Showing posts with label Documentary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Documentary. Show all posts

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Film Festival: Closing Night



Calling this documentary fawning would be an understatement. I don't know, maybe there just aren't any warts on this Phillies player turned broadcaster. He sure seemed like a nice guy that everybody liked. The problem is that nice guys who lead good lives generally don't make for the most interesting films. But I did like the part where he went off on a tirade about how much he hated catchers. It was partly insane but totally funny.

Well, that's it. My sixth film festival is over. I saw 49 movies over 13 days, subsisting mainly on granola bars. I know that sounds like a lot but they showed 143 movies at this year's festival (they'll tell you that it's over 260 but that's counting each individual short), so I barely saw a third of what they had to offer. I mean, I missed 94 movies.

Sigh. There just isn't enough time.

Anyway, stay tuned. I have a backlog of films I saw before the fest that I still haven't written about and I plan on updating this site more regularly in the future. Thanks for reading!

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Capturing the Friedmans: Ambiguity unbound


I think that great documentarians pick challenging subjects and aren't afraid of exploring the uncomfortable territory they lead to. And Capturing the Friedmans is filled to the brim with uncomfortable territory. It tells the story of Arnold Friedman who pleaded guilty to sexually
abusing and sodomizing the children that took his computer classes.

This case is especially complicated because the police failed to uncover any physical evidence and used questionable methods while interrogating the children. On the other hand, Arnold had a decent sized stack of kiddie porn hidden behind his piano and he admitted to molesting a minor on a previous occasion. It's quite possible that he is a pedophile who was wrongly convicted of child molestation.

The film consists almost entirely of gray areas and neither the Friedman family nor the police/prosecutors come off as very credible. The director, Andrew Jarecki, gives both sides enough rope to hang themselves. That the facts of what actually occurred remain so illusive is especially surprising considering that Arnold's son (and professional clown), David, made extensive recordings of the family as it went through this crisis. These home movies contain footage of incredibly personal moments of the family discussing the case, their legal options, the turmoil they're all going through and, most disturbingly, them just goofing around and having a good time.

It would have been easy for Jarecki to pick a side and make a film about how Arnold sexually abused entire classes of children or how a community fell victim to paranoia and began a witch-hunt that resulted with an innocent man in prison. But the director chose a more difficult path by presenting all of the confusing and contradictory evidence, trusting the audience to find their own answers to this mystery . . . or not, in my case.


So, who's the black sheep of the family? The admitted child molester or the professional clown?

Monday, August 13, 2007

Sicko: Does Moore know what he's trying to accomplish?


Disclaimer:
For this post I'm just recycling a paper that I had to write for class. I apologize for it being dry and unnecessarily verbose (I had to fill two
entire pages).

Michael Moore has devoted his life to altering American society through his film and television work. One can argue with his complaints or his suggested solutions but these criticisms are not particularly relevant. Moore’s work attempts to influence opinions and it should be judged by how effective it is at achieving that goal. Whether that goal is worthwhile should be a matter of politics.

The primary hurdle that Moore needs to overcome in Sicko is his image as a member of the radical left. In order to have his message generally accepted he must be perceived as the populist he wishes to be rather than the extremist his detractors accuse him of being.

Moore seems aware of this issue and begins his film with a fake-out. He introduces us to a couple of characters who have suffered from a lack of insurance. Although there are many Americans who are uninsured, they still constitute a minority and the middle-class demographic that Moore must play to in order to get his message across may not be able to relate to their situation. It is at this point in which Moore, rather ingeniously, stops the film and informs the viewers that the movie will not be about these people.

At this point Moore informs us that Sicko will be about people who are insured but find that their coverage is inadequate to deal with medical emergencies that they have encountered. This is a constituency that Moore’s audience can relate to. It immediately raises the question in their minds about whether or not their own insurance would cover all of their expenses in the wake of a catastrophic disease or other dire medical need.

This is the films greatest strength. It exposes the risks that face regular Americans who never know how extensive their insurance is until they are faced with doctor’s bills. It also allows Moore to explore the corporate policies that have victimized sick people and their stories make for very emotional sequences. Even someone who is completely opposed to Moore’s proposed solution of socialized medicine would be hard-pressed to watch this film without feeling that these patients have been treated unfairly.

