May 29, 2008
Secret Festival, Dust, The Song of the Sparrows
This year's SIFF has gotten off to an amazing start. I've already doled out a few 4's in my movie voting, compared to the usual "blah" of the 3's that tends to dominate my overall experience every year. I'm not saying that's neccessarily a bad thing -- in fact, I think the "1"s and the "2"s can be amazingly educational -- but there needs to be those movies that hold steady as "not great but okay", so that an amazing knockout can occasionally stand apart from the crowd.
That said, I gave all 3 movies mentioned here a "4" -- that's inclusive of the Secret Fest which I can't really talk about.
The first film, DUST, was a documentary on dust. That doesn't sound particularly exciting I realize, but it's quirky concept attracted me to want to see it. I've been a bit iffy on the experimental films at Northwest Film Forum but constantly try to include some in my schedule each year because I think they are worthwhile and challenging to my own perceptions. I wouldn't say DUST was experimental at all, however. It was a very straightforward documentary with narration and some talking heads. So why would something like this propel beyond just a meager "3" for me? I think a large part had to do with the very well done photography. From the very beginning, the composition was incredibly planned and executed, and the movements were highly precise and direct. I imagined the same dialogue and sets in the hands of an inexperienced layman with a cheap DV cam and immediately began to think what a horror it would have been to sit through 90 minutes of shaky handheld and subpar audio quality of people talking about dust. At times, DUST felt more to me like a narrative, with long sweeping pans and the occasional quirky character commenting obsessively about something unashamed of the camera lens.
But then at other times, DUST went too over the top. Long scientific monologues, though interesting and educational, weakened its pace. Occasionally the camera doubled over an area again, panning as if it were simply out of visuals or correcting a prior attempt, or possibly afraid to stray too far away from the subject for fear they may do something interesting. These little things detracted from the movie overall. Despite that, it had a very similar feel in tone to Out of Time, a SIFF documentary from last year which I rated very highly. It was no surprise then to discover the same programmer picked up both movies. (Thank you, Andy Spletzer!)
THE SONG OF THE SPARROWS was a solid narrative, humorous and touching with a great flowing script, and an exceptional cast. There was some symbolism involving an ostrich searching for freedom and a man searching for the ostrich, but I'm not really sure how to interpret it as of yet. I'm happy to see another great movie from Iran, and especially happy to see another movie that features more of the urban big city life of Tehran. I hate to judge a movie by politically motivated factors, but it's very refreshing to that side rather than a bunch of families huddled in caves way out in the desert, which while important, is less easily related to by american audiences.
I did not think SPARROWS was amazing enough to be one of the best, simply because it didn't really break any new creative ground, but there's a scene involving a group of boys tripping over a bucket of water and spilling a massive amount of goldfish they had saved up for since the beginning of the movie that really broke my heart and almost tipped me over to the "5".
AUDIENCE WATCH: One person in the audience at SPARROWS felt the need to vocalize at certain moments, one of which was when one of the characters did something rude to another, they exclaimed, "jerk!"
May 24, 2008
Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson, My Effortless Brilliance
SIFF officially kicked in today with a screening of GONZO: THE LIFE AND WORK OF HUNTER S. THOMPSON and MY EFFORTLESS BRILLIANCE at the Egyptian. I'm going for CAPS this year on the movie titles, by the way. Brilliant idea, I know.
GONZO is a loosely assembled hodge-podge of clips, reenactments, sounds and music that flow along a timeline of milestones throughout Thompson's life. Narrated solely through interviews and direct readings from his work by Johnny Depp, it offers up a glimpse at a more personal side behind what in later years could only be determined through reports of Thompson's reclusive personality.
The movie begins with some awkward editing sloppiness which continues at times throughout, and is later dotted by semi-frequent cliched musical interludes, however in its attempt to show Thompson's life it succeeds in portraying not only the biographical aspects of how his writing was shaped, but also a more deeper analysis of what his writings and his character have meant for the political landscape of our country.
Depp's narration of the movie was less painful than one might otherwise expect, though occasional on-screen moments reading out of a book seemed out of place and unnecessary. These portions and other b-roll could have been dropped altogether to tighten the film, which ran at roughly 2 hours.
One of the highlights of GONZO isn't really about Thompson at all: it's a glimpse at the phenomenal work of Ralph Steadman.
MY EFFORTLESS BRILLIANCE is described by director Lynn Shelton as an experiment in making the filmmaking process as organic as possible. It started by first identifying the actors, then building characters around them, and then finally scene suggestion where dialogue was all ad-lib in front of the camera as it was rolling. What came out of this was a natural conversational feel to the movie -- you could tell there was no way it was scripted, but the strengths of the actors were such that it didn't matter. The dynamic between the two leads was incredibly natural and helped drive the success of the film.
AUDIENCE WATCH: Even after a stern warning from festival programmer Beth Barett about cell phone peeking during the film, the woman to my left couldn't resist the warm glow of mobile love about an hour into BRILLIANCE. Piling onto that was two separate individuals in another row making loud crinkly sounds with their popcorn/candy bags for at least a good half hour apiece. People love to hear their own noises!
May 09, 2008
Update + SIFF 2008
It's that time of year again.. The sun starts peeking out and we dash into the local cinemas to postpone spring for several weeks in order to enjoy a bundle of movie goodness.
It's also the time when I start updating this blog on a regular basis. If there's one thing that's kept this thing alive, it's SIFF season, that's for freaking sure.
The SIFF schedule was recently published and the box office has opened, which means I've already assembled a sort of working list. In fact I think this year is a record as far as selecting a working list and actually planning out a schedule so quickly.
I won't be getting a Full Series pass this year due to having just started a new job at Disney. I'll have more to share on that later.
For now, let's just get right to the schedule (behind the cut).
Continue reading "Update + SIFF 2008" »
June 18, 2007
SIFF 2007 wrap-up
All in all, it's been an interesting past few weeks thinking about all of the movies I saw, what I learned from them, and all the fun I had with the whole festival experience.
To wrap up the 2007 Seattle International Film Festival, I thought I would make up a bunch of lists.
Perks of the Pass - or great things about being a first time Full Series Passholder
- Ducking into the restrooms early before the ticketholders generate a ridiculously long line
- Likewise with the concession stand, when the siren song of buttered popcorn calls
- Separate entrance at the Neptune from the lowly ticketholders and their ticketholding germs!
- Flexibility to change your mind on a moment's notice, when the buzz on a film starts to go around
- Getting to hear buzz through the Fool Serious email list
Sucky Things About the Pass
- Full Series Passholders are still one cut below yet another group of pass-holes -- Platinum passholders
- Skipping movies comes easier because you're not tied to them individually as with tickets
- The Full Series pass is no good for galas or Secret Fest, thus ensuring you plunk down at least $100 more in miscellaneous festival entertainment expenses
- Being leashed to the pass can be a great annoyance with it dangling around your neck constantly
Tiring SIFF Moments - or things I could do without for another year
- Excessively long programmer introductions to films
- Watching the SIFF intro animations again, of which there were only 3 this year and one live action short
- The smell of fresh buttered popcorn
- People laughing at Beth Barrett's "pacemaker" joke (it was funny the first time!)
- Wishing I had earplugs at the Egyptian
Common Film Themes - or reoccurring things noticed across a number of movies this year
- guys seriously obsessed with girls
- cats making random appearances
- poorly produced documentaries about highly specific subject-matter (though this isn't exactly unique to this year, admittedly)
SIFF 2007 Ranked List of Films
- Rocket Science [the cream of the crop]
- The Year of Living Dangerously
- Sharkwater
- Season Five
- King of Kong
- The Boss of It All
- Great World of Sound
- In the Shadow of the Moon
- Out of Time
- I Don't Want To Sleep Alone
- Joe Strummer: The Future Is Unwritten
- Manufactured Landscapes
- Berlin: Symphony of a City
- Woman on the Beach [the first half would have hit my top 5]
- Secret Fest Film #4
- Paris je t'aime - A Collective Feature Film [hit or miss]
- Interview
- Secret Fest Film #2
- Hounds
- Rescue Dawn
- Delirious
- Offscreen [first 3/4ths would have hit my top 10]
- The Pervert's Guide to Cinema
- Dr. Bronner's Magic Soapbox
- It's Winter
- Syndromes and a Century
- Angel-A
- Waiter
- The Art of Crying
- Scott Walker: 30 Century Man
- Vinicius
- Secret Fest Film #1
- Black White + Gray
- American Shopper
- Secret Fest Film #3
- The 2007 Fly Filmmaking Challenge
- Still Alive. A Film About Krzysztof Kieslowski
- Northwest Ties
- Sanctuary: Lisa Gerrard
- Dans Paris
- Murch
- Blood on the Flat Track: The Rise of the Rat City Rollergirls
- Cthulhu
- I Dot the Eye
- Slipstream
- Eagle vs Shark [enragingly unfunny]
- Man in the Chair [offensively horrible]
- The Elephant and the Sea [worst. movie. ever.]
June 17, 2007
Secret Festival #4, It's Winter
Ah, the last day of SIFF 2007, a very sad occasion indeed. Originally scheduled as a four-movie day to go out with a bang, I cut back today to two films and instead have taken the extra hours to recuperate from the last several weeks (and do laundry).
The last Secret Festival movie was certainly nice and enjoyable, but it wasn't one of the two movies I was really hoping for which is a shame but was still worth attending.
It's Winter is a film by SIFF Emerging Master Raffi Pitts who also directed the previously seen Season Five, a movie which I enjoyed. I wasn't so thrilled about his most recent work, but did appreciate both his sense of direction on it and again the beautiful cinematography and still-portrait type of shots so prevalent in his movies.
