Triple Threat Chat: A Talk With the Directors of the Documentary LUCHA MEXICO

A few weeks ago, as DOC NYC, the annual festival of documentary films, drew to a close, I managed to get to an encore screening of the wonderfully insightful film on the world of lucha libre pro wrestling in Mexico, LUCHA MEXICO. Although disappointed to miss the chance to talk with subjects of the documentary and bona fide pro wrestling stars Shocker and John Strongman, who appeared at the documentary’s US premiere, it was still a thrill to see the movie on a big screen and have a spirited talk with co-directors Alex Hammond and Ian Markiewicz about the making of the film (with Chocko providing some much appreciated outside interference and camera work to be shared down the line).

Below is an approximation of our chat...

mondocurry: You mentioned that you’ve been a long time wrestling fan. Did your viewing always veer toward lucha libre?

IAN MARKIEWICZ: Lucha libre has always been interesting to me, and whenever I can watch it, I do. I think it’s harder to find on TV in the US. You’ll see it there for many months and then all of a sudden it’s gone. So it's not consistent. I always had this idea that I was going to do something more about wrestlers in the US, but loved the idea of one of them going down to Mexico, because that happens a lot: guys go down to rehab themselves, or maybe work there early in their career. It's a side of wrestling we aren't as exposed to. That’s kind of where the Jon Strongman angle comes in.

MC: Can you talk about the period of time over which the documentary was made?

ALEX HAMMOND: We started shooting 4 years ago, around 2011, 2012. Every few months we would fly down to Mexico and shoot as much as we could, getting to know the different companies and finding stories.  We would be working on freelance stuff at the same time, and even finished another feature documentary while shooting Lucha (Better Than Something: Jay Reatard). 

IAN: There was maybe a year in there, give or take, of research.

ALEX: The beginning was all research, finding the characters we were going to use, and some of that never even made it into the film.

IAN: Earning their trust took a long time, and that was before we could even turn the camera on. You’re asking somebody to let you into their lives, which is rarely easy.

MC: Were there wrestlers who were difficult to speak with because they were guarded about their non-wrestling identities?

IAN: I’ll be honest with you, most of the masked guys don’t want to give you too much. Only some of them will. Blue Demon was really there for us and we spent a lot of time with him. And there were others who were very nice and loved the idea of what we were doing, but knew it wasn’t something they could be fully involved with. In those cases it wasn’t like there was a real barrier - they were very honest and said that while they didn't mind appearing in the film, they couldn’t show what’s behind their character.

The only person who totally refused to participate was El Hijo del Santo… because he wanted the movie to just be about himself. If it included other wrestlers, he didn’t want to have any part of it. Of course, he’s not the original Santo… But it still would’ve been nice.  

MC: Was there any one individual, or individuals, who helped you to gain access to others you ended up following in the movie?

ALEX: Well, the first company we worked with was with Triple A (AAA, one of Mexico’s major pro wrestling promotions) and we got quite a bit of access early on, but ultimately they were the company we ended up following the least. It was on one of our later "research" trips that we finally connected with CMLL, which was not easy, and started meeting and interviewing more wrestlers. We have to thank Sandra Granados, the head of PR at CMLL; she kind of runs the show, and was one of the first people to really get what we were trying to do. I'd also add that at the first CMLL press conference we went to, we met Jon Strongman, and he introduced us to Shocker. And Shocker introduced us to a lot of the other guys, like Fabian El Gitano, and this whole world opened up.

Having filmed with two of the major wrestling companies, we knew we also had to meet with Perros Del Mal, the hardcore/extreme promotion in Mexico. Perro was a different thing. We met El Hijo del Perro Aguayo at the major Lucha Expo, where everyone goes once a year to meet their favorite superheroes. From there we started hanging out and going to shows with him, he was very generous with us. 

MC: The music in the film is fantastic. Sometimes it was like traditional and modern sounds meeting one another. Can you talk about your ideas for it and how it came together?

IAN: That blend of modern and traditional was exactly the idea.

ALEX: We worked really hard on that. The music was always going to be a long process because we wanted original music as much as possible, but we also knew there would be famous songs like (wrestlers’) entrance songs, and we wanted to have some authentic Mexican music in there, stuff that’s popular, and music that was cinematic.  Two composers that created original tracks for the film were Jonathan Snipes, a film composer in LA, and Tucson-based musician/composer Sergio Mendoza. They both brought a modern and Mexican mix to the soundtrack. 