For this reason, it is such a shame that Moore looses his way during the second half of the film. By incorporating the 9/11 rescue workers into his narrative Moore conjures up memories of his previous film Fahrenheit 9/11. That was a very divisive film and since Moore’s call to change is directed at all Americans he would be wise to avoid dredging those issues up. Although the President’s approval rating has dropped to around 30%, one must remember that approximately half of voters chose to vote for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.

If Moore wants to create a consensus on health care he must court the roughly 15-20% of the voters who helped to elect Bush but now think that his performance is unsatisfactory. By dredging up allegations about faulty pre-war intelligence, election stealing, and other controversial issues Moore polarizes his audience just when he needs to bring them together.

Moore’s greatest gift as a filmmaker is his ability to make movies that deal with complicated issues in an entertaining and easy to understand way. Although this leads his opponents to accuse him of oversimplification, is provides him with a powerful tool for changing people’s perceptions. However, his ability to convince those on the other side of the aisle is dramatically weakened when he plays into the popular caricature of himself as a radical troublemaker.

In this way, Sicko is a mixed success for Moore. He has created an intelligent movie about a complex dilemma that is appealing to many people because of its sentimentality and humor. Unfortunately, this film also serves as a slap in the face to a significant portion of Americans who supported Bush in the past but who may regret that decision now. In order to become the genuine populist that he presents himself as, Moore must learn to stop taking cheap shots at the moderate Republicans he needs to create a force large enough to truly affect national policy.


Now you know what it feels like to be one of my professors. Exciting, no?

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe: The title is surprisingly literal


One day future documentarian Errol Morris told famed documentarian (and feature film director) Werner Herzog about a movie he'd like to make. Herzog told Morris to stop talking about it and actually make the project happen, promising to eat his shoe if Morris followed through. This challenge resulted in two things: First, Morris produced the wonderfully bizarre documentary Gates of Heaven. Second, Herzog ate his shoe. An act that was documented in Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe by Les Blank who had previously filmed Herzog as his subject in Burden of Dreams.

I know this is starting to sound like a documentary circle-jerk but there was some impressive work done here. Morris got his career off to a great start with Gates of Heaven which chronicled the lives of pet cemetery proprietors and their clients. But I'm not here to review that film, so I'll just say that it's fascinating and well worth checking out. Oh, and Morris went on win an Oscar for directing The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara, which is also great.

Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe is a lesser work but at a brief 20 minutes I don't think it was meant to be a great piece of art. It plays more like a home video. That doesn't mean that it's boring or amateurish, far from it. This doc has a light conversational tone, as if you were friends with those involved and along for the ride. Herzog discusses the meaning of the stunt and how he plans on cooking his shoe to a semi-edible state but he also takes time to discuss art and the importance of following your dreams.

It's not the kind of movie I'd recommend to just anyone. But if you're interested enough in filmmaking (and Herzog in particular) to rent the Burden of Dreams DVD, which includes it as a special feature, it's worth checking out this little film.

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

Burden of Dreams: Don't take Klaus Kinski into the jungle with you. Just don't.


Werner Herzog made a film called Fitzcarraldo about a deranged man who moves an entire boat over a mountain in the middle of the jungle by using indigenous people. In order to achieve this effect Herzog moved a boat over a mountain in the middle of the Amazon by hiring Indians. Burden of Dreams documents this remarkable event.

Herzog spends a lot of time on the commentary track for Fitzcarraldo trying to convince the listeners that he's not actually insane. After seeing this, I can see why he felt that was necessary. This film has scenes where Herzog delivers creepy monologues about the jungle, like this:
Nature here is vile and base . . . The trees here are in misery, and the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing. They just screech in pain. It's an unfinished country . . . It's like a curse weighing on an entire landscape . . . It's a land that God, if he exists has created in anger . . . Taking a close look at what's around us there is some sort of a harmony. It is the harmony of overwhelming and collective murder . . . But when I say this, I say this all full of admiration for the jungle. It is not that I hate it, I love it . . . But I love it against my better judgment.
Yikes,! When you start channeling Colonel Kurtz, it's time to get out of the jungle.