Audience Watch: During the Secret Fest movie, a woman was wearing some insanely strong perfume that smelled a lot like cologne. It was extremely overpowering. There were a number of Iranians in attendance for the showing of It's Winter, several of whom made it very clear they were from Iran during the Q&A. I think a lot of them feel a sense of pride in watching great films from Iran, but there is another aspect during the Q&A where they tend to take it up as if the theater was a giant living room, grilling and needling the director about various plot point details as is common in friendly but passionate Iranian conversation.
June 16, 2007
Blood on the Flat Track, Delirious, Interview
The second half of the title to Blood on the Flat Track is "The Rise of the Rat City Rollergirls," a name which would imply that the documentary has a story arc beginning with the inception and subsequent seasonal successes of these local roller skating queens and their rapidly increasing base of followers. The film unfortunately heads in no such direction, instead relying on a solid base of interview clips mixed with live footage from past events.
On the one hand, the subject is very strong, pulling all of us non-followers into the sometimes brutal and competitive world of the rollergirl community through entertaining first person accounts and very solid action-packed footage of the rink. It shows us something new, something funny, and also something kind of inspiring and touching at the same time, bringing in accounts of physical and emotional hardships as well as stories of friendship and reconciliation. It's likely that these varying perspectives were what the filmmakers wanted to hone in on and present in a unified form on screen. But on the other hand, the movie really limits our view of the experience to these brief windows of information and historic retellings. The documentary does not add anything particularly new or thought-provoking to the collected footage. Aside from the occasional humorous or shocking elements of women beating eachother up, it presents us with soundbite after snippet in an all too obviously organized progression -- first we hear about how it started, then about each team, then about the players, then about the player relationships, and finally more about the players, ultimately leading to an excessively long ending roll call of each and every member of the organization. One gets the feeling that the information presented here could all be gleaned from simply attending one roller derby.
While I don't doubt that a considerable effort was made in producing this documentary, and I really hate to frown upon a locally produced film, it seems that a better film would have come from actually following one team, or even one or two players, for the entire length of a season or several seasons. That means actually working on it for several years or more -- Heart of the Game by comparison came out of a 7 year effort. King of Kong physically followed its players around the country and didn't just rely on first person accounts, it was the first person account. Given the fact that the Rat City Rollergirls are ranked #1 in the nation now, the achievement of making it to first would have made a great story had cameras actually been around to follow the true "rise." Blood on the Flat Track may not have had the access, resources or foresight to be able to do this, but because of this lack of story arc it suffers a great deal. Its interview footage and unique subject-matter may pull it up and out for many people, but this may only be a brief spotlight in the present until the information contained within it is outdated and only the true fans and players are still left to care. The story of the rise would have made it timeless.
Delirious and Interview were both movies starring Steve Buscemi, with the latter also having been directed by him. Delirious was perhaps slightly less strong, but campy and an amusing diversion nonetheless. Buscemi plays a quirky paparazzi photographer who hires an assistant (Michael Pitt from Dawson's Creek, among other things) and ends up making himself nuts with all this added change to his life. It's a fun look at the life of the paparazzi and the idea of what fame really is and how it is spawned. At times a little over the top, but an amusing story with another great Buscemi role.
Interview is a remake of a movie by dutch director Theo Van Gogh who was most recently in the news due to his unfortunate murder. The original film is set entirely in one location, however Buscemi's remake opens up to a second and third location briefly. It's a very tug-of-war kind of story between a man and woman that seems sort of reminiscent in dialogue to something by Linklater or Altman (who is thanked in the credits). The man is a reporter who has been sent to do a fluff piece on a rising star actress, and is resentful about it while at the same time having enormous difficulty getting any information out of her. The two go back and forth between arguing and posturing and playing general mental games, moving between various locations of an enormous loft apartment that gives the film a lot of shooting space and flexibility. It's not exactly an entirely original concept by any means, but it's a solid script that works really well within its confined location, keeping things engaging with little twists and turns along the way. The film works because the script works and the actors draw it out. In that sense and primarily due to its single location, it calls to mind a stage play. It may not be entirely for everyone, but its execution with what it is is done very well.
Audience Watch: Some cheers during Blood on the Flat Track by audience members and a brief Q&A with the co-directors. Lots of irritatingly obvious questions during the Buscemi Q&A, somewhat of a SIFF tradition it seems.
June 15, 2007
Season Five, Kinksi performs Berlin: Symphony of a City
Season Five is the first of two Iranian films at SIFF this year, a somewhat sorry number but still much appreciated and way better than zero. It's sort of a Romeo and Juliet type of story in that there are two families living in rural Iran who absolutely despise one another, and a marriage between two members of those families turns very sour and serves to chisel the divide between the families even further. It's a beautifully simple story as a lot of Iranian cinema tends to be on the surface, but digs very deep into its cultural quirks and behavioral nuances. Director Rafi Pitts made this movie after a 15 year departure from his home country, returning to craft something that he felt fellow Iranians would enjoy. During his Q&A, he stated the importance of being able to make his home country laugh because in a way that is really the truest gauge of whether you still share that blood.
The cinematography in this movie is excellent and Pitts truly extended the screenplay into his own, as he stressed during the Q&A, by adding elements into the picture to bring out what he felt were important to him and his life and his world having been apart from his homeland for so long. There is the running motif of women wearing red, which he said was to draw them out from the crowds and bring them to the forefront as a tribute to his mother. There is the motif of the children spinning tires with sticks which permeates the entire movie subtly by giving it a simple but effective thread. The camera follows this imagery in a way that creates a beauty both through its meaning of simple harmony, and visually as a flowing device of movement.
It's a very well rounded piece of work and I truly believe it is the kind of movie that is a labor of love for the director and it really shows. In addition to being well versed in cinema history, Pitts has the ability to do what he preaches is the only way to direct, which is to do it in the only way you as an individual would without trying to emulate anyone else. It's a very stubborn, and very Iranian, view of directing and art in general, but it's also a very accurate description of one primary quality a good artist needs to possess -- the ability to know themselves well and to be able to communicate that into their chosen medium.
The silent German black and white film Berlin: Symphony of a City celebrates its 80th anniversary this year and to commemorate the occasion, local experimental-grunge band Kinski performed a live score to it at The Triple Door. I've seen Kinski before a couple of times and have always been on the fence about them with their alternating moments of pure brilliance mixed with bouts of bored fiddling and feedback. Their potential in a soundtrack to an old black and white classic seemed compelling and I was curious to see yet another modern band pull such a feat (last year, a soundtrack to The Unknown was performed by the band Portastatic).
It should be mentioned that The Triple Door is an upscale club that typically caters to jazz musicians. Their seating is arranged very similarly to a Cinema Grill -- that is, it's a bunch of tables facing forward with food served while a performance is observed. It's an entirely different experience eating and watching something, especially a movie. For one thing, servers are always walking by and the clank of dishware can be heard permeating the venue. For another, this particular venue seats people to fill, so sitting with random strangers at the same table is not uncommon at all. In general it's a nice venue with somewhat overpriced food.
Kinski performed a small soundtrack to a short silent black and white film preceding Berlin that was effective and meshed well with the experimental animated nature of the short. It was a nice intro and really suggested the rest of the evening would be just as good. Unfortunately the rest wasn't really as good as anticipated and I walked away feeling fairly disastisfied with Kinski's overall soundtrack performance.
The first very noticeable thing early on was the very American movie sounding tone to the music. It felt a little ethnocentric and somewhat silly since the screen was displaying images of a foreign city that begged for more globally oriented melodies or sounds. I was surprised that Kinski stuck very closely to their current style which even uses alternate tunings without branching out into a more German influenced musical style which could still have retained a lot of the experimental qualities that the band exemplifies so well. It really detracted a lot from the experience to be hearing these very simple melodies, and in general I would have expected far more experimental feedback from them in keeping with the somewhat cold, industrial nature of the city. Some of the melodies were very upbeat and almost had a very naive air that didn't fit the mood of the film at all. In other cases, some hard driving guitar riffs served to drown out the feel of some of the scenes giving them far more weight than perhaps originally intended.
The other, perhaps more primary issue was that the soundtrack really didn't feel like a soundtrack. There was no overriding theme or anything tying any of the segments together, as Portastatic did so well with The Unknown. So rather than pulling a thread through the film with the score, it was primarily random little songs as if Kinski was just playing a regular show. The mood of these songs barely matched the mood on screen, and when at times the pacing fell right in line, most of the time there was nothing to denote transitions in the movie or clear areas where the style should shift. In fact, most of the time these transitions seemed about 5 seconds off, but who knows if that was just chance again or poor timing.
Kinski's score to Berlin was extremely incongruous with the entire movie, again as if they were simply playing one of their live shows, and the experience was fairly dissatisfying overall. It's nice to actually get an idea of what a bad score is like however, because it helps to appreciate what makes a good soundtrack great.
Audience Watch: There were a few Iranians in attendance for Season Five and were very vocal during the Q&A. One person managed to hog the Q&A with about 5 questions as if it was a personal conversation between them and the director. The Berlin show was pretty fully attended.
June 14, 2007
Black White + Gray, Cthulhu
Another day, another couple of movies. I've been skipping a lot lately -- last year I was doing 3-4 movie days every day of the fest, but this year it's just not working out that way, either due to laziness or burnout. I am in fact seeing less movies with a full series pass this year than as a ticket-holder last year, which is notable however the convenience of the pass is very nice and would likely spur me to purchase another next year if possible.
So here we go again with Black White + Gray, another poorly produced mediocre documentary entry into the festival. This movie was essentially like watching a slideshow with narration. The majority of the subject-matter revolves around Sam Wagstaff and his passion and knack for curating an amazing photograph collection which he then later sold to Getty Images, as well as his influence on infamous photographer Robert Mapplethorpe. Patti Smith was also part of the trio as a housemate, and each one of their careers blossomed at roughly similar times, however her role in the movie for the most part involved speaking about the other two.