MC: There is incredible close-up footages of matches that to me looks better than broadcasts of lucha libre that I’ve seen in the past. How did you approach filming?

IAN: I think that was very purposeful. We wanted to show a different perspective. You can see this stuff on TV and now you can see it all online, so what’s the point of just showing the match as it's already available? Wherever possible, we wanted this to be our own version.

MC: Did you bring in experiences with other types of filming to your project? Did filming the wrestling matches force you to adjust in any ways?

IAN:  We've shot a lot of live music stuff, like concerts. Performance and dance movement - wrestlers are no less performers than any dancer. The biggest challenge was dealing with the standard six man tag team matches. You may have one guy you’re following, but you can't capture his match if he's the only one you shoot, and there are usually at least three different points of action. And we’re only a two-person crew. So you have to find a way to navigate the chaos. 

ALEX: There are times you miss things in the ring. It’s awful. We shot so many shows, and after the years we put in we got better at working around the ring. You become more in tune with different wrestler's styles. So our shooting got better along the way, but I have to say it's never easy running around and making sure you follow the action while also trying to compose something beautiful without getting in their way. 

IAN: Wrestling is just hard thing to shoot.

ALEX: You have to predict and then be very quick on your feet.

MC: It was just the two of you filming?

ALEX: Yes, Ian and I took turns shooting the verite scenes, and then we both shot the shows whenever possible. The only time we had three cameras was for one of the big CMLL Anniversary shows. 

IAN: An old friend and colleague of mine, Sean Williams, came down to shoot for a few days. I love working with him, and we had a ridiculous amount of fun in Mexico. 

MC: Were there any moments while filming where you felt like you were in a dangerous situation?

IAN: We were never in danger, really.

ALEX: Ultimo Guerrero almost fell on you…

IAN: He ended up breaking a photographer's camera right next to me. You do see some collateral damage. And there were times guys got me in a lock up just to mess with me while we were in the match. That was for fun, though. I think the worst was when the crowd started throwing stuff. I had a guy throw a full Gatorade bottle at my head.

MC: That brings to mind a wild scene in the movie when Ultimo Guerrero is riling up a fan sitting at ringside. He responds by throwing a drink. Can you talk about that kind of scenario? Was it typical?

IAN: That night was chaos. In that arena in particular, Arena Coliseo Guadalajara, you can see crazy shows. They have discount beer, a lot of interaction with the wrestlers, and the people don't hold back. Arena Mexico is a little bit more calm. There’s a lot of security. It’s a rowdy but controlled crowd. It all depends where you are.

MC: Have either of you experienced a change in your perception of lucha libre, or professional wrestling in general, since working on the movie?

ALEX: I think I’m going to be a fan for life. Making this film is definitely the reason for this, because I honestly didn't follow Lucha Libre or pro wrestling before. I have to say I think Lucha Libre really brought me closer to Mexico and to my culture. I'm half-Mexican but grew up in the U.S.  Every time we're in Mexico, I seek out a lucha show and of course go to the Arena Mexico. I have a new respect for wrestlers now.  I do believe they are athletes, hard workers who risk their lives for our enjoyment. It really is a fascinating world. 

MC: How did you reach a conclusion to filming? Was there a certain point where you felt like there was enough footage?

ALEX: There are so many little details of lucha libre that we could have included another hour of scenes and details of the sport… We didn't want to make a movie that was going to hold your hand and tell you the rules of everything. 

Honestly, we found it hard to stop shooting, because we really enjoyed shooting this movie and kept finding new things to shoot. But there came a moment where we knew we had the film. We actually finished a cut, and two months later, Perro (Aguayo Jr) died… and that was really hard. It was a total shock for us. This made us go back to the edit, and we basically spent the rest of the year re-cutting the movie.

IAN: We had the movie before that but… You can’t have something like Perro Aguayo's death and not address it. We were as shocked as everyone else - there are only a handful of wrestling deaths as tragic as his. We felt like it would be dishonoring his memory to sweep it under the carpet in any way. And not only that, but he was a really big supporter of us and the project. He really loved what we were doing and always made the effort to help us. We had to pay that back on some level.