Also, this doc gives intriguing lines but doesn't always put them in context. For instance at one point when Herzog is talking about how important this project is to him he mentions that people have been killed while working on the film. Herzog is careful to point out in the commentaries for Fitzcarraldo and this documentary that the deaths were through no fault of his own (a couple of the extras attempted to steal a canoe in the middle of the night and drowned and there was also a crash involving a private plane). These claims come off as credible but they also sound a lot like someone who's trying to convince future investors that he actually is responsible.

Of course, we all know that the real lunatic in the jungle is temperamental actor Klaus Kinski. Kinski's outbursts were so upsetting to the indigenous actors that their chief approached Herzog and offered to have the actor killed. I've heard that Kinski also plotted to have Herzog murdered but I don't remember if that was in the documentary, one of the commentaries or just something I read online. Oddly, the only Kinski tantrum caught on film wasn't used it the final project. However, Herzog did use the footage when he made his own documentary about Kinski, My Best Fiend (no, that's not a typo).

Fitzcarraldo is a good film but it is a movie that's backstory is more interesting than the final film. Fortunately, Les Blank was there to film the behind-the-scenes drama and Herzog is still around to defend himself. Kinski died in '91, so there's nobody around to stick-up for him but that's probably just as well. He'd only make himself look worse.


A documentary about Werner Herzog? That's so Meta.

Monday, August 6, 2007

Champion: Who said there are no second acts in American lives? Oh, it was F. Scott Fitzgerald? Well, fuck that guy.


Champion is a documentary about Danny Trejo, my favorite Hispanic character actor (sorry, Luis Guzmán). His fascinating life and oversized personality make for a thoroughly watchable film and are great at showcasing Trejo's awesomeness. But what surprised me the most is how it also serves as a critique of the American penal system. There are a lot of intimate moments where Trejo confesses what kind of a person he had to become in order to survive prison. Even more interesting are the moments when he talks about his struggle to escape from his jail persona once he was released.

Even if you don't have a fixation for Chicano bit-players I still think you can really enjoy this movie. It's the story of one man's journey from an, admittedly, insane criminal to a minor celebrity who uses his down-time between filming to serve as a motivational speaker for troubled youths. You'd have to be pretty heartless not to be moved by that.


This guy was a drug counselor . . . after he got out of prison.

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Crumb: Who's Robert Crumb?


R. Crumb is probably best known for his "Keep on Truckin' . . ." illustration (above), a Big Brother & The Holding Company (Janis Joplin's band) album cover or Fritz the Cat (which he is none too proud of). He's also been accused of being a misogynist and a racist. I'm not really familiar enough with his work to say whether he's commenting on misogynism and racism or just being them. However, I do get the impression that he's the kind of artist who just takes whatever messed up thoughts are in his head and puts them on paper. That probably doesn't make for the most enlightened work but it's certainly honest.

There's a fine line between genius and madness and Crumb shows us how that line runs through one family. You know things are bad when the successful and happily-married brother is the one who was sexually attracted to Bugs Bunny as a child. And I'm not talking about Bugs dressed as a woman (hey, we've all been there) I mean regular old Bugs.

It's fascinating to see how similar Robert is to his oldest brother, Charles, and how differently their lives turned out. They're both talented artists who are also giant freaks. Yet, Robert was able to venture out into the world and carve out a niche for himself while Charles became a shut-in, living with his mother in a house with comforters hung up to block the windows. Even Max, Robert's youngest brother, escaped from home. If only to become a beggar who sits on a bed of nails on the streets of San Francisco.

Basically, this is a great documentary. Even if it did loose me for a little bit while that art critic was comparing Crumb to Goya, Brueghel and Daumier.


R. Crumb is on the far right, his relatively well-adjusted brother is in the middle and his, surprisingly, somewhat-normal son is on the left.

