Nightcap 10/18/15- NYFF 53 is done-I had fun- but they need to change programmers

Another New York Film Festival has come and gone. We are now left to recover and prepare ourselves for next year’s onslaught.

For those of us in the press corps it was a long four weeks of films and functions. At the same time this year's the festival was rather low key. Outside of the three tent poles and BRIDGE OF SPIES things there didn’t seem to be that much excitement since most of the films had played elsewhere or in many cases were due to be released to theaters shortly after their NYFF appearance.

For me the problem this year was that the selections were rather bland. While I pretty much liked everything there was very little that really excited me.There were no real discoveries as far as features were concerned. The real place where there was any passion, generating both intense love or hate, were the shorts. Some of the best films of the festival were in the short collections-also some of the worst.

I think part of the problem this year with the festival was that a huge chunk of the festival had been decided back at Cannes. I think the programmers found twelve of the 26 Main Slate films back in May and then built everything around them. The reason I’m pretty sure of this is that if you look at the July/August 2015 issue of Film Comment which listed their contributors top films from Cannes- most, and in the case of Kent Jones all, ended up as the bulk of the Main Slate:

ARABIAN NIGHTS
THE ASSASSIN
CAROL
CEMETERY OF SPLENDOR
JOURNEY TO THE SHORE
MEASURE OF A MAN
MIA MADRE
MOUNTAINS MAY DEPART
MY GOLDEN DAYS
THE TREASURE
IN THE SHADOW OF WOMEN

THE COWBOYS was not on their list of best films but did screen at Cannes, as did SON OF SAUL which ended up as a special presentation.

If you want to take it further another 10 Main Slate films premiered elsewhere including STEVE JOBS- which was one the true coups until Telluride stole it. (I'll stay away from the other sections because it will get very messy). That means 22 of the 26 main slate features played elsewhere- with one short of half coming from Cannes.

How can you have a living festival of the stature of NYFF when all of the films come from somewhere else, and from one film festival  in particular? Isn't NYFF supposed to stand alone and not be Cannes West?

The fact NYFF has been picking over other festivals is a problem that has really haunted it for the last three or four years. New York is no longer a place to make discoveries rather it’s a place to see stuff you couldn’t see because you haven’t been able to travel. Consider that local press who are able to trek to Toronto didn’t show up for films like CAROL or BROOKLYN at NYFF because they saw it up north. Alternately they put off seeing films at Toronto because they can catch up later. Excitement is muted, and in the minds of many of the people I talked to the festival isn't what it once was.

I understand part of the problem is that other festivals have stolen the festivals's thunder but for god’s sake this is the NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL,It should be making it's own thunder. This is the festival that used to be the stuff of legends, but now there is very little in the way of excitement. The last bit of legendary excitement might have been an audience member collapsing during the ANTICHRIST screening in 2009. This is now a once proud and glorious festival that is rapidly becoming an also ran,

The programmers have to get out and start fighting for films. They have to make bold and daring choices. While I don't know what goes on behind the scenes it seems as though they haven’t done that in ages with the result that the festival has declined in the years since the recent high point of the 50th. To me the most daring feature of the last three years was Asia Argento’s MISUNDERSTOOD. It was bold and ballsy and the sort of cage rattler the festival should be running. Outside of that there really hasn't been anything, good bad or indifferent that made you sit up and realize that you're seeing something special or at the very least the work of a bold new filmmaker.

On some levels the festival feels as if it is calcifying and decaying. I truly believe the festival's reliance on people who have been programming it for years, if not decades has stagnated the festival. NYFF- I love you but I don't really remember the current crop not being involved in some way with programming over the last six or seven years with Amy Taubin seeming to have been there the whole 25 years I've been going (I'm probably wrong but it feels like it). The result is there are no bold steps forward- or even intriguing bold steps off the road into the ditch (Oh how I would love a glorious misstep)-basically the festival simply is the same old same old. Its so same old same old that they always trumpet  a new film from a director who had been there before-whether the film deserved to be noticed.