MC: Are there any relationships that formed while making the film, and has the experience informed your next projects?

IAN: Shocker is a great friend, and John (Strongman) is wonderful. They've both given us the shirt off their backs more times than I can count. And that's just the beginning of a long list. We were very fortunate to have been able to work with people we could actually be close with. On top of that there were a lot of incredible people we spent time with but couldn't fit in the film… 

ALEX: Yes, there were many wrestlers we got close to but only so many you can explore in an hour and half movie. We made quite a few friends, some we'll have to return to in future projects. Of course, we have many other films we'd like to make before continuing work on this one!

IAN: At some point you have to say "the film is done," but every project is different. We probably will try to bring out a little more of this stuff in whatever way makes sense. We're not planning to make a longer or different cut of this film, but we're open to exploring and sharing some of the other tangents if people are interested. 

Look for LUCHA MEXICO to make its mark on the West Coast of the US in the near future, with sights set on a theater release some time after.

Nightcap 11/22/15 The best of DOC NYC 2015, The Kool Aid List or great directors you never heard of and Randi's links

With DOC NYC done and after seeing 132 of 157 films I thought I’d put together a ten best list- and keep it at ten films. Having seen as many films as I did that was a damn tough thing to do.

What I resorted to doing was removing all of the "short list" films of possible Oscar contenders. I then went through a list of all of the films and the ones I didn’t hesitate for a second went on the list. This resulted in NEW HIGH, WILHEMINA’S WAR, BOLSHI BABYLON, BOUNCE, FRACKMAN not making the list because of a momentary hesitation. Since I didn’t see SPEED SISTERS that’s not included despite everyone telling me how good it is. I also removed MAN UNDER which is one of the best films I saw in 2015, but I already put on Tribeca’s best of list. I felt bad including it again.

 My best films list ended up being:
 MISS SHARON JONES
THE JAZZ LOFT ACCORDING TO W EUGENE SMITH
MIRIAM’S HOME DELIVERY
WOMEN HE’S UNDRESSED
CAN WE TAKE A JOKE
GREAT ALONE
NO MAS BEBES
END OF THE WORLD
And most of the sonic Cinema- SYL JOHNSON: ANY WAY THE WIND BLOWS, HUSTLERS CONVENTION, MAD TIGER & THEORY OF OBSCURITY because they all are that good.

While there are a few films I didn’t like putting them on a worst of list is unfair since where DC NYC is concerned they are being unfairly compared to 157 other great films. Its like picking the worst Vermeer- you’ll like some more than others, but they are still all Vermeers

 ---
THE UNSEEN FILMS KOOL AID LIST
Earlier this month I reviewed Christian Svanes Kolding's END OF THE INTERNET and I mentioned that there were a couple of filmmakers whose work I love but whose names you’d never know and a couple of people asked me who these people were.

While I have a long list of filmmakers where I've only seen a single example of their work but who have impressed me none the less  (Jason Kartalian or the duo of Jordan Harris and Andrew Schrader for example) The group I’m talking about have taken the next step and made a couple of films that I think are as good if not better than their firsts. These are the guys I'm waiting to make the jump to super stardom. These are the guys whose work made my jaw drop and murmur under my breath that I was seeing the emergence of someone great-not just once but twice or three times or more. These guys make up the so called KOOL AID LIST because as far as their ability to turn out great films is concerned I'm all in and I've drunk the Kool Aid.

The list is unscientific and purely personal. While I have seen other directors who may have as much talent as these guys the guys on the Kool Aid List score in one key place- I can't shake their films. These are they guys who's work I keep thinking about. And these are they guys I want to name drop when I get involved in talking about the up and coming talent and the next big film directors. I love these guys and I love that there work has become part of my psyche.

The listing below is not in any order- they are all just great directors.