Production-wise, this movie flopped big time. It was shot in 4:3 for presumably a broadcast audience, which is bizarre considering the obscene and sometimes very gorey nature of much of the photographic works. The interview material is extremely poor with Patti Smith's footage being the worst and noticeably grainy, and some of the interviewees being recorded without any additional sound mics causing the quality of each successive soundbite to differ considerably. Then a bulk of the visuals for the movie are taken up by Ken Burns-ish photographic displays, the difference here being that the movie provides nothing in the way of additional comment on these photos, so instead the effect is like watching a simplistic Powerpoint presentation. However the force of these photographs is so powerful that it is doubtful people would notice this, which is a strong argument for having a unique subject focus for a documentary.
The only things this movie really did for me were, 1. to appreciate production quality, 2. to appreciate the strong role of pre-production, 3. to continue to hate talking heads, 4. learn who Sam Wagstaff was and the role he played in inflating the photograph market by deeming it "art", 5. to make me want to go shoot some b&w photos again. The latter is not a testament to the influence of the movie as much as a testament to the power of the photographs displayed within the movie.
Cthulhu was a last minute add to the schedule that I passed up on several initial runs through the SIFF schedule originally but decided to attend anyway. This was the world premiere night, so there was a lot of enthusiasm in the air and a lot of crew and friends-of-crew in attendance. These are always fun screenings to attend because there is just a lot of joy from people who have just completed a feature film which to me sounds akin to giving birth to a new baby. There was also a lot of skeptical posturing about Tori Spelling's role and how that would pan out and everything.
For about the first quarter-to-half of this movie, I absolutely hated it. 1. Lousy slow-to-start script, 2. lousy acting direction (who told the actors to talk so slowly and meaningfully?), and 3. Lousy overall shot direction. I find it hard to blame the director of photography for this 3rd one because the photography was absolutely beautiful given what he had to work with, so instead I blame the director for throwing in such cliched shots as, 1. the camera tracking the yellow road marker to show driving, 2. the hand wiping the foggy mirror to reveal the person behind, 3. the rear view mirror shot to show driving, 4. the slow parallel track down the grocery aisle. There are half a dozen more that I noted but have since now forgotten, and while I understand some of these are necessary to establish scene, it plays into my overall opinion that this movie was dull and provided nothing in the way of cinematic innovation that it potentially had at its disposal. And perhaps a large part of noticing these cliched shots was in fact because the photography was so rich that I expected a bit more and got nothing.
The movie's primary subject deals with his father who is unhappy about his gay lifestyle. He soon discovers a larger, evil force at work and must figure out what this force is and what is happening to the people in the city. It is essentially a horror film, but it never gets to this point until about halfway or so through the movie. At the point that it finally gets to this, the acting improves a great deal, Tori Spelling's character is introduced, the production quality increases a notch, and things are a little more interesting overall. Even the script gets a little better in certain segments, throwing in a couple of good one-liners that the audience howled over. But in other areas, it still fails to come together for some reason. The movie is not campy, but it's not slick either, and it's overall meaning seems to want to shout itself out but still somehow seems very obtuse as if the screenplay can't decide which direction it wants to take. I did find this second half to be far more interesting of a movie, but it continued to fail to hold my interest completely.
June 13, 2007
Out of Time, Confession of Pain, The Boss of It All
More SIFFing madness today. I had a very tight connection between movies with a pre-rush hour dash from Pacific Place to Lincoln Square that was extremely close but successful.
Unfortunately, this required that I miss the very last minute or so of Out of Time, a beautifully warmly photographed documentary about four old Austrian businesses that are finding it difficult to compete with new modern businesses which are slowly pushing them out. On one hand, it's a very intimate portrait of the shopkeepers and their personal thoughts about what makes them happy being in their own stores for many years. On the other hand, it's a very sharp criticism about how these wonderful people who take pride in their work and their customers are being driven out. The degree of closeness and heartfelt dialogue that emanates from each of the shopkeepers is astounding, as well as the very decisive photography, which gives the movie as a whole a very narrative feel as if we are watching something scripted. It's an impressive piece of evidence as far as how well the documentary medium can be pushed to be truly produced well, though one has to wonder how this affected the truthfulness of what we see on screen as certainly some parts would have needed choreographing with the subjects.
The movie as a whole is very slowly paced, but even this serves its purpose well in the context of the subject-matter because it sits us down to listen to a time when people were presumably more valued over the contents of their pocketbooks. The older generation may be bitter about the gentrification that is wiping out their businesses and lives, but their thoughts and experiences can still serve as valuable lessons for future generations.
Confession of Pain is an action packed thriller from Hong Kong by the director of the Infernal Affairs trilogy. I enjoyed watching it, and a remake is already in progress, although admittedly this was one of those movies where I had a difficult time at first keeping track of who was whom. The story has a lot of twists and turns that make it exciting to watch but not in a way that's cheesy or where they are blatantly thrown in to extend the story out further. It will be interesting comparing this movie to the remake.
The Boss of It All is an amusing well-written comedy about a company man who hires an actor to play the role of a more senior boss to avoid being criticized. This is the first movie by Lars von Trier I've seen and I really enjoyed it. The editing was a little crazy, with dozens of jump cuts, which is an interesting technique in bringing out more perspective. Apparently the camera movement was entirely controlled by computer assistance, which during the main body of the movie didn't really show much as the camera was still, but during some director commentary could be heard making motor noises.
Audience Watch: Some walkouts during Out of Time although these were towards the tail end and I wondered if this was mainly due to tight connections to other movies. The latter two movies were very well attended, with The Boss of It All being completely sold out.
June 10, 2007
Secret Fest, American Shopper, Scott Walker: 30 Century Man
Today's Secret Fest film was moderately ok and that's really all i'll say about that. Carl Spence of SIFF let it be known that there are rumors someone has been violating the Oath of Silence on their blog which is not a good thing.
With all the buzz and promo material (buttons, flyers, postcards, etc) going on around American Shopper, you'd think it was a band or something. But no, this is the new method of DIY distribution: street crews. It's a little crazy if you think about how long indie bands have been doing this and only now independent filmmakers are latching on. I've always been a little iffy about bands with excessive amounts of slick promo materials, and usually they've turned out to be fairly sucky, so my inclination was a little in the right direction with American Shopper although I would not call it sucky -- just not exactly my cup of tea. A lot of the buzz surrounding this movie though wasn't exactly regarding the quality of the material itself but the straddling between documentary and mockumentary form that it seems to accomplish.
I really started to feel a very mockumentary vibe going on as the movie began, and almost believed these were really good actors playing very natural roles. I'd imagined maybe a very loose script similar to Curb Your Enthusiasm where the actors are given what to do but not what to say. At the end during the Q&A, some of the major characters came up to the stage and it was very clear by then that these were in fact real people. If the Q&A hadn't happened, I might still be questioning the reality of it.
The movie follows a new up and coming "sport" known as "Aisling" which is the practice of shopping in a grocery aisle while doing funny dance moves or throwing things very gracefully into one's cart. Basically shopping and being goofy about it in a way that is a form of self-expression. In the movie, the leader of the movement puts on an Aisling competition and a bunch of people enter to win a grand prize of $10,000. The point where the documentary angle meets mockumentary is that the original idea was in fact one of the directors', and the organization of the event was assisted by the film crew. So the establishment of the actual event and sport is a setup, then the film then goes into documentary-mode to explore the real lives of many of the contestants, only a handful of whom actually made it into the finals (and thus, in the picture).
While the idea of Aisling is cute and funny and establishes a nice fertile ground for all kinds of crazy antics, I guess I still felt a very mockumentary vibe about this movie in that it wasn't really a real thing (yet) and thus I didn't really care too much about the contestants and felt a bit detached from the whole concept, even though the characters themselves were very real and charming people. The audience seemed to really enjoy this one, but I found myself completely unhumored or finding any of the shopping cart antics particularly inspiring (save for the marshmallow-shooting contestant).
Scott Walker: 30 Century Man delves into the notably reclusive life of Scott Walker who was one-third of the famous group The Walker Brothers, who then went on to create very sporadic albums that moved very strongly in the direction of experimental music. At the Q&A after this documentary, director Stephen Kijak (who did the excellent Cinemania) said this was very much a film about the evolution of a songwriter, rather than specifically geared towards Walker's life or probing to get more information out of him. In fact, the highlight of the piece is an interview and studio session with Walker personally, but these were done after pretty much the majority of the film was already assembled. The movie assembles information about his career path and the evolution of his style as it transformed, and features interviews with various people who were either involved in his professional career or were influenced by his works, including David Bowie whom you can really hear a vocal resemblance to.
The documentary as a whole was very informative, but I have to admit I wasn't particularly interested in the music. There were elements of Walker's experimental style that I really enjoyed, such as the orchestral instrumentation and the use of alternative forms of percussion (e.g., punching a big slab of raw meat, or shuffling a garbage can across a wooden box), but the music as a whole really didn't do much for me, and it really is essentially the centerpiece of the movie. Regardless of that, the documentary as a whole is very well done and provides some great background on the career of a highly influential musician.
Audience Watch: In two different theaters I sat in a row just in front of someone with really bad breath which was somewhat painful to endure. Also, during the Scott Walker documentary there were a number of very noisy walkouts.
June 09, 2007
Great World of Sound
The two movies planned for today were skipped completely and instead I went and saw Great World of Sound which was on my schedule in the future and moving it would allow me to see American Shopper which there has been some buzz about.
Great World of Sound is one of my favorites of the festival now, closely competing with Rocket Science for best narrative. The story follows a young man, played by Pat Healy (who also appeared in this year's Rescue Dawn), who becomes excited by the prospect of working for a company that seeks out music artists in an effort to discover them to become the next big thing. It starts with him pairing up with another new guy played by Kene Holliday and travelling to a city to lodge up and audition some new stars in their hotel room. What transpires from there is a lot of hilarious comical bits with musicians auditioning, cut together in such a way that it never really gets tiring or overdone. Each of the artists are so uniquely endearing that you don't notice how many are actually run through the entire length of the movie until the credits are shown. As a side note, there is an unsubstantiated claim via the movie's IMDB entry that 80% of the performers auditioned were not in on the fact that this was for a movie. It is rather notable as a point of style that each of the shots filmed in the hotel rooms contain very documentary-like handheld DV cam footage.
