To me the shots all look uncomfortable - too many similar shot sizes, and "loose" framing (if that's the right word). I longed for a bit of variety in ls / ms / cu etc so visually it didn't look thought-through. A lot of the people are placed centrally in the frame and looking to one side, which looks very uneasy. You need "looking room" for characters so for example, if they are looking to one edge of the frame, I'd expect to see them placed somewhere in the other side of that frame. I mean, being charitable, some of it might have been intended, but there's too much inconsistency in whether people are looking up or down and in a couple of places it cut between people facing each other but looking in a similar direction (eg both looking to their left), so it looked like they were avoiding looking at each other, a sort of "crossing the line" effect. All of this is irritating and gets in the way.
I know a critique wasn't requested, but this clip is quite good to learn from - you can't edit your way out of badly set-up shots!
I think the idea behind the film is quite entertaining, from the bits we see here. I made my earlier comments on a PC without working sound, forcing me to concentrate on the shots and shot sequences, and the dialogue is sort of entertaining. But it also shows that all the elements (sound, design, script, direction, lighting etc...) must be in place. If one is missing or just wrongly done, it will take away from the impact of the film as a whole. You can forgive some stuff, but given the pretty empty, large location, there really isn't much excuse for the shot-framing we're seeing here.
@jefelemur I thought so. It really comes through in the way it was shot. The actor seems very natural in front of the camera and the camera really seems to be "listening" to him. Great stuff.