Let's be honest- NYFF is safe- which in the current form of the festival means its dull and boring. If you follow a year's films you can actually guess with a high degree of certainty what many of the NYFF choices will be. I don’t know if the programmers want this or if its reflection on the patrons of Lincoln Center many of whom seem to want a certain type of film. Whatever the reason the selections over the past few years have steadily gotten weaker. They aren't bad, but they are of a type, and when you compare the films of this year to say those of 6 years ago when I started covering NYFF for Unseen I was more excited by the choices then as opposed to the ones this year. (And this year don't tell me nothing was available I saw some great stuff from other fests that would have been great here had they chosen to steal them)

At the risk of getting banned from the festival I’m going to make the bold request that the programmers step aside and let a new crop take to the lead, perhaps with some of the young guns who did the shorts (though not whom ever did the International shorts). Or if not step aside add a new crop of voices to balance things out.

Why do I want them to step aside? Because since the programmers have been there years and years  I can pick out what films they are going to claim as their own and introduce or do the Q&A. Worse if I didn’t correctly guess who programmed it I can tell what sort of a movie I’m going to get when the each programmer strides on stage. The sole exception is Gavin Smith who’s eclectic tastes are a constant source of wonder as he shows up at the darnest things both at NYFF and elsewhere. If he’s involved in programming something I’m interested, so he should probably stay. Ultimately the festival needs programmers who will think outside of the box and will fight to get more than the leftovers of other festivals (and do more than create what amounts to Cannes on the Hudson). I don’t think, outside of Smith, they have that now and the festival is dying as a result.

Understand- I’m saying this because the festival is the one that is nearest and dearest to my heart. I’ve been going to it the longest- 25 years and counting. It was always the biggest deal in the world growing up- and it was the first festival that let me come as a member of the press. NYFF is part of me and I don’t want to see it wither, I want to see it grow and prosper. I don’t think it’s heading in a direction that will allow that. If it doesn't start rattling cages it will be just another dull and boring film festival in New York, of which there is now an increasing number.

To be honest I don't think anything will come of this request. The festival events seem to be crowded and sold out so why change? The festival has the Film Society membership to assure a certain size audience so,again, why change? I don't know, But the festival should consider the unscientific fact that during every other of the 45 festivals Unseen covered or mentioned this year our readership double or tripled, but that the numbers for most of the NYFF coverage this year remained flat (with some direct to DVD horror films scoring a higher readership)

That said I am looking forward to seeing what next years festival brings- I'm hoping its a return to glory.

For those curious my best and worst films of the festival are as follows:

BEST FILMS OF NYFF
MIA MADRE- you will double over with laughter moments after crying your eyes out and back again.
MILES AHEAD (Here because its the festival's most daring film)
HEART OF A DOG- a trip into grief and memory
JIA ZHANGKE, A GUY FROM FENYANG- a great film on film
The opening Pet Shop Boys sequence from MOUNTAINS MAY DEPART
The act of seeing JUNUN big and loud
brouillard passage 15- visually cool
HARD AS OPAL- great filmmaking
CARRY ON- a wonderful story expertly told
The whole pf the Horror shorts- this is what shorts programming should be
BAD DANCING- Adult, funny and a calling card for a director who I expect great things from

WORST FILMS OF NYFF
WE ARE ALIVE- This is why Marx and Engels have faded into obscurity their ideas as written are boring as hell.
The experience of seeing Nathaniel Dorsky's films one after another was painful
MONACO- a horrible short where nothing happens and you have to read the notes to know basics
ROLLING- I doubt the Children's film festival would even run this

----
And now we close with a huge backlog of Randi's links

Nazi Bombs are still dangerous perhaps more so
Yogi Beara
Happy Birthday
Last Wishes
The changes Julie Taymor wanted to make to the Lion King
Lights in the sky
Tribute to Winsor McCay
No Man's Land
Ghana's Anti-corruption film
Does James Bond product placement go too far
Asia's weird undersea creatures
Radio's scariest episodes
The Birth of Superheroes
Smellovision revisited
A Mammoth found near Detroit
The Rocky Horror Picture Show cast reunites
The letters of Ian Fleming
Terry Gillam webchat
Attention KMart shoppers
Hidden comic book heroes
SHows that never made it to Broadway
Red Solos cups can't be recycled

Miles Ahead (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

DOn Cheadle talks MILES AHEAD at the New York Film Festival

Don Cheadle's MILES AHEAD is a cinematic jazz film. Its a portrait of Miles Davis told as if it was a Miles Davis composition. It is a film that like a great piece of music requires multiple viewings. It is one of the most complex films of the New York Film Festival and probably one of it's best films.