I recognized the director's name Craig Zobel from somewhere and then immediately realized he was one of the co-creators of the infamous web cartoon homestarrunner.com. While HomeStarRunner may not be up everyone's alley, you definitely have to admit the creators have a knack for writing, comic timing, and creatively sequenced sketches. All of this definitely comes out in Zobel's co-written screenplay, throwing in little random one-liners here and there that seem almost forgettable or unscripted, but yet do seem scripted as they somehow contribute to the character development. This is actually a very big writing trait of HomeStarRunner that has always worked successfully, albeit in a completely different context.
The soundtrack was done by David Wingo who also did the soundtrack for the absolutely amazing George Washington.
I'm reasonably confident that this movie would be well received by many people, even regardless of whether they like or dislike the subtle sense of humor in HomeStarRunner. The entire audience seemed to actively enjoy this one.
Audience Watch: Nothing to report here. Harvard Exit always has good audiences.
June 08, 2007
Sharkwater, The Pervert's Guide to Cinema
It's hard for me to speak objectively about a documentary like Sharkwater without at least disclosing the fact that I'm very strongly in favor of animal rights. The term "animal rights" is a very loaded and polarizing one that immediately sets people into a certain frame of mind: for or against. Sharkwater is best viewed with an open mind; that is to say, it's a documentary about sharks, but it's also equally a documentary about activists and, to go even further, a documentary about preserving the balance of an ecosystem in order to save ourselves from future possible natural disaster.
The first noticeable thing about Sharkwater is that it's told in first-person by photographer/biologist Rob Stewart. This is his personal film and story, developed out of a great deal of beautiful footage of underwater explorations. Because of this we see a lot of Stewart and his naturally good-looking physique in the movie which, as overheard by a few people, might come across as a bit overbearingly egotistical. Setting that aside, this movie is made all the more stronger because it is a first-person retelling and not simply an omnipotent 3rd person voice speaking the truths of nature. It's the same reason Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin's pieces are so grabbing, and a big reason Herzog's Grizzly Man was so strong -- the adventurers and explorers are there telling their stories first-hand in places we don't have immediate access to see. They take us to places we can only dream of exploring, because they require years of study just to get there and the adventurer's spirit in order to overcome the fear of all the potential dangers at risk.
The movie begins with some extremely beautiful footage that was made all the more powerful on the big screen. It's absolutely breathtaking photography. Stewart's narration is a bit simplistic, but his deep voice serves to make it stand out stronger. He introduces us to sharks and then explores why sharks have such a bad reputation through interviews with some experts, interviews with a couple of random people, and some humorous archival footage. The stunning color photography is intermixed with black and white archival shots of sharks that work surprisingly well together -- it gives us a more balanced view.
After discussion on the poor name sharks have with people, mainly due to the media, Sharkwater then segues into Stewart's personal path in joining the environmental activist group Sea Shepherd. During this, he risks being arrested at various times and even faces a life threatening disease. The movie progresses more into Sea Shepherd's efforts, lead by Paul Watson who is a founding member of Greenpeace. It becomes increasingly more activist oriented, intermixing swimming shark footage with that of people cutting off their fins for the billion dollar shark fin industry.
It's hard to say whether the direction towards the end as far as showing the evils of the shark fin industry and Sea Shepherd's efforts is enlightening to people, annoying, or ineffective. I found it enlightening having heard of Sea Shepherd but not the shark fin industry, but certainly it could go in any direction for anyone else. There was a Q&A afterwards with Rob Stewart and Paul Watson (Sea Shepherd is based on Friday Harbor here in WA) but I was only able to stay briefly as the connection to the next movie was very tight. Stewart has a very strong enthusiasm that I think he shares with many great animal biologists who serve not only as researchers but who also motivate and encourage us to learn about our fellow species.
The transition into The Pervert's Guide to Cinema was a "SIFF dash" classic. I'm using the term "SIFF dash" to describe the frequently tight connections between showings requiring serious traffic navigating mojo and good parking-fu (assuming one is driving).
It starts with a single, solitary man, Slavoj Zizek, who is apparently a world famous philosopher and quite a fan of David Lynch and Alfred Hitchcock. He starts talking at the beginning of this two and a half hour movie and never really lets up until the end. The movie explores his ideas of psychoanalytical thought in terms of what cinema can tell us about ourselves and why we need it. Accompanying his sort of lecture-like but still very off-the-cuff speaking style were many snippets of some great classic films. His speaking style seemed all the more stronger for not being scripted, or if it was he did an excellent job of making it seem we were in on his thoughts at every second. Zizek's humor comes across at various points through playful things like inserting himself into sets made to look like a scene he was about to show. It's an entertaining wild ride exploring and pondering what films communicate to us, and for about the first hour or so it's extremely fascinating. Sometime just after the halfway point, I think we all needed a bit of a pause due to information overload because the barrage of philosophical ideas comes nonstop. That's not to say the movie waned in any way towards the end -- it just never let up. Despite that, Zizek's observations were very fascinating and enlightening and made me want to go back and re-explore some of the movies he examined. This is definitely a good college film student cult-classic in the making.
Audience Watch: Lots of whispery chit-chatters at SIFF this year, pretty much at every movie, which is really surprising.
June 07, 2007
Syndromes and a Century
I start another review of an Apichatpong "Joe" Weerasethakul film with great hesitation and resigned confusion. For some reason I was excessively tired yesterday evening, so about 3/4ths of the movie is totally lost on me which doesn't help things. Previous to this I had seen Tropical Malady which I didn't like, and Worldly Desires which I didn't like even more. One might question why I continue going to see his movies -- my feeling on it is I believe his movies have merit and at times are very beautiful and very meaningful, but the package as a whole fails to come together for me.
I went to Syndromes and a Century thinking this would finally be the one that came together and made me suddenly realize what everyone else seems to see in his movies. And indeed the first quarter or so of the movie was just that -- it was interesting, beautiful and even humorous at times in a very humanistic way. His direction is very careful and precise, showing us at times everything that we need to see with a wide shot, and at other times showing very little to nothing when we should be concentrating on the off screen imagery formed in our heads by the sounds. The story is at times flighty and at other times playfully repetitious.
I've been unable to extract much meaning from it due to my spacing out from being sleepy, and felt that if I had hung in there it might have won me over. I definitely felt it was a stronger movie than the other 2 I have previously seen though, and for that reason would probably give Weerasethakul yet another shot. Overall, Syndromes and a Century was worth seeing, but may require another viewing or two to fully appreciate it.
June 06, 2007
The Art of Crying
The Art of Crying is a dark "comedy" from Denmark about a boy struggling to cope within the confines of an excessively dysfunctional family. The reason I use comedy in quotes is because it's labelled as "black comedy" but I found it very difficult to laugh in the context of some pretty disturbing stuff. It is quirky and slow to start at first while the story is told by the youngest son and the characters are introduced one by one. His perspective is very realistic in terms of a young child naively trying to make sense of the world. The movie then leads down a path of strange unrealistic character actions that become too overwhelming to be believable at some point, or perhaps too frustratingly believable. The end result is watching a good movie but completely not enjoying it, and not in the way watching a depressing or scary movie is, but in a way that is uncomfortable and frustrating. I guess I wanted to just get up and slap some of the characters around.
Audience Watch: A girl sat down next to me at the last minute in the theater and proceeded to slowly unwrap a crinkly chocolate bar, then left it open on the seat next to her. So for the duration of the movie, I had some serious wafts of a very strong fancy 98% cacao chocolate bar in my nose, which is a nice smell for about 5 minutes and then becomes increasingly difficult to tolerate. However, more significantly than the chocolate bar situation was the woman whose cell phone went off in the theatre three times! On the third time, she proceeded to swiftly walk out of the theatre carrying her still ringing cell phone in her hand, instead of just pushing one button to shut it up! Then several minutes later, she actually walked back into the theatre after this outburst and sat back down again, at the risk of being torn to shreds by the entire theatre after the show.
June 05, 2007
Woman on the Beach, A Conversation With Julien Temple, Joe Strummer: The Future Is Unwritten
I've noticed an increasingly negative slant over the past few entries here during SIFF that has become a little unsettling. Today's selection thankfully breaks that trend a bit.
Woman on the Beach's director Sang-soo Hong has had movies shown at SIFF before, all of which were consistently rated the lowest each year. This probably served to lower a lot of peoples' expectations of the movie, though there was still quite a large number of walkouts during it.
The movie follows a film director's attempts to write a script, in the midst of meeting a woman and struggling with his feelings about her. It starts off very casually with a lot of humorous conversational moments. The first half of the movie was really great to watch, and Hong definitely has the ability to capture dialogue very naturally. The latter half of the movie though struggles to keep up with the momentum, possibly because it delves more into the drama of the love triangle and it is at times very difficult to understand the motivations of the characters. Overall, it probably could have been cut a bit shorter and worked very well, and indeed there seemed to be several false ending shots that would have sufficed perfectly. As far as the technical aspects of the movie, it was visually pleasing and had a nice little soundtrack. There were a few instances when the camera did a close push as a moment of dialogue from a character got a little more personal, and this in any other person's hands would have been very effective, but the zoom-in was very abruptly done as if part of a home movie or documentary-style and looked very amateur. I noticed this style got a little bit better towards the end of the movie and speculated that perhaps the camera person was new or was working with new equipment. In any case, overall it was an enjoyable movie and only serves to increase my interest in more films coming out of South Korea.