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Karamoja!: The exclamation point stands for exploitation


I went to a Secret Cinema screening the other day and the guy who runs the show over there got up and a made an impassioned plea to support repertory cinema and spread the word to our friends (Well, impassioned for the Secret Cinema guy, he's pretty mellow and has a really dry sense of humor). In case you don't know, repertory cinemas are places that show classics, older films that are not quite classics and occasionally newer movies that don't make it to theaters, usually foreign (I'm talking about Africa foreign not, like, Pedro Almodóvar foreign). So, go see repertory films . . . and the Ritz doesn't count, try IHouse, Exhumed Films, Andrew's Video Vault or Secret Cinema. Well, that's my plug for today.

The program began with some short films. The first one was an off-brand Soundie called Jungle Rhythm. A Soundie was essentially a music video made for video jukeboxes that were commonly found in bars and nightclubs in the 30's and 40's. This one featured a chick in a skimpy outfit dancing to a vaguely tribal beat. You could see, like, half her belly-button, it was pretty hot. The second short was called Adventure Parade: South Africa or maybe it was Adventure Paradise, my notes are unclear and I don't really remember anything about it. The final short was an educational/propaganda film produced by a group of missionaries called African Cousins. I was a little worried that this one was going to be way racist but it turned out to be a very positive look at a community in Africa and how similar they were to Americans (at the time we had considerably more people growing up on farms in this country than we do now). The whole production was geared toward children, complete with cheesy narration and my favorite part was when the narrator described how a young boy scoffed at an ancient ritual to banish evil spirits explaining that the boy had learned that there were no such things as evil spirits in his Sunday school class (where he, presumably, learned the much less-silly idea about the three good spirits).

Then things got underway with the main attraction, Karamoja!, a documentary about Uganda (who's history of genocide was made into a major motion picture starring Forest Whitaker, not Don Cheadle). This film was made by a dentist who was informed that he only had six months to live. This man, who had never made a film before, decided to grab a camera and head off to an area that had been undisturbed by western culture bringing with him a small crew (one of who he wound up marrying early in the process).

When this movie was released in America it was presented as a Shockumentary, a kind of exploitation film that could get away with showing violence and nudity under the auspices of educational fare. And although this film has plenty of violence and more full-frontal nudity than you'll ever see in a non-pornographic film, it's also a sensitive look at a culture that's remained unchanged for thousands of years. The violence is mostly directed at animals, which can be hard for some people to watch, but it's all part of surviving in a harsh environment and probably more humane than our industrial slaughterhouses. And even though there's plenty of nudity, none of it is sexual. It's just that Africa is really hot and these people have never heard of skin cancer, there's really no reason for them to not walk around with their junk hanging out.

It's an odd juxtaposition, the sincere attempt to understand an alien culture packaged as a sleazy sex and violence expose, but that's what makes repertory films so fascinating.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Film Festival: Day 12



This fascinating documentary is about the slums of Port-au-Prince, the capital of Haiti. The film primarily follows one of the five gang leaders who covertly works for the President to intimidate his political opponents. The gangster goes by the name '2Pac' and one of the members of his crew is named 50 cent. Things get a little confusing when the Haitian 2Pac calls up his friend the Haitian Wyclef Jean who is, like, the real Wyclef Jean. It's a great look at a complex political, social and personal situation where there are no real good guys. Only people doing what they can to survive in a terrible situation.


The premise of this film is that six people get trapped in a haunted house while taking a tour of a rundown movie studio that is lead by Henry Gibson. (Excellent premise!) The gang realizes that they are being forced to reenact an old movie and everyone is forced to tell their own personal real-life horror stories. Each tale is told in flashback and is directed by a different person with Joe Dante directing the wrap-around segments at the studio. As with any of these things the individual segments are sort of hot or miss and unfortunately the best parts are at the beginning. The first one involves a woman who gets breast implants that come from real breast tissue recovered from cadavers (clearly, this will not end well). The woman's newly enhanced bust takes on a life of it's own and begins sucking the blood of any would-be suitors. It's sort of reminiscent of Rabid, the David Cronenberg film with legendary porn-star Marilyn Chambers. So, if you start off your omnibus with vampire tits, where can you go from there? Demon sex. That's what the second segment is about. Both of those are pretty great but what comes after that is a little bit of a let-down.