Christian Svanes Kolding as you know is a great filmmaker. I loved his THE EMERGENCY KIT and now his END OF THE INTERNET is even better. You can read my thoughts on EMERGENCY KIT in the review for END and you can put him on the list of people to watch

Jon Kasbe has made a whole bunch of films including MIPSO IN JAPAN and BEAUTIFUL WASTE (see them at his website) and I love every one of them.  Jon has an eye and a sense of place and beauty that is the sort of thing that in a few years is going to be the style everyone is copying. While the look of his films might be enough for some filmmakers its not for Jon who turns in compelling tales every time. (Here is the trailer for his next film and I can't wait)

Jerimiah Kipp is one of the greatest directors of horror films I’ve ever run across.He deserves to be in the pantheon of guys who will scare the crap out of you over and over again. He’s directed a bunch of films but simply on the basis of this two films THE DAYS GOD SLEPT and MINIONS (not the cartoon) he deserves to be making full length fright films because he knows how to disturb his audience deeply. This isn't to sell his other films short- they are damn scary films, but DAYS and MINIONS still haunt me and make me not even want to think about them.

Chun-Yi Hsieh is one of the greatest directors working anywhere in the world. He contacted me way back in 2011 and told me I needed to see his film THE BRAID and he was right it was one of the best films I saw that year, and it’s a film that has haunted me ever since. When he gave me the link to that film he accidently gave me links to a whole bunch of other films that he had made. It was clear back then that he had the right stuff. He’s now back in Taiwan making feature films and his APOLITICAL ROMANCE just kicked it to the curb as one of the great films of NYAFF 2014.

I debated including Alec Kubas Meyer in this group for two reasons. First he’s a friend which makes my recommendation suspect and secondly the films he’s made that put him on the list haven’t officially premiered yet. REEL, a Hollywood action film is finishing post-production and NOT TOO YOUNG has been submitted to several film festivals for next year. However based upon those films, plus his earlier film MIRANDA and his student films Alec is a filmmaker to watch. While I’ve talked at length about his ability to handle action in my piece on MIRANDA, it’s the handling of troubling difficult subject matters in NOT TOO YOUNG and two additional films he’s working on that forced him on to the list.

And so concludes my Kool Aid List. Take notes and watch for these guys to break out and do something wonderful real soon....

----
And now several weeks of links from Randi


.


If you still have Halloween Candy- How to trade up
Blair Witch the Greatest Horror film?
Potboiler quiz
Pictures from un released Australian films
A kick ass piece on NOSFERATU
Onion Studios Covers
Bring me the head of Winnie the Pooh
The Death of the Yeti
On the newly restored William Gillette SHERLOCK HOLMES
How TRICK R TREAT became a Halloween classic
The original Urban Cowboys
Death Avenue
25 years at a video store taught me
David Lynch talks ERASERHEAD
When Disney was trippy
Films de fin d'études 2015 – G
OBELINS
Lampreys
Most powerful photos
Serial's place in film history
Still haunted by the Yorkshire ripper
lost disney film found
Sea monster?
Creepy houses
record treasure of Mongolia
You can be too clean
Story Time gallery
The opening of the Lion King on Broadway in 360 degrees
---
This week look for a bunch of cinematic turkeys as Unseen presents it’s annual Thanksgiving series.
After that look for what has become the usual mix of films- old and new which should head straight on until our 6th birthday in February

Above and Below (2015) DOC NYC 2015

ABOVE AND BELOW played a single time at DOC NYC I'm not sure if it was worth going to see.

The film is Nicolas Steiner's look at fringe dwellers in the American South West. April takes part in a simulated Mars trip, Dave lives in an abandoned bunker and a trio lives in the storm drains of Las Vegas and have to deal with the occasional dangerous flooding. We watch as the various people go through their lives and discuss how they got to this point.

To be honest this film completely eluded me, no not eluded me made me wonder why I was watching it and why anyone thought that this film should run 9...er two hours long.

The problem for me is that there have been variations on the stories told here over the last few years and they were done more quickly and much more to the point. The one film that instantly jumped to mind was Steve Birnbaum's LOST VEGAS which covered the stories of people living in the Las Vegas storm drains much more succinctly. LOST VEGAS moved me deeply. ABOVE AND BELOW had me nodding off.

Its not bad, more it's just not particularly exciting.

the last night of DOC NYC 2015- The Award Presentation and the screening of DREAMING AGAINST THE WORLD and CLAUDE LANZMANN SPECTRES OF THE SHOAH

You would think it a joke if I said the final night of the 2015 DOC NYC was a dark and stormy night, but it was. A wicked rain storm lashed the New York Metro area making it a very unpleasant night to be out. Thankfully movies this time of year screen inside so all one had to do was make it to the theater to be safe and warm for a couple of hours.