Julien Temple is the director of such infamous things as The Filth and the Fury, Earth Girls are Easy, The Great Rock and Roll Swindle, and various music videos when MTV was just starting up. He primarily rose out of documenting the punk rock scene in England, and still somehow manages to carry these ideals forward into his works of today.
The conversation was really just that -- no Q&A by the audience, and moderated entirely by Sean Nelson who asked various questions about his career intermixing them with demo reels of some work he has done. It wasn't so much informative as it was humorous hearing Temple's little stories and generally getting a sense of his snarly english punker attitude which is endearing. Temple's answers during the conversation as well as the Q&A after the Strummer documentary were always dodgy with kind of a "screw you" subtext (or overtly) which was pretty fun to watch. I'd always been curious about how someone like that thought of themselves as pretty much spawning the MTV generation, and his attitude seemed to be essentially he had to do those things to generate the money to work on the films he really wanted to do.
It is interesting comparing the films that he is most proud of (punk rock related) to things such as the slightly more polished looking music videos -- you can really tell he has the skill to adapt to these very different visual styles, and his own work looks specifically unpolished for good reason and not just neglect or uncaring.
This was a good segue into Joe Strummer: The Future Is Unwritten which definitely has the same Temple frenetic-random-collage style that seems to emulate a lot of the print art that comes from the early rise of punk rock DIY practices. The documentary is a journey through Strummer's beginnings, his interest in various styles of music and relationships with people, and on through the years with The Clash, then the period after The Clash and eventually his death. It's a long movie, but it never really has any dull moments because of how finely cut each clip is. One very noticeable aspect very early on is none of the interviewees are identified, yet you sort of get an idea of their relationship to Strummer through their words. Later at the Q&A, Temple responded to a question about this by essentially stating he didn't believe in celebrities, which I thought was a totally great way to really pay tribute to punk rock because all of the interviewees are suddenly equally important even if they weren't a celebrity (which in some cases was true). Though one might argue that if celebrity wasn't so important, the title credits would not have repeated Temple's name several times.
Audience Watch: As mentioned above, there were a lot of walkouts during Woman on the Beach in succession which was a little distracting. In addition, Pacific Place tends to seat people fairly late into screenings more than any other theater I have seen at SIFF, even though there is a supposedly strict late seating policy. The audience for the Julien Temple conversation was very sparse, but seemed to grow threefold for the Strummer documentary which is entirely opposite to what I would have predicted.
June 04, 2007
Vinicius, Angel-A, Northwest Ties
Vinicius de Moraes is the man who fathered the musical style known as bossa nova. Many peoples' knowledge of bossa nova comes from having heard "The Girl From Ipanema" one too many times. Or if young and hip, they might know of the band Nouvelle Vague and their wacky bossa nova covers of classic punk rock tunes. Vinicious the movie delves into the man who founded this music style and follows his crazy life up until the end.
The film uses a somewhat irritating device right off the bat -- actors on a stage reciting poetry, seemingly as if they were being de Moraes or were part of his life somehow. If you're unfamiliar with de Moraes himself, as I was, you have no idea why we are watching these people, or why they are reading poetry at all. In fact, I started questioning whether this was actually going to be a documentary or a docudrama, having no idea where all this acting was going. Fortunately the beautiful imagery kept things from going downhill rapidly. Then, finally, there were the talking heads we all know and love, discussing things about de Moraes and being intermixed with old snapshots and footage. It's learned that early on in de Moraes' life he was a poet, and as such we hear recitations of some bits and pieces of his poetry. A good bulk of his life seems to have been spent around poetry and the movie reflects this, so it definitely doesn't jump into bossa nova or even any music for a while. As the music begins to emerge, more and more screen time is devoted to various musicians playing various songs by de Moraes, intermixed with some pretty b-roll. Everything in the movie is painted in very warm colors and it's really quite beautifully shot.
Apart from the wacky stage actors reading poetry, this sounds like your typical documentary about some famous person's career path into stardom and then eventually to their death. The thing that sets this movie apart from all that is this: the man had nine wives. Yes, nine wives. So we follow de Moraes' career path slowly upward as he becomes further recognized for his music, and at each interval we learn de Moraes gets married. Again. Nine times. This alone makes it almost worth seeing, simply for the humor value in learning about each progressive marriage and seeing the interviewees talk about them.
I didn't exactly walk away learning much about bossa nova, and though there were some excellent singing performances in the movie, "The Girl From Ipanema" is still the only tune I can name. The movie itself extends a bit too long as well. But the interviews are great and bits and pieces here and there are really interesting if you have the patience to sit through the entirety.
Angel-A was one of those movies that started out teetering on the line for me between pretentious self-indulgent trash and humorous quirky drama. Usually this line settles itself in the first 10 minutes or so and I can continue watching through a filter of excessive disgust or amused relief. Unfortunately this time the battle of good vs. bad continued throughout the entire movie until it was over, and I'm still not sure what my feelings are on it.
The story basically revolves around one sadsack man and his inability to be truthful with himself and thus be happy. He receives a visit from a tall blonde woman who it turns out is an angel sent to fix his life for him. The movie is completely in black and white, though the contrast is very soft so that it almost looks like it was originally shot in color. The script contains a lot of navel-gazing Linklater-ish dialogue between the two main characters, mixed in between moments of high drama and corny comedy.
I'm still not quite sure what point the b&w photography served on this movie, as there didn't seem to be much compositional or thematic need for it. Fortunately the script was pretty engaging, even at times where the dialogue was a bit stilted, and the pacing moved it right along so those dull points were easily forgotten. Overall it wasn't bad, but in a sea of lousy movies lately that may not be saying much.
Northwest Ties is a compilation of short films produced here locally. There were six films total, and afterwards there was a Q&A with the directors/actors. Several were very poorly produced and had equally lousy scripts to boot. Several were very well polished. Fortune Hunters had its fair share of dialogue issues that were very distracting. By that I mean, the dialogue sounded really forced and in turn like it was dumbed down for the viewer so that they could understand what was going on. But Gedde Watanabe makes an appearance which I always consider a good thing.
Audience Watch: I sat next to some progressive short-haired women for the first movie who were ranting about how awful some movie was (didn't catch the name) because it was exploitive to women. This probably isn't funny in and of itself, but as someone who grew up in Olympia, WA, this conversation comes a dime a dozen next to a cup of fair trade coffee and Utne Reader. During another movie, a couple sat behind me and argued about how lousy their seats were because one of them spent time searching for a parking spot instead of just parking in the lot.
Some things I learned today:
- Evergreen Washelli Memorial Park is the place to go for shooting any cemetery scenes, apparently they are very accommodating to filmmakers.
- HD can still look really horrible on the big screen without proper lighting and post-production care.
SIFF blogging
It's good to keep up on the latest movie buzz during the film fest just to make sure you're not missing anything totally amazing. Usually you get this by talking to people in the theaters or overhearing snippets of conversations throughout the theater lobbies. You can also find some information in the local papers that do reviews. Full Series passholders also have their own email list which helps to get more information.
One of the best sources for movie info during the fest is through blogging, and there's a ton of SIFF blogging going on right now. Here's what I've found -- If I'm missing anything, please feel free to post/advertise it in the Comments!
Personal SIFF blogs
Greg's cineblog is totally lagging behind as usual this year, but when he gets to updating it the entries are entertaining and thoughtful.
Chris at Film Lovers Are Sick People writes nice morsel reviews of each movie he saw at the fest which are far easier to read than my ramblings. He has recently added an Audience Watch-ish feature as well.
Ken Rudolph sees a bajillion movies each year and has nugget-sized reviews that serve as a great reference, especially since he sees a good handful of SIFF's movies at other fests prior to ours.
One of the Usual Suspects has very nice thorough accounts of the SIFF-going experience, including well written reviews and ratings, ads that were shown, any goodies offered, and percentage of audience in attendance.
Rich also writes nice morsel reviews of SIFF movies. One thing I like about his blog is the listing of past films he rated highly to calibrate your tastes against his -- an important thing when it comes to reading reviews.
I just discovered Jayde's blog and it's got some good review writing on it that's far less formal sounding than mine, which is a good thing.
Andy Spletzer is a SIFF programmer who writes good articles for film.com.
Collective SIFF blogs
The reviews on these blogs have a variety of contributors.
Seattle Metroblogging's SIFF notes
Film.com has some bits about the festival and is actually hosting a handful of SIFF short films to view online (requires RealPlayer).
June 03, 2007
Secret Fest
Ahh, a one-movie day and it's a Secret Fest day to boot! I'm off the hook for writing, which is good because I need to go to sleep.
Secret Fest this year has been moderately OK. No real winners, but nothing completely loser-ish either. The two movies I've seen so far have managed to at least entertain a relatively diverse looking audience.
And speaking of the audience...
Audience Watch: Today's movie had a lot of good humorous bits with the audience laughter making it all the more fun. A woman sitting behind me unfortunately began the movie by loudly stuffing popcorn into her face nonstop and talking randomly. I wish I could understand what is so satisfying about chewing popcorn with your mouth open, and cramming it into your face at lightning speed. Maybe I will try it in the comfort of my own home and see. It wasn't even just chewing loudly at intervals, it was completely nonstop with no break between the lower volume segments of the movie. Most people will at least reserve their noisiness for loud sequences. Later on during the movie, the man sitting next to me started to fall asleep at exactly the point where I thought the movie was extending a little too long, and then proceeded to start snoring. I pondered nudging or hitting him, but then decided I didn't really care because the movie seemed pretty much over to me at that point and if anyone else had a problem with him they'd hit him instead. Also I've seen this guy at many, many showings and talking with many people, so I figure this is his schtick and i'll just let it be. Well, nobody ended up clobbering him and eventually he woke up and the movie finally ended.