End of the Line

This is a good (but politically muddled) horror flick about a group of Christians who get the word that the Day of Reckoning is upon us and start killing everyone to save their souls. It is unclear how killing someone before Satan's army arises from the dead will lead to everlasting life. This was made on a shoestring budget but it does offer a few jumps and a lot of suspense.


Wicked Flowers

This Japanese horror film is sort of like Cube meets The Game with Michael Douglas, only a lot stranger. It's kind of slow but I have to give it props for being weird as all get-out.

Monday, April 16, 2007

Film Festival: Day 11


This is an all puppet retelling of the classic with Dermot Mulroney as Dante and James Cromwell as Virgil, his guide through the underworld. It's pretty funny.


This is a labor of love by the brother of a comedienne who recently died of cancer. It's funny, it's got a lot of heart and it would seem cruel to criticize it.


This is an interesting mix of a family drama and a horror film with the horror aspect being a combination of a well-meaning, mentally ill caretaker and his cancer stricken mother. It's not always easy to tell fantasy from reality and that only adds to the suspense.


This movie is billed as being "From the makers of Napoleon Dynamite" but a more accurate description would be "from the editor, casting director and sound department of Napoleon Dynamite." I went in thinking this was going to be Napoleon Dynamite II and I was surprised to find a slower, more poignant film. It's got some really eccentric characters that are good for a few laughs, for instance it has a pompous actor played by a Baldwin brother (not the famous one or the crazy Christian, one of the other two) but it's more of a drama than a comedy.


Unholy Women

This is three short Japanese horror films rolled into one. The first and last section are both solid but it's the middle one that's a real gem. It's a funny, terrifying, and just plain bizarre tale about a boy who gets set up on a blind date with a girl who's got nice legs but is completely encased in a burlap sack from the waist up. She never speaks but does make inhuman, almost insect-like, screeches and her sack is lumpy and bulbous. Clearly, there is more than just a girl underneath. It ends with an act that I can only describe as (spoiler alert) a reverse-birth/consumption sex act. It's weird and wonderful.

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Film Festival: Day 10



This is a documentary about a guy (Kahloucha) who's basically a Tunisian Ed Wood. It's a lot of fun to watch him make Tarzan of the Arabs (pictured above) and see all of his friends crack up as they watch his work. It's also interesting to see who his screen heroes are. I wasn't surprised that Clint Eastwood was his favorite but who expect to him to know Jim Kelly and Alain Delon? If I hadn't seen his movies I'd say that he has great taste.



This dead on parody of 70's sex flicks shows a remarkable attention to details. Just look at that room, the clothes on the men, and the turquoise eye-shadow on that woman. It invites (and deserves) comparisons to Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, although this film is more limited in it's scope. I really admire it for playing the entire thing completely dead-pan. A lesser film would have given into the temptation to wink at the audience. After the first minute I thought, surely they can't keep this up for the whole movie? But they did, for two straight hours. That would be my only complaint, though, the length. It's a remarkable exercise but, at it's heart, it's a one-joke movie and I think a briefer runtime would help. It's not that the film ever drags, or that it feels padded. I just think it's a super-awesome movie that's screaming for a more ruthless editor.



This is the best documentary I've seen at the festival. It's about a man who shot his sleeping dorm-mate at Swarthmore College in 1955 and his decision to go public with this information after fifty years. He tells everybody, his daughters, his in-laws, his friends, his co-workers, his psychology students and the media. He says that he's coming forward because he wants to take a stand against bullying, which is what lead to his break-down and the subsequent killing (a the time he was declared mentally unfit to stand trial and spent almost five years in a hospital for the criminally insane). The film mostly follows his youngest daughter and her attempts to make sense of the situation which is only made more difficult when friends of the deceased come forward to deny that the killer was abused. It's a challenging film that raises many question (both ethical and factual) and doesn't provide any easy answers. It's a film that demands you to think.