I was going to the screening of CLAUDE LANZMANN SPECTRES OF THE SHOAH which was screening with DREAMING AGAINST THE WORLD at the SVA theaters. The original start time was supposed to be 730 but things had gotten moved around because of security issues with Hillary Clinton who was attending MAKERS:ONCE AND FOR ALL which screened earlier in the evening. That was fine with me because I got to have a long leisurely dinner with Mondocurry.

When I got SVA it looked dead, the heavy rain keeping anyone without tickets away from the theater. I picked up my ticket and went inside.

Sitting in my seat I ended up talking to Dave Schachter who produced BARGE as well as Kurt Vincent  who directed and Irene Chin LOST ARCADE. Vincent seemed a bit ansy about the future of his film I assured them that the demand was there as was strong word of mouth and that at the world premiere no one wanted to leave the stand by line even after being told they couldn’t get in. Dave Schachter also made some suggestions about getting the word out to a wider audience. Vivent said that he had already lined up a screening at the soon to open Metrograph theater which is located not far from the location of Chinatown Fair, the subject of his film

The evening began with some thank yous and then the announcement of the awards…

Two shorts won top prize and both go onto the Oscar short list

Marc Levin and subject accept his award

Nicole Horanyi accepts her award

Directors Justin Schein and David Mehlman accept their Audience Awared

After the awards the directors of the two films came up and introduced their  films

Or not.

Francisco Bello and Timothy Sternberg who directed DREAMING said they don’t like to talk before a screening so they said nothing.

Adam Benzine director of CLAUDE LANZMANN SPECTRES OF THE SHOAH said a few words, largely dedicating the screening to the people of France.

The lights went down and the films started.

DREAMING AGAINST THE WORLD  is a very good portrait of artist Mu Xin.

A Chinese intellectual, he ran into trouble off and on over the years with the communist government and found himself imprisoned. During the time he wrote a prison diary and painted pictures which he hid had to hide lest he be executed. The film is a singular portrait of a singular individual who refused to be broken or to die despite poor treatment by the Chinese authorities. In his way he got the last laugh living long enough to be considered a cultural icon. Its a great little film and seeing the art on the big screen was absolutely  stunning.

An aside, during the Q&A the film makers said that they got the interview with Mu Xin, who had only done two previous, very short interviews by showing up at his home with a collection of Beethoven CDs.

In the time between the films about a third of the audience got up and left. I recognized most of them as filmmakers of other DOC NYC films who had shown up for the awards ceremony. While I know why they left, they were there to see who won the various award, I think it was bad form and thought they should have at least waited until the second film ended.

The LANZMANN film disappointed. The film consists of a 2013 interview with Lanzmann where he recounts his life and the making of SHOAH and some outtakes from the epic film. While its good, it isn’t anything special. Worse there is little here that anyone who knows Lanzmann and his work hasn’t heard before, though the footage of the attack by Nazis that put the director in the hospital for a month is new and chilling. The film is a kind of puff piece DVD extra. I’m not sure what it’s point since it’s clear that there could have been more being told- a fact made clear when director Adam Benzine said he shot with Lanzmann for a week. A week and you only could cull 40 minutes out of it? What we have is good but Lanzmann deserves more-he deserves at least a couple of hours.

After the films the directors were brought on stage as was Richard Brody Film Editor of the New Yorker and Professor Stuart Liebman Media Studies, Queens College; CUNY Graduate School.

I'm going lose friends by saying this but the addition of Richard Brody  was a major mistake by the festival. I say this because once Brody started talking he didn’t shut up.

There was one question to Timothy Sternberg and Francisco Bello about DREAMING and the next question went to Brody who then talked for about ten minutes on the importance of SHOAH and going into great deal about several sequences in the Lanzmann film. He apologized for talking so long but after a couple of questions to Adam Benzine and Professor Liebman he jumped back in and just went. What he said wasn't bad but what he didn't realize the night wasn't about him, which is what it became. (there were only two audience questions)

I always hate multiple film Q&As because one  film always gets shut out but this was ridiculous. It would have been better if the only film screened was the Lanzmann doc and there was an hour discussion because DREAMING ended up unfairly forgotten in the discussion.