June 02, 2007
I Don't Want To Sleep Alone, Man in the Chair, The Elephant and the Sea
There is a running motif in I Don't Want To Sleep Alone that best describes the theme of the movie which the story and its characters revolve closely around in a nearly plotless environment. The motif is hands, which express in a physical sense the altruistic nature and potential that people possess inside them. This nature encompasses acts such as the kindness of a stranger in need, the care given by close loved ones, and even extends to submission to god by praying. Tsai Ming-Liang's movie is about this humility being part of what makes us human, and expands further on this theme by showing characters take this humility at their worst -- taking kindness for granted or having it expose jealousy in others, and more significantly, the fact that the way we give is never entirely altruistic and there is always the expectation of return.
The camerawork is very Ozu-like in the way it cuts from scene to scene with little moving shots, and mostly from a low angle. This makes the characters seem closer and more human, and let's us focus very intently at their actions and dialogue. There is a truthfulness to shooting it in this barebones way, which still allows for some beautiful portrait like shots. There is little dialogue in this film, since it relies very heavily on character movements and the framing of the camera around these movements. In this way, it is a slow steady snapshot of interactions and isolated characters acting upon eachother in their environments under the instinctual need to care, but again for the sake of reciprocation at some later date.
I would be interested in seeing more of Ming-Liang's work as this was the first I have watched of his. I really liked his deliberate yet subtle style which requires some work on the part of the viewer, but rewards very well for that effort.
Man in the Chair in contrast was completely unenjoyable. About 5 or 10 minutes into the movie I knew I wanted to leave but didn't have the gumption to get right up and do it. Rather than encapsulate my thoughts into a boring paragraph or two on why I hated it, I thought instead it might be more useful to list things out as part of a larger conceptual topic of Things I Vow Never To Do As A Director:
- Make my movie hip. This includes excessive use of the same kind of boring music (e.g., indie rock), long sequences enabling songs to be played out in their entirety against abstract images, the use of music by famous bands to enhance my work, or the use of music to force a mood on a scene that doesn't exist in the scene by itself. This also includes the usage of any slang specific to a certain decade (unless the decade plays a specific role in the movie's overall story), and any use of brands, products, or other imagery to denote either a certain type of style or a period of time that is supposed to be deemed "cool". I would like the films I make to be timeless (see also: review of Rocket Science).
- Use excessive overproduction in either the camerawork or editing room (e.g., fast zoom, jump-cuts, use of abstract fx) that fail to have anything to do with individual scenes or the overall movie, or force my viewers to take specific notice of them (see also: Eagle vs. Shark and claymation sequences).
- Make gratuitous references to self, film industry or director influences to boast industry cred.
- Use a poor script.
- Use the dialogue of a character to force my personal agendas in such a way that compromises the integrity of the character and overall movie.
- Use poor actors.
- Treat viewers as if they are stupid (see also: poor script) through oversimplification of scene construction.
Perhaps I will add more to this working list as things evolve throughout the fest.
2 Days in Paris, the film I was originally scheduled to see afterwards, was a complete bust. It turns out this was a gala screening which requires a special ticket, and Full Series Passholders once again get screwed out of another little "extra." Tickets were mostly sold out at that point too, so instead I went to see The Elephant and the Sea.
Any hopes I had about seeing something to bring me out of my movie slump this past week were completely torn apart by this movie. It was completely awful. One of the interesting things about it is that it is from Malaysia and the director really tries very hard to emulate Tsai Ming-Liang's style with the use of steady shots, low camera angles, simple scenes drawn out, lots of use of natural lighting and little dialogue. Having watched Ming-Liang's newest earlier in the day, it was a good reference point to compare the two movies together. Ming Jin Woo's film seems to go mechanically where Ming-Liang does, but the feelings and thematic elements are lost. In I Don't Want To Sleep Alone I felt watching it a very strong sense that I was seeing pieces of a larger puzzle or an overall concept. Elephant and the Sea instead felt like simple snapshots. I could visually see where ties could be created, and there was a bit of a storyline following throughout, but none of it really made much sense at all. I actually shut my eyes for long portions of this movie and didn't miss anything.
Audience Watch: There were a handful of walkouts during I Don't Want To Sleep Alone and another smaller handful during Man in the Chair, and even still more during The Elephant and the Sea. I'm really starting to suspect something is up with this year's fest. Either I've been picking the wrong movies, or there has been a serious drop in programming quality over the past year.
June 01, 2007
Still Alive. A Film About Krzysztof Kieslowski
If you're wondering why the last couple of entries here are so sparse, it's because I've had to interrupt my dream vacation with some work. Now I'm really free, so it's time to ramp things up and watch some freakin' movies.
Starting tomorrow.
Tonight, I'm bailing out on the last one, The Last Winter, to chill out a bit this evening. Partly because I'd like a break, partly because Greg's bailing out due to sickness, and partly because I'm a little burned out with SIFF right now.
Most of my latest movie commentary here has had a distinct lean towards the negative. While I've picked a couple of good winners to start SIFF off this year, the rest seem to have resulted in mainly medicore to poor losers.
Now consider this: I have seen 18 movies, and of those, 7 have been documentaries. SIFF always has a strong documentary lineup, and it's sort of a fluke that I've scheduled most of them towards the beginning of the festival, but I see it as something that plays a bit into my budding burnout. What it is to me is a large presence this year of poorly produced documentaries with highly specific subject matter. Examples like Murch, Sanctuary, Dr. Bronner's Magic Soapbox or today's showing of Still Alive. A Film About Krzysztof Kieslowski really start to beg the question: what is a documentary? All of these were fascinating portraits, disposing a great amount of useful information, but all were clumsily shot and even more shoddily edited together. All of them, perhaps arguably excluding Sanctuary and Dr. Bronner, were geared towards a very specific audience. None of these really had a story to tell, other than the general career timeline of each individual. Even Manufactured Landscapes with its addition of supplemental material suffers from similar issues.
This leaves only 2 films that I have seen so far at SIFF that I feel are strong enough to be considered true documentary cinema: In The Shadow of the Moon and King of Kong. They each have their faults too, but their writing, which is the true core of these films, push them to a level far and above the rest. There is hope, fear of failure, self-doubt, heroes, and big challenges that people must rise to overcome. It's not just the dispensing information that completes the experience of watching these documentaries, it's the sensation of being in those experiences with those heroes that make them so powerful. I forgive the sometimes shoddy camera-work in King of Kong, and the rampant talking heads in In The Shadow of the Moon, because above all else their stories are solid, their music is spot-on, and the feelings these create when they come together far outweigh the individual quirks. In fact, over-production might even detract from the authenticity in something like King of Kong. We've all seen the footage of Neil Armstrong a million times, we all know the end of the story about how the astronauts made it to the moon, but I would be shocked at anyone who actually found the retelling of this story, through voices, music and images, to be anything but totally fascinating.
So, getting back to Still Alive. A Film About Krzysztof Kieslowski. The film covers Kieslowski's career from the time he attended film school until his death. We learn about him through interviews with colleagues and archived footage of himself, as well as through clips of his films and on the sets of his films. It's an educational portrait of him, though at times seems very geared towards one who is more familiar with his work since not enough of each film is covered in any particular depth. There is no narration in this movie, so there is a very strong reliance upon interview soundbites. This causes the movie to become very wordy at times, stringing together one person talking against another and then another and so on. Watching this film in English compounds the issue even further by having to read all of this in subtitles, making the experience akin to reading a book for about an hour with a few supplemental images. It's not really a fault of the movie that the subtitles were very wordy, but it should have included some breathing room from the voices as we need some time to digest regardless of the language. And, again, the camera work was pretty unremarkable here as well.
Fortunately that ends a large chunk of documentaries this week, and only 3 are scheduled next week and the week after. It may sound pretty negative, but there's only so much you can wade through before it starts getting tedious. Documentary filmmaking has become pretty big and it's great that anyone can pick up a movie camera and shoot, but I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding of what actually makes a good documentary and too frequently the uniqueness of the subject matter seems to overshadow the importance of the other traits of a good quality film.
Audience Watch: Random wafts of a soapy perfume emanating from some distant seat location at the Egyptian caused some occasional sensory disconnects during the viewing of the Kieslowski film. Several people walked out during the first 20min.
May 31, 2007
Eagle vs. Shark
Indiewood cranks out another boring quirky romance comedy with Eagle vs. Shark. I had so many problems with this I don't know where to start. Okay actually I do -- what is up with that lead female role? Why are all the nerdy male characters in these movies always horribly disgusting, and all the geeky awkward female characters totally not? Is it really believable to cast someone attractive in such a role, I mean can this really happen in real life? This movie suffers all around from unbelievably weird casting -- from the family that looks very unrealistically hodge-podge, to the daughter dressed up as someone who just walked out of a Little Miss Sunshine lookalike contest.
Setting aside the distracting casting issue, the movie starts out with a weird Miranda July-ish monologue, then segues into one of several animated clay segments that make little sense in the context of the movie, and alone aren't very good to begin with. It has gotten comparisons to Napolean Dynamite which makes sense due to the dry humor and 80's set.
Given that the budget was small, it seems better money would have been spent on more script readings or paid actors. The director stated at the Q&A afterwards that he used friends where possible, and that the lead female was actually the catalyst for the creation of the movie. And that he's a big fan of animation. These all sort of explain some of the problems I had, but put together, it just wasn't my cup of tea at all. The entire rest of the audience was howling though, so much that I thought there might be something wrong with me. Well, maybe there is, but I still didn't like this movie.
May 30, 2007
Slipstream
I skipped the first movie for today out of laziness and also because I wasn't completely thrilled about picking it in the first place (Children). I slacked off for most of the day instead and caught up on errands.
When I got to the Egyptian later in the afternoon for Slipstream, they were rolling out red carpet in preparation for Anthony Hopkins' arrival for the award ceremony after the movie. I walked in and pretended it was for me! Then I found a seat and waited.
Slipstream was Anthony Hopkins' baby project -- directed, produced, starred and even scored by himself. As the film began, I was immediately pleased to see this wasn't something ordinary. Not only because I love to see something different, but because someone as well-known as Hopkins was putting something experimental out there as a labor of love.