This is a frighteningly claustrophobic Romanian horror film that is made all the more terrifying because it claims to be based on a true story. Of course, you can't always trust movies to tell you the truth about something like that (I'm looking at you, Fargo). It's incredibly suspenseful and it hits all the right notes. I'd say that it's a stand-out in the genre, I was on the edge of my seat the whole time.

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Film Festival: Day 9



This is a solid ghost film but it has the shakiest camera movement that I've seen since The Blaire Witch Project. Only then there was a reason for it, in this movie the image just jumps all over the place for no reason. I can understand using hand-held shots during the scary parts to increase the tension or even having the camera move in every shot like Gosford Park. But having a spastic camera during mundane scenes is just irritating and Robert Altman pretty much stuck to fluid camera moves. Anyway, I sat really close and got a headache.



This is a suspense movie that is incredibly slow. Probably because there isn't much of a plot (even at a glacial pace the runtime is only 80 minutes). Here's the story: Three friends go hunting. Someone (or someones) unknown starts shooting at them. They shoot back. That's it. I have to give the director credit for making it into a somewhat compelling movie but I definitely heard some snoring in the theater.



This movie rules, like you would not believe. It's a horror-comedy and it delivers on both fronts, in a big way. It'll be playing again as part of the Festival Favorites on Tuesday in the Ritz 5 at 9:30. Do yourself a favor and go see it. Seriously. I just saw 30+ films and this is the first time I'm giving you a show time and venue. But be sure to get your tickets in advance, I'm sure it'll sell out.



This offers an interesting look at people who run (very) independent movie theaters all over the world, from India to Burkina Faso to North Korea to Wyoming. The documentary is more about the people who bring the movies to their communities (that would otherwise have to do without) than the movies themselves which is sort of a shame because those North Korean propaganda films are pretty interesting.



There's really nothing quite like watching porn with an audience of a couple hundred strangers and, if I'm not mistaken, a couple of people I know (don't worry, I won't out anybody). These shorts have an odd mix of the naturalistic and the artificial. It has women that come from an age before plastic surgery and, since these were shot on the cheap, it's unlikely that they did many second takes so you end up with shots of men awkwardly stepping out of their pants. But, at the same time, the women mimic the exaggerated, over-dramatic acting style of the silent stars of that era. Needless to say, it's unique.

Best line of the night: Behold, the gushing fountain of youth!

Friday, April 13, 2007

Film Festival: Day 8



This is an inventive documentary (although, not quite as inventive as Zoo) that uses a series of recorded interviews with Kurt Cobain combined with footage of the towns where he lived and the people who live there now to tell his life story. However, it notably does not use any of Nirvana's music and the only images of Cobain himself are saved to the very end. It can seem a bit tedious at times but if you're interested in the man or how fame affects people, it'll be worth the wait.



This is my first ghost movie of the festival and it's from Thailand where, apparently, young women shower while wearing towels (no fun). It's got a ton of ghosts (which, by the way, are all quite seeable) and they all have their own back story. This film is loaded down with more sub-plots than it knows what to do with. It's definitely got it's creepy moments but it's mostly a big mess.


This program consists of two shorts, the first of which is City Harvest. It offers an interesting look at how a prison gardening program provides seedlings to community gardens, which use them to grow produce to donate to local food banks, which distribute the vegetables to needy families, usually in the same communities where the prisoners came from.

The second short is Recovering Satellites and it's about three Vietnam veterans who got short changed on a New Jersey memorial. It covers the story from two angels by telling the personal story of one of the men and it also gives the bigger picture of how we failed to support our troops during Vietnam. Can I just say that I'm a little sick of people who try to make me feel guilty for not giving the troops a proper welcome when they came back from Vietnam? I mean, I wasn't even around back then. But I guess people are still really upset about that. Hey, how about we make a deal? Bring the troops home from Iraq and I'll show up for the parade. Oh, and I promise I won't spit on anyone. Deal?



This is a really great film that was adapted from an Oscar-nominated short. In fact, the entire 18-minute short is contained in the feature film. I'm tempted to describe it as Clerks meets Amelie meets my sexual fantasies but that doesn't really do it justice. It starts out as sort of a mid-twenties-life-crisis/slacker comedy but it evolves into something magical. It's full of wonder and surprises. You should all see it.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Film Festival: Day 6



This is the kind of movie that Corey would dismiss as pretentious but I really liked it. It's cinematic poetry.