The evening wasn't bad it just was really odd.

And with that DOC NYC was done for another year.

Over all I had a blast and I can't wait until next year.

For more pictures from the evening go to our Tumblr page

(My personal best of DOC NYC  list will appear Sunday night)

(ADDENDUM- This post has been modified to remove several pictures due to problems with the hosting site)

Sunshine Makers (2015) DOC NYC 2015

The story of Nick Sand and R.Timothy Scully who tried to turn the world on to LSD. They made millions of tabs and were hunted by the government.

Sorry if that isn't exciting, but to be quite honest this is one of the duller films that played at DOC NYC. Its a portrait of two mellow guys who had their minds expanded by the drug,  but even with all of the intrigue are much too low key to sustain a 90 minute movie. The problem with the film is that it doesn't pick up steam until we get to the final third when the police begin to take center stage.

This is the sort of a film that you kind of get a bead on ten minutes in and you realize that unless they suddenly make an exciting turn the film was going to remain on one level. I knew after ten minutes that the film was going to end up too long and that this would have been better as an episode of some true crime show on History.

The problem, aside from the slack pacing is that we never really get to know either guy beyond what we know in the first couple of minute. Scully is a scientific genius who has a touch of Asperger's who wants to give the acid away and Sand is ladies man driven to make money turning the world on. That's about it. There is no sense as why we should want to listen to them for 90 minutes. Its an interesting story but not told this way nor as the main focus of a feature. Its a short film, and if someone went at this film with a pair of sheers you's have an great short doc.

Wait for this to show up on TV, either cable or PBS.

A rambling piece trying to work out 13 Million Voices (2015) DOC NYC 2015

A look at the 2009 concert PEACE WITHOUT BORDERS that was held in Cuba. The film follows the run up to the show and what followed. The film also tries to explain how Cuba is seen by people in the country and by exiles.

You can tell that I am very mixed about the film in that I am running the review after it screened at DOC NYC, and after the festival. While I like the music in the film I'm not sure about anything else with it. Part of the problem is the film is  choppy in the editing, especially in the early part of the film where we jump through several years of time depending on what the film wants to get across. The result is a film that for me is very hard to completely get a grasp on.

I'm also feeling adrift about what the film is really about. The film is very much against the lack of freedom of expression in Cuba, but at the same time the concert happened...

You have to excuse me because the film is this really weird  mix of being in love with Cuba and hating portions of it. Its a film that seems to have been shaped by exiles and their families and yet some of what we see isn't the complete anti- Castro Cuba...

Its kind of like the film has some sort of agenda but doesn't really know what it all is. Part of it is the editing, part of it is I don't think the people who made the film have a real handle on what they want to say. I mean they are nominally telling the story of the concert  but there is all this other stuff in there.

I know I'm not making sense. The problem is that recently I've seen a bunch of films about Cuba and expression there be it art (ALUMBRONES) or cars (HAVANA MOTOR CLUB) which paint a differing picture of the country. I'm not sure what to think is the real story.

Actually I'm not sure what the story is of this film either- I've thought about and I really don't know. I know that may inspire hate mail, or people screaming I don't get it-and that maybe true- but if so please leave a comment and tell me what I'm not getting because frankly I'd really like to know.

Lost Arcade (2015) DOC NYC 2015

This is a look at the Chinatown Fair which was opened in the 1940's as a a kind of indoor carnival. It evolved over time to become New York City's longest surviving video game arcade. The film is a look back at the arcade by some of the people who used to hang out there, as well as kind of overview of video games in New York.

Despite spending a lot of time in Chinatown over the last 20 or so years I only went into Chinatown Fair once or twice largely be in an "arcade" because arcades had disappeared. When the film was announced for DOC NYC  I asked Mr C, who had spent a great deal of time there, to take a look at the film and let me know what he thought. I posted his thoughts in our curtain raiser because I wasn't sure if I was going to get around to reviewing the film. He said:

The Chinatown Fair on Mott Street was a dive of an arcade in lower Manhattan that was ultimately competing with the neon giants of gaming arcades that were propping up in Times Square. My memories of the Chinatown Fair was during the 80s-90s when it acted as a place of refuge for gaming & time away from the hustle and bustle of Chinatown while I wait for my mom to end her shift working at the sewing factory on Lafayette Street or when my Dr. Toothy dentist visit ended the grinding & clamping sessions early. What I experienced at the fair included watching a culture of passionate fighting game enthusiasts start to brew to catching wannabe Chinatown triad rebel rousers passby the arcade to take a break, or simply those just curious of the Live Tic Tac Toe playing Chicken! THE LOST ARCADE documentary brought back memories of a lost but not forgotten New York.