That feeling of being pleased started to diminish fairly rapidly, as the film progressed further and further into a weird storyline, then seemed like it was becoming decent again, then shot itself down further with a couple of old tired cliches, then ended very unsatisfyingly. The visual effects in the film weren't even particularly original either, or used very effectively, and in some cases were outright annoying.
I'm not even going to venture to write a plot summary for the movie since SIFF's website does a better job of that. I really wanted to like it, but it just failed in so many ways. The only redeeming quality that I could point out is John Turturo came through with an excellent performance.
Audience Watch: An irritatingly obnoxious man sitting in the row behind me kept making random comments during the movie in a normal conversational voice.
May 29, 2007
Hounds, Manufactured Landscapes, The Year of Living Dangerously, I Dot the Eye
Four movies today and I'm still in one little piece! The Full Series Pass comes with a few perks, one of which is being able to dart into the theater before the rest of the crowd to use the bathroom without waiting in line. This comes in very handy when you're hopped up on caffeine and going through tons of water on a hot day.
SIFF seems to assemble a bunch of their lesser-known movies into the 2pm weekday slots for most days. The audiences are usually very mixed and most showings seem very sparsely attended. This isn't always the case, but I notice it frequently. I like these showings though because they're generally pretty decent but overlooked films. Last year I saw Host & Guest from one of these timeslots which I liked a lot. Today, Hounds was showing over at Pacific Place so I hauled on over to check it out.
Throughout the beginning of Hounds there are stark white wide shots of cold landscape. There is no music for a good half or 2/3rds of the movie. Character dialogue is very curt. Everything feels very tightly restrained. Perhaps this speaks to the stereotype of the cold, calculating German people, or perhaps it's simply for dramatic effect. Whatever it is, it creates an interesting mood across the storyline that makes way for strong punctuation by short musical pieces and expanded dialogue later on as the movie progresses. This extremely careful pacing and planning pay off very well, in addition to the controlled cinematography that is very deliberate in its commentary on the characters. The movie itself is about a boy who discovers his now-separated father is seeing his ex-wife's sister. He becomes friends with a girl who is mute which eventually evolves into a love story. It's definitely not fast-paced or action packed, but the rewards that come from the careful exploration of each character within their environment are great and their numerous subtleties very satisfying. I really liked the direction on this movie overall. The story itself not quite as much, but what was done to illustrate it was pulled off very nicely.
I had previously skipped Manufactured Landscapes but fortunately another showing happened in the same theater I was already at so I stayed. This movie explores the photography work of Edward Burtynsky. His photographs explore the large scale effect of man on the earth. During the movie, he talks a bit about how he doesn't necessarily comment on whether that's good or bad, but instead lets viewers draw their own conclusion. The photographs are completely amazing, and this neutral stance is notable considering how sharply the works comment upon our environmental problems. The movie very accurately captures both Burtynsky's still photographic work and thought process, as well as his overall vision through the cinematography. In just the first scene alone, we spend several minutes viewing the interior of a very huge factory as the camera tracks across each aisle. This live view perfectly accompanies Burtynsky's still photos, giving them even more weight and communicating his overall conceptual ideas through the movie camera lens.
I have to say, his photographs alone are pretty awesome. Just that alone makes this movie worth seeing, because there is something about the scale of them that makes them very suited towards view on a large screen. Besides that though, the movie really adds a lot to his photographs. It's not just a documentary on him and his still photos, it is in and of itself an extension of his work. The idea of the movie screen being an extension of still photography and picking up where it physically cannot works very effectively here with the theme of human effect on environment in being able to really show the moving sum of parts that create the effects captured so well by Burtynsky's camera.
My only gripes about Manufactured Landscapes is that there are a few overuses of a particular type of still photography transition effect to communicate the enormity of the photographic subjects, and the latter half of the movie wasn't quite as moving to me as the first half, perhaps because it delves very specifically into subjects without retaining more of a global view.
The Year of Living Dangerously is a movie from 1982 starring Mel Gibson and Sigourney Weaver. At first I was a little weary of seeing this, it just seemed like the type of movie I probably wouldn't have seen when it was released either, but I'm really glad I went. It's part a story of a journalist and his career woes, and part a love story. There are certain devices that always get me worked up about movies, the first being movies about filmmaking (Cinema Paradiso, for example), and the second is movies that feature still photography processing. This one had the latter. Anyway, Living Dangerously's story and set location, along with some very fine acting and well developed characters, made it stand out as a winner.
And finally the last feature of the day was a shorts package of avant garde work I Dot the Eye over at Northwest Film Forum. I've seen some of their experimental curations before and it can be very hit or miss, so I was pretty much prepared for anything. Unfortunately I wasn't completely thrilled with any of the films shown as part of this package. I loved the experimental nature of all the films, and I enjoyed the usage of 16mm in several of the shorts, but did not find much to grab onto or be inspired by. Several of the movies seemed to make little sense even in the context of experimental, and a couple were just plain drab. The director for the last one, I'm Keith Hernandez was there for a Q&A afterwards about his film, which was pretty well done and probably my only real favorite.
Audience Watch: I had the unfortunate luck of sitting next to at least several older women during one of the movies who reeked of "old lady perfume." During this, I also sat near a man who was constantly writing on a notepad and would flip the page every 5 minutes. I don't know who this guy was, but I find it hard to believe he was with the press or anything, so I don't know what his story was but it was extremely irritating. Later when the movie ended he let out this huge sigh and verbal end note that I had trouble interpreting but seemed to succinctly punctuate his overall irritant level.
May 28, 2007
King of Kong, Murch, Fly Filmmaking Challenge
Today's batch of movies was a grabbag of interesting film!
It started with King of Kong, a tale of one local man's (Steve Wiebe) struggle to overthrow the reigning world champion of Donkey Kong -- the classic video game we all know and love. The scores themselves are kept by a referee organization known as Twin Galaxies (you can view my personal scores as an example). First and foremost, this film had an incredible amount of shooting luck. The director stated over 300 hours of footage was shot during the filming, so perhaps that's more good responsible 
planning than luck, but what was captured was certainly very noteworthy. The story is very well driven by this excellently thorough footage. It pushes along the drama surrounding the serious intensity that comes from long hours of classic arcade gaming, and delves into those people who fully devote themselves to it. It's definitely a film with great highs and sad, sad lows. There's the champ to root for, the challenge that lays ahead for him, the ever patient wife and family, the onlookers, and even a bad guy we can all loathe. It's all there in one entertaining package -- so much in fact that the director has stated that a narrative feature film will be produced based on King of Kong sometime in the future. The documentary itself will premiere in theaters in August.
The next film was also a documentary called Murch, which is about Walter Murch the famous film editor who has worked on a number of classics. Originally going in, I thought this was going to be a biographical piece about the man and how he became an editor. About 10 minutes into the movie it became clear that it was distinctly not this at all. The film's strong point is its teaching potential for budding filmmakers (such as myself). For the majority of the film, we see Murch in an interview discussing very eloquently the finer points of editing theory and not necessarily what he does but why he does it. It's a fascinating look into the choices editors are faced with and what goes into the decision process. In one segment, Murch discusses how it is important to push beyond what is familiar to you and the audience and challenge your decisions by moving things around to experiment with what may work. In another segment, Murch talks about the eye as the natural editor, blinking at key moments when our brain needs a cut to signify the end of something. He talks about why standing up editing makes him feel more involved in the process and in tune with the film, and how important it is not to use music to force a mood into a scene. These and other tidbits flow along naturally through his well worded explanations, which are backed up with footage from his movies as demonstration material as he discusses them. It's quite an information overload if you're not already familiar with some editing concepts, and there are some biographic moments which Murch talks about as far as his involvement in the film industry, but overall the bulk of the documentary (if it can be classified as that) is really about Murch's editing process. With that said, the film did have its share of flaws. The single headshot of Murch talking became almost like a classroom lecture with his films as overhead projections. This is great as a learning tool as mentioned above, but for a documentary it may disappoint quite a few simply because the ground it covers is different from what one might expect going in. The massive amounts of jump cuts made during Murch's talking segments, which were necessary to cut out a lot of what appeared to be him rambling frequently, sometimes came across as stilted and forced -- even one word or two was cut between two others while he was on screen, which seems a bit extreme but the sound editing was well enough so that it wasn't quite as jarring as it could have been. At times this was on purpose for effect, but at other times it wasn't clear what we may have been missing from what Murch said. Lastly, the title sort of makes me again think of it as a biography about him, but it is really an informational piece about his editing process. As an informational piece, it is definitely a must-see for anyone interested in editing.
The last feature of the day was The 2007 Fly Filmmaking Challenge, which is actually comprised of three 10 minute shorts that are produced by SIFF and filmed by three directors chosen by local organizations. The films were The Bridge by Lisa Hardmeyer, Rainbow by Dayna Hanson, and Numb by Matt Daniels. All three were pretty good, but my favorites in order were Numb, Rainbow and The Bridge. Daniels' fairy tale imagery using vaseline lens vignetting, moody lighting and set design, and animated backgrounds was amazing considering the limited time necessary to complete the challenge. Hanson's story was beautifully shot and somewhat quirky, starring my new up and coming favorite local actor Linas Phillips (from Walking to Werner). I'd seen a short by Hardmeyer at the Post Alley Film Festival and was impressed by it, but The Bridge just wasn't up my particular alley and I think a lot of it had to do with the base script which didn't seem to have much there. Thinking about the physical script on paper, it does seem technically like a good idea overall, but I don't know maybe it was the dialogue or just simply the pacing that wasn't quite right. Or maybe I just don't like the cliche of starting at the story end and working backwards anymore.