In my first festival post I joked about how long it would be before I saw a penis. Well, the answer was day six and that penis shot about three feet of flame, as you can see. I really don't know what to say about Taxidermia. It tells the story of three generations of men who each have an obsession: sex, food and, uh, taxidermy? Maybe that last one's supposed to be death, that probably works better thematically. This Hungarian film has things that I guarantee you've never seen before and they're things that you might be better off not seeing. It's definitely not for the squeamish and it has some vomit scenes that put Stand By Me to shame. Needles to say, I loved it.

On a side note, György Pálfi, the director, is also responsible for Hukkle (Hiccup) a film that shows life in a small town in Hungary without any dialog, other than a song. It is beautiful and this couldn't be more different.



This is a documentary about a Ukrainian man who builds a submarine in his garage and has dreams of taking it to the Black Sea. When he takes his sub to a local pond for a test drive you become absolutely terrified that this clearly deranged man is going to die before your very eyes.



This is not what you would expect from a gangster film. It's about two men who are waiting for a hit and kill time by, well, living. It's a character study and I think it does for gangster films what Pat Garret & Billy the Kid did for westerns (or maybe it's what McCabe & Mrs. Miller did for westerns, but I digress). It's just full of life, all the good things as well as the bad.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Film Festival: Day 5



First of all, I'd like to give a shout-out to Tim for coming out to this one and one for his friend who gave me a ride to my next screening afterwards and who's name I've already forgotten (also, I'd like to give a belated shout-out to Ringo for going to The Ten with me). This is one that will definitely hit theaters. I mean, it's got Gabriel Byrne and Laura Linney. If you've ever seen Robert Altman's Short Cuts you'll recognize the story of four guys who go on a fishing trip, find a body, continue their vacation and wait until they they get home to report the incident (both are based on the work of Raymond Carver). The story was a small part of the Altman film but here it's really fleshed out and the cast, directing, and pretty much everything are just great. Additionally, this movie taught me that I can't tell the difference between Aborigines and white people. Who knew?



I've got to hand it to the local guys who made this film, it is seriously disturbing. The only problem is that the story is pretty weak and might even boarder on being retarded. It also seemed to have a current of homophobia and, quite frankly, I'm surprised that it got into the festival seeing as one of the villains seemed to be sporting the same red leather pants that I think I've seen on the Executive Director of a certain film society. But if you like movies that make you wince and feel really uncomfortable, you can't go wrong with this one.



I know we're not even halfway done but I'm going to go ahead and declare The King of Kong to be the most fun documentary of the festival. It's about two middle aged men battling it out for the world's record for highest score on Donkey Kong. This movie is filled to the brim with eccentric characters, unexpected intrigue and awful haircuts.



This was my second Johnny To (the "Jerry Bruckheimer of Hong Kong") film I've seen this festival, after Exiled and I didn't really understand what was going on in this one either. Part of my confusion is that this is a sequel to Election (not the one with Reese Witherspoon) which was supposed to be screened during the festival but got pulled at the last minute due to print availability so, obviously, I haven't seen it. But it was still cool and I learned a lot of things about Hong Kong gangs, such as:

Gangsters elect a Chairman to serve for a two-year term (the duties of a Chairman are unclear)

The Chairman is elected by the "Uncles" who, apparently, make up the board of directors for the gang

If a gangster kidnaps an important person, they will store them in a coffin with the lid screwed shut

When sealing someone in a coffin it is customary to stick one of your own henchmen (preferably the fat guy) in the coffin on top of the person to "keep an eye" on them

Just when you think that you are out they pull you back in

It is acceptable for gangsters to drink out of juice boxes (but, possibly, only if this action is immediately followed by a machete fight)

Monday, April 9, 2007

Film Festival: Day 4

Now that I'm done with the first quarter of the Film Festival, I'd like to take a moment to reflect. I feel like all the movies that I've seen so far have been solid to really good. Nothing has really blown me away or been just crap. I hope the first thing will change but I fear it's more likely that second will.