Less straight biography than an exploration of the psyche of the great jazz musician, MILES AHEAD mixes some fictions with some rearrangements to make us get sense of the man. The film is essentially a piece of music that begins when Don Cheadle's Miles Davis is asked  to put his story into his own words. He picks up his trumpet and begins to blow which zips us into the story of part of his life. Cheadle described it as a film about Miles Davis that Miles Davis would have wanted to star in. Periods of time collide, music plays all over the place and reality, fiction and memory merge. It all plays out as a weird mix of genres, comedy,blaxploitation film, melodrama, romance, bio that is constantly shifts gears and never feels wrong. Then as if to remind us that the  whole thing was jazz piece it ends when Davis stops playing.

Its a unique film that could rightly be called a masterpiece.

Cheadle not only has created a technical marvel of a film (I can't talk about the details I was too busy getting lost in the film to take notes) but he also puts in an Oscar worthy performance as Davis. Cheadle doesn't always look like Davis but Davis is always on screen.  Cheadle's performance is at times a scary ghost of the man himself. In some shots, particularly when we see a young Davis Cheadle isn't so much Cheadle but  rather a Cheadle inhabited by the soul of  Miles Davis. Its a scary good thing to see and hopefully will be remembered come Awards season.

I really like this film a great deal. I love that a film like this is coming from an American filmmaker. Its so rare that a film of this complexity would come from a a major star. Its hopeful turn of events.

I highly recommend this film when it hits theaters down the road.

THE ASSASSIN (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Coming out of Cannes with great fanfare not to mention a boatload of awards Hou Hsiao-hsien’s THE ASSASSIN was one of few films that you could find on pretty much every film writers must see list. The press screening I attended was packed to the rafters. With people wanting to see the film before everyone else in New York.

The film is the story of a young woman,Nie Yinniang, given over to a “nun” for training as an assassin who is sent back to her family with orders to kill her one time betrothed. There is more to it than that but the film is so obtuse in its plotting I never quite worked out more than that.

Intellectually I admire the film a great deal. I could wax poetic about the use of differing color palates, black and white, the changing frame size and the sparse use of music. I admire that the film requires that the audience to work with it to figure things out. As film of the head its extremely good.

On the other hand the film has no really heart. I never connected. Worse it’s need to be a puzzle for the head makes for some odd choices.

The biggest problem with the film is it falls into the chasm where it doesn’t explain enough. I’m all for a film not explaining things and I’m against a film explaining too much but this film leaves chasms where we don’t have details enough to explain where things stand. Late in the game our heroine returns a horse to some people and I was left scratching my head as to why this was such a big deal. Who are these people? And even after we are clued in to who they are- why are we seeing it? There are numerous characters whose role in the events elude me. There are plot threads that come and go.

The film is also a film of silences and monologues. People don’t so much talk to each other but talk at each other. There are long silences where nothing happens. Unless you are a fan of words unspoken this film is going to bore you.

When the ASSASSIN was announced as being a martial arts or period film from Hou a good many people I know were excited. Would the film reinvent the form, or if not so much reinvent the form would it reinvigorate the film as Wong Kar Wai’s return to the genre had done, or even Ang Lee’s?

While the film has several action set pieces, its not until the latter half that they become anything more than fleeting. The bits in the second half- in particular the battle in the jungle- are quite good but there is not enough here that is going to make this a must see for wu xia fans. I feel sorry for anyone seeing this film expecting anything approaching an action epic because this film is going to confuse them to no end. (The film is being released in the US by Wellgo who normally handle action films from Asia. Anyone picking up this film expecting their usual fare are going to be very upset)

I have a few other reservations about the film -particularly why Hou shot several sequences so they are obscured by hanging cloths when there is no reason for it – but it’s not worth beating a wounded horse(and don’t tell me the it’s because Nie is watching because she is not around for some scenes and in different places for others)

As I said intellectually I know why things were being done, but emotionally the film made no sense to me.

Personally I’d rather have a film resonate emotionally then being of interest intellectually. If a film is emotional I’ll want to see it again because I’ll want to feel again. An intellectual film I never need see again because its all in the head.

The film has played the New York FIlm festival and opens Friday for it's regular run

My Favorite Cate Blanchett picture

This is my favorite of all of the pictures I took today at the CAROL screening at New York Film Festival. There is something about the light and dark and the sense she is in thought that just resonates with me.