As someone who isn't well versed in the arcade my take was slightly different. For me the film is an uneven look at the arcade and a few of the people who went though it's doors.

The film started as part of an effort to document the arcade which at the time was rumored to be closing. Director Vincent Kurt began filming in the arcade in order to make a record of the place which meant so much to him. Through that experience he connected with several other people and the tale of what the arcade was for them emerged.

As a slice of life and portrait of a moment the film is very good but over long.As the film stands now it would be a really good short, but the problem is that the film wants to be something more with the result that the film kind of drifts.

For the film to work as feature it really should have given us more of the history of its subjects. First the film should have rooted itself more into the history of the arcade and of the neighborhood. Yes we get some of it but I know from reading and seeing other accounts of Chinatown there is more to it than we see. The fair was there for 60 years so there has to be more to the back story than what we get.  The film could have used more in the history of arcades in NYC and in general, especially since the film talks about Chinatown Fair in relation to other places in the city. In many places there isn't enough meat. What is here seems to be more off the cuff explanation of everything and it works against the film.

I like the film enough that I want it to be better. I know it could be better.(And unfairly the films flaws seem kind of glaring when compared to a few video game/arcade films I've seen recently)

Reservations aside this is a good look at a slice of New York City life that has now passed away.

American Masters: Janis: Little Girl Blue (2015) DOC NYC 2015

Amy Berg's profile of Janis Joplin is a real mixed bag. It has great music, a touching ending but there is there are a lot of problems with it that keep it from ever really soaring.

Berg's film seeks to be a profile of Joplin from her birth to her death. It consists of lots of interviews with the people who knew her (friends and family), interview footage with Janis herself, her letters and lots of performance footage. While it covers her whole life it ends up being rather bland and at times incredibly superficial.

The problem with talking about the film I run into the danger of making you think its a bad film, it's not its good, but at the same time the film has lots of problems. Because I feel I have to I'm going to say a few of the things that bothered me.

-First off there is very little sense of her as a young girl growing up. Yes we her that she's picked on but outside of being picked on as the ugliest man on campus we get very little sense of what was going on. Its a general she was an odd duck sort of thing.

-The sense of time is a tad cockeyed. At one point we're shown pictures marked 1964 and then suddenly the film jumps back to 1963. At other times, outside of the major events there is no sense of when things are happening.

-A lot of people come and go and we have no idea who they are. One of Janis's girlfriends talks briefly about her bi-sexuality but its never mentioned again until we get to Woodstock and Janis is calling her girlfriend to come- who is she and if she's that important why wasn't she mentioned before?

-Janis's drug use is very unevenly dealt with. Its mentioned early on when she was in San Francisco with a fiance and then its brushed under the rug until around the 70 minute mark of the film where it becomes an issue as Joplin was using it after shows to mellow out. At the same time no one but the guy who was her great love thought it was all that bad until it killed her. Even the film kind of underplays it.

Actually until the last half hour or so the film is rather leisurely paced. Then suddenly its a mad dash to the end.

Despite knowing a bit about Joplin before going in through other films and books, I walked out of Berg's film feeling I some how knew less. Additionally the makes a major error is that until the end credits there is no talk about the people she influenced or why-only as the credits whiz by to be hear the women she influenced and why. Sadly its too little too late. I understand that the film is Janis' story but some people really do need to have her importance explained to them.

Over all this its not bad but this film should have been soooooo much better especially since all of the right people are on camera and it has footage from a variety of sources.

That said the film does end up breaking your heart with the realization that had she gotten the telegram that was at the Motel's front desk she might not have taken the drugs that killed her.

The film will be running soon on the PBS American Masters (though how they are going to deal with the language and breasts is beyond me).