I feel better prepared to deal with the fest this year due to a couple new acquisitions. The iPod that Corey, Ringo, and Leslie gave me has been a handy thing to have on the longer walks and when I have an hour or so to kill between screenings. Also, the cargoish pants that Colleen picked out for me have been very useful. I've got a pocket that can hold a day's worth of granola bars on each leg!

One thing that troubles me is that I have a tendency to forget what I want to put in this blog by the time it comes to actually write it. For instance, in my review of White Palms I wanted to inform you all that, apparently, in Hungry "stiff as a whore" is an expression. Incredibly, I also failed to note that Hell's Ground features a zombie dwarf.

Also, my left knee is really starting to hurt.



This was documentary heavy day for me. The first one is about Chinese-Muslim children who train to become tightrope walkers. It offers a really interesting look at how China indoctrinates it's youth while insulating them from religion. Additionally, it features children in peril as they don't use nets. But don't worry, none of the children fall very far.



Somehow the curators were given access to the Disney Vault to produce this series. I think the most illuminating were the Alice shorts which featured real girl in a cartoon world. They were introduced by Leonard Maltin and Roy Disney (the one that's still alive) and they talked about how Disney/ABC gained control of the Oswald the Lucky Rabbit cartoons that Walt directed by trading Al Michaels to General Electric/NBC/Universal.



This is a pretty good documentary about Philadelphia being unable to win a championship since Liberty One rose above the statue of William Penn.



It's a simple story of boy meets girl, boy gets girl, girl finds out boy is married, girl leaves boy, boy hires two black men to assault girl, girl opens door to receive a face-full of acid, girl goes blind, boy goes to jail, boy gets out of jail, boy gets girl back, boy marries girl, girl finds out boy has a mistress, boy threatens to throw acid on mistress, boy goes to court (again), girl stands by boy. This doc really has to be seen to be believed.

Best quotes: From the boy's friend, "Even Hitler had friends" and from the girl "I thought marrying him would be the best revenge".


Zoo

Okay, I saw the horse-fucking movie.

First of all, I'd like to say that this is a very inventive film in terms of it's form. It really pushes the boundaries of what a documentary can be at a time when so many in the field are just talking heads. I think the only movie I can really compare it to is American Splendor in the way that it combines interviews with those involved with artistic re-enactments featuring many people playing themselves. I feel like the line between feature films and documentaries can be drawn between these movies with American Splendor just barely being a feature and Zoo just barely a doc.

As for it's content, Zoo really
makes you consider the issue of bestiality (or zoophilia). It forces you to confront the humanity of the people involve and I think that's what the best documentaries do.

Sunday, April 8, 2007

Film Festival: Day 3



This is a wacky look at history as well as an indictment of the Bush administration for harboring anti-Castro terrorists. If those two things don't sound like they'd go together well it's because they don't. It's an interesting documentary about the (many) plots to kill Fidel Castro but the tone is inconsistent.



I think that picture sums up the film nicely: It's crazy, confusing, weird, wonderful and most of all, fascinating.



Shorts weren't really designed to be watched five-in-a-row and although the presentation got to be a bit tiring, the films themselves hold up remarkably well. Before the screening Maltin informed the audience that the idea for Our Gang was born when, one day, producer Hal Roach looked out his office window and saw some kids playing in an abandoned lot. Roach sat transfixed for over half an hour before realizing that the simple pleasure of watching children play could be put on film (and make him a tidy profit). It's that simple charm that makes these shorts classics.



I didn't always understand what was going on in this Hong Kong action flick but it was still pretty awesome.



A solid remake of an early Brian DePalma film that explores slightly different themes. I think they changed the ending and made it better (I know it's only been about two weeks since I saw the original but I'm can't remember exactly how it ended). Either way, watch out for conjoined twins. Them bitches are crazy! Oh, and so are psychiatrists. Don't go messin' around with them either. You basically want to avoid all doctors and patients. In fact, I'd recommend giving the entire health care industry a pass.