Carol (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Cate Blanchett at the New York Film Festival screening of CAROL

CAROL confused me. I'm so used to bleak Patricia Highsmith stories that I expected the romance at the center of the film to end with some one dead. I'm going to spoil things slightly and say no one dies, and by Highsmith standards its positively cheery. Actually in another five years its going to be considered a grand romance.

The plot of the film has shop girl Rooney Mara and housewife Cate Blanchett meeting in the toy department of the store Mara works in. There i an instant attraction and before long the pair begin a dance that leads to what in 1951 would be called the love that dare not speak it's name.

A well made and well acted romance is classical in construction. If it weren't for the fact that the lovers are two women the film would almost be considered run of the mill. We've seen variations of this story for  years but never like this from a major studio release. Its kind of heartening that so close to the adoption of same sex marriage we get such a solid romance.

As much as I like the film, and I do like the film, I think its being wildly over sold by the Weinsteins. The film is very good but it is not Oscar material. Yes both of the women are quite good but they are not going to win the Oscars  the producers are hoping for. And the HUGE WTF related to the awards quest is that Mara is being considered for a supporting actress nod when she's on screen as much as if not more than Blanchett

Definitely one to see when it hit theaters soon. If you're in New York the film is getting an encore screening tomorrow (10/11) at the New York Film Festival. For more information and tickets go here.

We Are Alive (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Bensaid with Castillo

One of the dullest films ever at any New York Film Festival ever is Carmen Castillo's WE ARE ALIVE a political tract on how the Marxist/Leftist/Communist/ect/ect ideas that fueled the revolutions of the 1960's are finding real world success in various parts of the world.

A cinematic position paper framed around a celebration of Daniel Bensaid who was one of the loudest voices for worker/human rights over the last 50 years. Bensaid kept the fires burning even while all his contemporaries, including Castillo walked away. We visit various groups around the world, from building squatters in Paris, rebels in Mexico and land seizers in Bolivia, all of whom are fighting the good fight and meeting with some success.

The film sounded interesting going in. I thought we'd actually get to know the groups and what they were really doing and the situations around them, and we get that on a cursory level. There are few details and no back stories with the result the discussion of a strike at a ship yard means nothing.

What we get  are long winded discussion of the ideas of revolution. This is the language of Marx and Guevara where things like dialectics are discussed as if they are the most exciting things in the world. They aren't, they are boring as all hell. It's over intellectualization of  simple ideas. Worse here its ideas with little real world connection.

Its awful and it drones on for over 100 minutes. By the time the ship building union spokesman droned on about whatever the hell he droned on about a good many people at the press screening had fled into the lobby to wait for the next film.

This film will put you to sleep if the inane nature of it doesn't have you throwing things at the screen.

Not to worry the NYFF screening is done so you can simply put this film on your must avoid list and and do something constructive

Brief word on BROOKLYN (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Saoirse Ronan stars as Eilis, a young Irish woman who goes to America in the hope of getting a better future. While there she meets and falls in love with a nice Italian boy. However when circumstances forces her to go home for period her world is complicated when her situation turns around and she suddenly finds she can have a good job and a nice Irish boy comes calling.

Based on a novel by Colm Tóibín the film was directed by John Crowley and adapted by Nick Hornby this is a nifty little romance that is based on a story Tóibín had heard as young man concerning a family member who went through a similar experience. You'll forgive me if I don't go into details since what happens is what gives the film its suspense.

A beautifully acted film this is a throw back in many ways to the films of the early 1950's when the film takes place. While the film is more up to date than the films of the 1950's, there were never references to using a bucket for a toilet, the film is pretty much a good old fashion romance and it's wonderful.

The cast is first rate. Saoirse Ronan is almost certainly to get an Oscar nomination in a turn that is going to make her an even bigger star and stamp her as one of the finest actresses working today. Jim Broadbent is wonderful as the priest who helps Eilis in America. Julie Walters is charming as Eilis' land lady. And the rest of the cast is equally good and it's kind of sad that they won't get noticed come awards season.

You want to see this. The film hits theaters in November. However if you're in New York this weekend the film is running as part of the New York Film Festival encore series on Sunday. For tickets and more information go here.

An attempt to say something meaningful about the vitally important The Memory of Justice (1976) New York FIlm Festival 2015

On September 27th the New York Film Festival screened the restored version of Marcel Ophuls follow up to THE SORROW AND THE PITY  called THE MEMORY OF JUSTICE. The film is a five hour look at guilt, memory and history, it was a heavy heavy experience.