In Brief: C-Word (2015) DOC NYC 2015

Meghan O’Hara, the producer of Michael Moore's films discovered she had cancer and her world went into a spin. After recovering from the disease she came upon the work of Dr. David Servan-Schreiber who advocated the best way to beat cancer was o change the way we engage with the world. If we change our diets, avoid toxins, reduce stress and exercise we could effectively end cancer over night.

Odd ball film with narration by executive Producer Morgan Freeman comes off as a kind of hyperactive pep rally cum sales film for Dr Servan-Schreiber's work. I'm not going to argue that what the good doctor is saying is wrong, it actually mirrors what I've heard from many other doctors, rather I'm saying the film is trying to do too much and explain everything and make it's point with too much show biz glitz.

I turned off about ten minutes into the film  and never turned back on having seen the non-personal details many times before elsewhere. I'm guessing O'Hara's Hollywood connections will get the film a release but I don't know about it's staying power  when there are better versions out there.

A few words on FEELINGS ARE FACTS: THE LIFE OF YVONNE RAINER (2015) DOC NYC 2015

I want to say a couple of things about this film.

First it's a very good  portrait of Yvonne Rainer and her career which helped to change what modern dance is. Its a kind of everything you ever wanted to know about her with lots of clips and talking heads that put it all into context of dance and performance history.

The other thing is that this is going to play best if you are a fan of modern dance and of Rainer in particular. I say this because I got about half way into the film and I kind of checked out. While I was enjoying the story of what Rainer was doing I was left cold by the dances themselves. Where with Wim Wender's PINA made Bausch's dances compelling to a non-fan, FEELINGS ARE FACTS never manages to cross over with the result I could appreciate what I was seeing intellectually but emotionally it left me cold.

For dance fans.

The film plays tonight and tomorrow at DOC NYC. For tickets and more information go here.

In Brief: Gayby Baby (2015) DOCNYC 2015

This is the portrait of four (pre)teens being raised by same sex parents and the ebb and flow of their lives.

I'm kind of the wrong audience for this film when it comes to the film because I live in New York where I see same sex parents with some frequency on the streets with their kids. To me the trials and tribulations don't seem as off beat as it does in Australia where this was filmed.

I have to stress that there is nothing wrong with the film, it's actually quite wonderful,  but if you were to show the film to someone and didn't mention at the outset the fact that the parents were gay and lesbian I think it would take them a while to catch on since this film is largely just a film where its simply the lives of a bunch of kids of a certain age. The kids really are just a bunch of regular kids going through life just like anywhere else. Yes we see the complications of having or being gay parents but this is really the kids story.

I know that's the point of the film, but to me over selling it as a "gay parent" film is kind of wrong since the film is about the kids.

Clearly that's my own way of seeing the film. As is my feelings that this is just a super portrait of kids regardless of their parents. Definitely worth seeing.

The film gets a single screening at DOC NYC tonight. For tickets and more information go here.

She's The Best Thing In It (2015) DOC NYC 2015

After Mary Louise Wilson won a Tony for Gray Gardens she found herself seemingly unemployable. No one wanted to hire her because they thought the Tony award would increase her salary demands. It wasn’t entirely true, but feeling that she couldn’t even get arrested she took an invitation from Tulane and went down to the school to teach acting. She’s the Best Thing In It is a celebration of Wilson, of acting and a chronicle of her time teaching aspiring actors.

I’m a huge fan of Mary Louise Wilson and I had this film in my pile to watch long before the film showed up on the DOC NYC schedule. I was holding it for a special occasion when I needed a special occasion. The occasion was the appearance at the festival.

To be honest I’m mixed on this film and slightly disappointed. The problem is that the film is really two films stuck together. The two films, one a celebration of Wilson and the other Wilson teaching never really blend together. Each part is fine but they don’t completely click. The sequences with Wilson kibitzing and talking about her life is much more jovial and inviting than the teaching sequences. The teaching sequences, while intriguing, are more the sort of thing that is going to interest someone who is an actor or who is very interested in the craft of acting. Watching them and the interviews with Wilson’s students I kept thinking that the sequences should have been in another film. This should have been another film.

At no point should this film be considered be anything less than very good and entertaining. The trouble is that the two excellent parts of the film when put together don’t make an excellent movie but rather just a good one.