Audience Watch: Oh man. Okay in my last entry, I noted a new irk which was audience members pushing an agenda during director Q&A's. Today's big agenda-pusher was a woman in the audience who decided to really give it her all with the co-directors of Murch, laying into them so hard that one of the director's actually had to have her repeat exactly what her question was. This woman's gripe was about "why there was only one talking head" and why it was so boring to her, etc, etc. I will give her some credit in asking the simple question about why no one else was interviewed, that's a legitimate complaint, but to take the floor for a good minute with a steady stream of ranting about how bad the film was to the directors standing on stage to me is just being a total jerk. I mean the fact that these people actually got a feature film done is commendable on its own as far as I'm concerned. The other thing is that any time someone takes the floor with a rant, it's a red flag that the show is over, because anyone who knows how to participate in Q&A knows that there is a level of respect one has to maintain for both the directors and the rest of the audience by not making everybody have to listen to this one random schmoe for the duration of their insane rantings. Anyway, the whole thing was extremely irritating and I felt really bad for the co-directors who smartly decided to end the Q&A after this question was up.
May 27, 2007
Secret Festival, In The Shadow Of The Moon, Rescue Dawn
I have to admit I kind of like Secret Fest days when the day is at its end because when I'm sitting here faced with having to write about everything I saw, I'm off the hook for at least one of those films. Not that I saw a whole lot today -- I bailed out on the last one, Manufactured Landscapes, and skipped the "maybe" one, Them.
In The Shadow Of The Moon is a documentary about the astronauts who visited the moon. The movie contains all kinds of never before seen footage of things like movie clips the men took of the moon, shots from space, the control room during launch, etc. This combined with the movie's very moving score give it a very awe inspiring feel. There are very personal, up close interviews with the astronauts which provide the narration that flows very naturally through the lifecycle of a trip. At the Q&A afterwards, director David Sington (notably British, as this movie was very much "American") said their aim was to get at least one astronaut from each space mission interviewed, and they ended up fairing even better than that in the end. The newly shown footage was found locked away in NASA's cold storage, which is apparently slowly being taken out from the wraps due to up and coming HD technology that makes it possible to get a decent high quality transfer done. The director stated that over 50 hours of footage were grabbed for eventual sorting through to make this movie, and who knows how many interview hours (2 days of interviewing for each astronaut). It seems like a hefty task, especially given the subject matter, but overall the film came out successfully achieving its goal of digging into the minds of those astronauts that made it to the moon and back, and telling their very personal accounts of an amazing journey.
Rescue Dawn is about a US soldier who gets shot down during battle (Vietnam), survives the crash, ends up being taken prisoner and then attempts escape. I won't spoil the ending, but it was a bit surprising and I think part of that was the build up in the first half. The movie is beautifully shot and directed by Werner Herzog with Christian Bale in the lead role whom many have remarked has frequent weight swings. The movie as a whole was a touching personal account as opposed to a "war movie" and the acting was very powerful. I don't really have a whole lot else to say about it except that I feel like the story itself is something I've seen before, which is why it didn't strike me as particularly exceptional except that Herzog treated the direction of it extremely well.
Audience Watch: During the Secret Fest movie, someone behind me whom I later realized was a kid struck probably 5 or 6 items on the Audience Tips list of things to avoid doing in a movie theater. He munched his popcorn with gusto, kicked the back of my seat randomly, and kept asking his mom, "what's he doing?" every time a character did some kind of drug. The worst part about this was that the mom answered back and did nothing to try to tone her kid down or teach him not to talk in a theater. The even worse part about this is that it seems a kid that age should be old enough to identify when someone is taking drugs through either smoking up, injecting or snorting. Then during In The Shadow Of The Moon, two people in different parties kept whispering obnoxiously throughout the duration of the movie. And last but not least, another irk that has cropped up recently is people pushing agendas through director Q&A. For example, those people gushing embarassingly at the Lisa Gerrard Q&A, or someone asking about why no female astronauts were chosen during In Shadow Of The Moon. I often wonder if these and similarly obnoxious or stupid questions are specific to Seattle and it's down to earth non-ritzy festival, or whether it happens at film fests all over.
Earlier today, I sliced a good chunk of my finger on the plastic covering to the Full Series pass. Which is sort of funny because I never even really used it for any movies today since they were stacked so close together that the theater was already letting ticketholders in by the time I arrived.
May 26, 2007
Waiter, Dr. Bronner's Magic Soapbox & Paris je t'aime
It was a mostly medicore 3-film day, I'd say.
Waiter is getting a bunch of comparisons to the Will Ferrell movie Stranger Than Fiction that came out last year, only it's from The Netherlands and a bit more wishy-washy. It uses a similar plot device in that the characters somehow discover they are being actively narrated then seek out their author and interact with them. It is here where Waiter departs from the Stranger Than Fiction comparison by immediately getting to this device and then continually revisiting it throughout the entire film. One thing that irritated me about Stranger Than Fiction was just how long it took to actually get to the point that we all knew was coming from all the trailers. The slow to start script made it a bit grueling. The other thing is that Fiction is a more subtle movie I think, and written most likely to showcase Ferrell's more dark humorous side (though I'm not sure how well that worked). Waiter is more outright goofy, sometimes violent, and overall fairly plotless. It instead focused entirely on the character/narrator device and overall character development. But the former seems a bit cliched, and the latter was sort of scatterbrained and not particularly fulfilling in any way. I just felt the whole thing was a little fluffy. And though I admittedly kind of like the overall cliched idea and was hoping maybe a foreign film would progress it beyond just simply being another of the same, it failed in rising above all that to anything actively interesting.
Several hours after Waiter, the next scheduled film was Dr. Bronner's Magic Soapbox over at the SIFF Cinema. So like a total slacker, I chilled out at home and waited until the last minute to head out downtown in the midst of all kinds of Folklife Festival traffic. I arrived at the theater about 5 minutes after its start time and was able to get in, breaking my #1 audience rule and of course, completely not caring because I really wanted to see it.
I wouldn't say Dr. Bronner was worth the traffic battle, few movies probably are, but I found it entertaining if one could look past its poor production qualities. The documentary is about the man behind those wacky soap containers you see at the store with all the finely printed labels spewing all kinds of random things on them. It's about who he was, what kind of person he was to others, and about his legacy which continues to live on by his children. One of those children actually happens to be quite outspoken about his dad and a bit of an eccentric like him as well. The movie's strength comes from the sheer luck of finding unique people with which some great footage was obtained, such as one humorous scene where the son is talking about his father in the car and manages to drive past a large sign that says BIG and then DADDY, at which point the car stops in traffic and the word DADDY is framed perfectly in the background. Talk about a perfect shot! And then there is the totally great stoner-pianist guy who is so totally honest with the camera and his interaction with Bronner's son that I assume the director had no choice but to just include it even though it had little relevancy to the story. The movie just kind of floats along like this with more of the same little peculiar or funny tidbits here and there that overall make it a fun watch, but nothing totally mind-blowing or great.
Last on the list for today was Paris je t'aime - A Collective Feature Film. 18 short films about love in Paris by 18 different directors. Rather than go through each one, which I physically can't because time is short, I will just note my favorites:
14th arrondissement by Alexander Payne: A totally hilarious yet somehow very touching story of an American woman who (poorly, in french with subtitles) narrates her trip to Paris. Totally great idea and done very well.
Tuileries by the Coen Brothers: A little tale about a sadsack man (Steve Buschemi) who becomes the subject of a couple's amusement during his wait in the train station. Shot really well and Buschemi is great as always.
Place des Victoires by Nobuhiro Suwa: A mother has lost her son and has visions of him. Another excellently shot movie with the always excellently depressing Juliette Binoche.
Faubourg Saint-Denis by Tom Tykwer: I have to admit, anytime I see Natalie Portman somewhere I cringe, but I really liked this one for some reason. There is an excellent time-lapse montage towards the end with narration to describe a small relationship timeline that was really unique and great.
The other shorts were not bad at all and there were none that I actively disliked save for another Nick Nolte scraggly-guy role, these are simply the ones that stood out in my mind.
Audience Watch: As I mentioned above, I was a prime offender here so I'd be a little hesitant to point out any issues today, but really there weren't any problems at all with any audiences of these movies so I guess the whole thing works out. Perhaps I'll show up in someone else's Audience Watch!
May 25, 2007
An Evening With Lisa Gerrard
I met Lisa Gerrard once. When I heard that she was going to make an appearance at a major bookstore down the street from my work, I hopped on over as early as I could to catch a glimpse of the legendary singer for Dead Can Dance. For some reason I was under the strange assumption she might actually sing a little, right there in the bookstore. But she was just there to sign cds, so I promptly bought another copy of her album, The Mirror Pool, just to have it signed. As I walked up to her, clutching my cd, I felt really weird. First, I'm not a big autograph person, but second, her presence was entirely overpowering. I muttered something about how I liked her version of Persian Love Song and she responded and said she was uncertain how the strings would play out in it and glad that it was well received. I walked away still feeling very strange. Her voice was so soft and she was so poised, it was almost like an act like she was playing the typical angel role in some movie. Later, I saw her perform and even her clothing looked angelic.
I saw her perform again last night at the Moore Theatre, and then again tonight before viewing the new documentary Sanctuary - Lisa Gerrard. The best part about her pre-movie talk was that she got up and began giving mini vocal lessons. Her passion for music runs very deep as is evidenced by her music and its style, and she is both inspirational to listen to as well as very well spoken when it comes to communicating abstractly or emotionally. It's a little strange though -- for all the emotion that she delivers through her voice and on stage, her body language in even the most relaxed state appears very formal and closed, yet she has an amazing ability to mesmerize an audience through just talking.
I felt a similar way about this movie that I did about the Leonard Cohen documentary from last year's SIFF: it tries too hard to convey in images what the music expresses, and notably fails at doing so. Much of the film's sequences are covered with massive amounts of abstract b-roll, such as fog or drifting clouds, images of natural forest, and the frequent image of hands moving s