The film was made when the BBC asked for a follow up to SORROW. Ophuls began work but found someone had beaten him to the subject. Looking around he began to look at the Nuremberg trials. This widened to take in more modern events such as Vietnam and  the Algerian war. The resulting film runs just under five hours and is something you'll need to see a couple of times to fully grap.

This is a heavy film, While at times over long and rambling, this film overwhelms you with facts and questions about war and human nature. It is epic in scope, but at the same time very personal as Ophul's turns the camera on his own family to examine how his wife and her family dealt with life in Germany during the war. Ophuls' film compresses enough material for ten History Channel series into one huge five hour bite.

I'm not going to lie, I don't know where to begin to discuss the film. I need a couple more times through it to grasp it all. I started taking notes and stopped because I could make notes or watch the film but not both, too much was being said and shown.  I don't know how anyone can say they "get" the film after one time through. I don't think it's possible.  My eyes glazed over the first time through and I ran off at the intermission because my brain was full. All I know is that the film was incredible. It raised a lot of questions that really need answering, specially in these days of fighting wars that are morally questionable.

The film is getting a rerelease soon- so keep an eye out. And check back for a longer review is coming as soon as I piece some words together.

Maggie's Plan (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Rebecca Miller's romantic comedy is one of the big head scratchers of the New York film Festival. The question is not directed at the quality of the film, it's enjoyable, more it's a question of why is something so light at NYFF to begin with?

The plot of the film has Maggie (Greta Gerwig) charting out her future. Deciding she wants a child she has lined up a pickle maker to be the sperm donor of her dreams. However things get complicated when she meets a writer (Ethan Hawke) who is married to a seemingly over bearing professor (a hysterical Julianne Moore). How their lives, and those of their friends and children, interact  is the film. (I'm cutting it short because it's too complicated to spell out simply).

A small scale charmer where Greta Gerwig does a bit more with a role - she actually is capable all the way through the film- MAGGIE'S PLAN is the sort of film that is going to warm a lot of people's hearts. Its a funny, intelligent film where amazingly you really like every single character, even Julianne Moore.

Julianne Moore's turn as Ethan Hawke's ex-wife is one of those performances that is going to get stuck in people's heads. Playing against expectations its a role with unexpected depth and warmth and the sort of thing that may very well get her into talks for Oscar gold. Personally I love her accent which reminds of a more refined version of John Cameron Mitchell's performance of his character HEDWIG.

As much as I liked the film I'm puzzled as to why it ended up at NYFF. Its a sure fire romcom hit, but at the same time it's much lighter pretty much every film at the festival for the last few years. I guess the programmers had an odd moment and scheduled it. (probably just trying to mess with the critics heads)

The film is getting an encore screening at the New York Film Festival Sunday and tickets can be had here.

Bridge of Spies (2015) World Premieres at The New York Film Festival 2015

I am still enough of a film geek that the thought of actually going to a screening that is a Steven Spielberg World Premiere warms the cockles of my heart. I say this because when the chance to see the film with Spielberg in the house plus all of the red carpet insanity presented itself I took it.

Not my best Spielberg picture, but the one of him on the red carpet

Sue me. But the chance to see Spielberg on the red carpet is just really freaking cool, I don't care where you're from.

The film tells the story of James Donovan (Tom Hanks) a high level insurance attorney who earned a reputation for fairness and belief in the American way when he served in the Army at the Nuremberg war crimes trials. When the government comes to his firm asking that he defend suspected spy Rudolph Abel (Mark Rylance) he takes the case. The case puts his and family's life in danger since most people feel that Abel should just be strung up. Donovan feels otherwise saying the one thing that makes us different than our enemies is we have a "rule book" and we stick to it. This attitude has him clash with the CIA who wants him to tell them about his talks with his client (he refuses). When the Soviet's shoot down a U2 Spy plane Donovan is thrown into a tense political situation as the American's have to rush to try and get their pilot back before he tells all he knows.

A huge Hollywood production this is the sort of film that they really don't make any more. This is the sort of film we might have gotten in the early 1960's except that it would have been politically impossible, especially since Abel is portrayed as a just a guy doing his job and not a psychopath out for world domination. Its a heady mix of history and politics as the film makes clear that while it easier to do the emotionally enjoyable thing-in this case killing Abel   after we squeeze him for all he knows- the more honorable thing and the thing that the country was founded on was and is due process of law. I'm sure it will give the political right kittens.

