A reasonable story, technology and love story, a lot of holes but a film giving to each viewer small part from what he deserves/expect. and that saves a short film with few ambitions to impress for special effects , using not the most credible story . but the last could be useful . as a kind of spice. robots, fights, resistence and the desire to fix an error from past. and nothing more.

This is the kind of short film students make who really have very little experience of film making or directing... anyth8ng good that is. And what a waste as the production values are obviously way and above average. But this is THE CLAS#IC mistake of new film makers. The script and story suck. It's all about 'hey look at us and how clever we are with effects. Doesn't it look great', meanwhile there's no real story and at 10 mins this in unforgivable. It's also not well directed with hardly a decent camera shot or imaginative framing in the whole piece. I've no idea who these people are but ultimately this piece is a waste of time nd money. Maybe the computer designers will get a job but this does nothing for anyone else who gave up their time. And boy there were a ton of people who worked on this. However this project serves as THE PERFECT example to film students on not what to do with a year of your time. Instead concentrate on a good script, a great story and find a handful of great actors and film something in a basement on a mobile phone and trust me it will be infinitely better time spent than this. What a waste,

I was very much intrigued by the opening shot of this . A young man stands on a bridge in Amsterdam and has to tell a young woman that the relationship is over . She is angry and hurt and cries is it because her robotic arm freaks him out ? Jump forward 40 years and there seems to be a robot apocalypse due to the woman making herself entirely cybernetic and building a conquering army of robots At least I think that's what's happened because there's not much exposition as to what has happened in the 40 year gap and it's left for the audience to make up their own mind on the details . Obviously the opening scene is pivotal and all important and ties in with the plot later on but it is slightly frustrating to fill in the gaps for yourself . There might be a train of thought that states short film making should lend itself to ambigeuty and reading between the lines but I must argue when you've got a high concept plot genre that is science fiction you must explain what is happening and why even if it's not in so many words . Instead TEARS OF STEEL concentrates on action and visuals , except I couldn't help thinking there weren't done very well and I don't think it's trying to be sophisticated self knowing parody of Hollywood TRANSFOMER type movies . I have to admit I don't like science fiction blockbusters featuring humans battling giant robots and didn't even like TERMINATOR 2 JUDGEMENT DAY finding it flabby and overblown but I guess it's something of a back handed compliment to the makers of this short that it's no worse than something directed by Michael Bay or Guillermo Del Toro

As a movie it has great shortcomings. The story and acting are half descent for an amateur night but sure are not up to the standard of the production. The story is simple and well structured but misses a strong rhythm and even for the short 12 minutes it has a slow pace with many repeat shots and recurring camera angles even when it goes into 'full action mode'.The design and production get a A++. It looks totally awesome and the animation is superb. But Like Disney company had seemed to have forgotten after Walt died; Great skill in making the movie is just a tool to tell a story.It all is clearly a showcase for those awesome design 'skillz'. That is why they still get a 9 out of 10 and I would classify this as a must see event.Besides it's free under Creatieve Commons 3.0 Attribution license. How can you NOT like this?