I thoroughly enjoyed the the film. I just got lost in it somewhere and I completely found the two hours plus blew by despite sitting on uncomfortable seats in one of the boxes. This is an Oscar bait film that actually deserves to be in the discussion- though I doubt, outside of Mark Rylance's performance for the ages turn as Abel it will have much of a chance of winning.

While the film is a blast to watch it isn't without it's flaws. The biggest problem is that outside of Tom Hank's Donovan and Rylance's Abel everyone blends together. Who are all of the people and why are people like Alan Alda and Amy Ryan in the film when they have nothing to do? I suspect that the film as supposed to be much longer but was cut down and all of the supporting roles disappeared.

I really liked the film a great deal.

Actually what I really liked was that the emotion the film generates at the end  for the characters is genuine and is earned. We are moved because what happened genuinely moves us. I say this because two of the big films at The New York Film Festival provoked a reaction in their endings that are in no way deserved- THE WALK moves the audience with reference to 911 which is completely out of place while STEVE JOBS turns all warm and touchy feely in its final five minutes when it throws away two hours of Jobs being a dick to make him into a great guy and loving father. In both those cases I wanted to take a bath to get the stink off me, while with BRIDGE OF SPIES I wanted to go tell some one I just saw a great film.

Alan Alda, Amy Ryan, Mark Rylance Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg and  moderator Kent Jones

After the screening the Spielberg and the cast sat down for a Q&A. It was mixed affair part congratulations (Ryance's and Hank's hats took a beating) and part informational discussion. For me the best part was when the daughter of James Donovan stood up in the audience and talked about her father and his attempt to meet Abel again years later. It wasn't to be.

The film has finished at the New York Film Festival and will open in theaters October 16th.

Steven Spielberg and his cast in the filmmaker's box after the New York Film Festival Premiere

Microbe and Gasoline (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Michel Gondry's MICROBE AND GASOLINE is an autobiographical look at Gondry's childhood- though moved into the present. At the post NYFF screening this past Sunday Gondry said the first half of the film is based on incidents in his childhood, while the second half was pure wish fulfillment.

The plot of the film has teenager Microbe, so nicknamed because of his small stature meeting and befriending the mechanical genius Gasoline, so named because he smells of it. The pair bond at first over the fact that both are more or less outsiders, but as the film progresses Microbe finds someone who accepts him just for who he is and Gasoline has a friend crazy enough to help him build a car to travel across France.

While the narrative is focused on the pair building and then traveling in the home made car, the film is primarily concerned with friendship and loyalty. We watch how the friends bond and how the friendship and its importance to each other becomes their primary purpose, even to the exclusion of girls.

This is a super little film. This is a throw back to the family films of the 1970's. The one American film that comes to mind is Don Coscarelli's grossly under seen and under appreciated KENNY AND COMPANY which to my mind nailed what it was like being a kid of a certain age. The film is also light years a head of MY GOLDEN YEARS, which also played at the New York Film Festival this year but had kids of the same age (the main characters sister) simply sitting around smoking and drinking.

I suspect the reason the film works so well is that according to Gondry all of the first half is true. He did pretty much everything that happened. And while he never built a car there were plans to do so. The second half trip was him finishing the trip he and his friend had always planned to take.

I really liked the film a great deal and when it was done on Sunday I texted a couple of people who I know would absolutely fall in love with the film. Walking out I know many people around me liked it too because I could hear the discussions of how the film kicked up memories of their own lives. Hell, Gavin Smith the head of Film Comment was moved to tears by it.

Put this one on your list of films to see when it finishes the festival runs and get a regular release.

New York FIlm Festival pictures from the last few days- Gondry, Spielberg, Miller, Hanks, Rylance and Ryan

I have many pictures culled from the over 1000at the New York Film Festival  I took over at our Tumblr page. There are also some still from the movies and and stuff as well.  Previously I've done picture psots but the flood of pictures from Sunday and Monday has been too much so here's a smattering of the best ones from the last two days.

If you want to see more go to out Tumblr page and scroll through all the pictures. You can find it here.

Michel Gondry and Gavin Smith talk MICROBE AND GASOLINE

Alan Alda on th BRIDGE OF SPIES red carpet

Steven Spielberg arrives for BRIDGE OF SPIES

Mark Rylance arrives for Bridge of Spies

Amy Ryan's Yellow Dress on the red carpet for BRIDGE OF SPIES

Tom Hanks arrives on the red carpet. Several people whre I was standing had no idea who "the old guy" was until I told them at which point they were impressed and then back tracked to say the hat confused them.

Everyone from BRIDGE F SPIES in the filmmakers box

A standing ovation for Spielberg

Geza Rohrig star of SON OF SAUL

Rebecca Miller introduces her MAGGIE'S PLAN

The MAGGIE'S PLAN Q&A

SON OF SAUL (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Gavin Smith talks to director Laszlo Neemes and star Gee Rohrig at the NYFF press conference

I hate to say this but "the emperor has no clothes."

I say that because when SON OF SAUL started to make the rounds of festivals it was being hailed as one of the great films of the year and one of the greatest Holocaust films ever made. Many pieces talked abut how when people saw it they could hardly move from their seats. Everyone talked about how the way it was filmed- largely close ups of  Geze Rohrig- managed to put us inside the death camp.

No.

Please don't take my contrary opinion to early reviews means I dislike the film, I don't I simply think that the initial reviews over sold the film, which I think is good, but terribly formal in its construction and by the numbers in it's telling.

The plot has Saul, worker tasked with cleaning up the dead in a death camp deciding to give a boy a decent burial. This sets Saul on a round about trip across the camp in order to secure the body and to find a rabbi who will help him bury "his son".

The film is told in what is best described extreme close up. The camera almost never leaves Saul's face. We never really see much beyond him, with most of the details as to what is going on conveyed by the aggressive soundtrack or snippets of images we see around Saul's head.

The gamble to shoot the film in close up and in 1:33 to 1,the Academy ratio really didn't work for me. Its not that the gambit fails for any reason other than Saul never really changes his expression. He is simply intense until almost the last moment of the film. I've read reviews saying that people have seen Rohrig reveal all sorts of emotion in through his eyes but to me it was all the same.

For me the real killer of the film was script which came off as highly artificial. The film very much feels like an artistic construct with a point about trying to buy one's piece of mind or trying to do one right thing. I felt as if very little of it real, more so when as all of the key bits of death camp lore was hit  and then the added layer of the possible prisoner revolt was thrown into the mix felt like it was trying to do too much and cover everything. Director Laszlo Nemes has some points and he very much wants to make them at all costs.

For me the trip around the camp was very artificial. As the film went on I started to make notes as the film hit each part of the camp. Would the film not cover some part of the functioning of the final solution? Nope it got it all from prisoner arrivals to disposal of the ash this film doesn't leave any thing out. The NYFF write up talks about the 9 circles of hell, I'd call it a grand scavenger hunt. While it does bring home what was going on in the camps in ways we've not really seen before, it still feels artificial.

I think part of the problem with the film is something that they talked about a great deal at the post screening press conference which was the seemingly big revelation that the prisoners helped the Nazi's kill all the people. It was a statement that kind of had me cocking my head sideways and wanting to ask the people on stage if they hadn't read on the camps before they made the movie. The complicity of the prisoners is an uncomfortable truth of the Holocaust. The fact we see the prisoners helping things along, while trying to save themselves apparently rattles a lot of people even when they should know that's what happened.

Still there is no getting around the fact the film is quite good on it' own terms. It is in someways it is the kick in the pants it was aiming to be from start to finish.

If the subject interests you its worth a shot,but if not you're not missing a masterpiece despite what some writers claim.

The film plays tonight  (Tuesday the 6th) at 9pm. It encores on Sunday at 9pm as well. For tickets and more information go here.

A note about New York Film Festival reviews

Things happen or rather I'm going to lots of public screenings and I am behind on reviews. As it stands now I owe you reviews for the following:

MICROBE AND GASOLINE (Which is really good)

BRIDGE OF SPIES (Which is really good)

SON OF SAUL (Which is very over rated)

MAGGIE'S PLAN (which is really sweet)

plus I have to write something on HELL AND BACK a very funny, very clever adult animated film that barely was released to theaters.

Since all of the NYFF screenings are done except for SON OF SAUL, I'll have those reviews before the festival ends- Saul I hope to have done before it screens.

I also have to put together some picture posts for those of you who haven't gone to our Tumblr page.

The reviews are coming - I just need to stop going to screenings.

Trying to describe Laurie Anderson's moving HEART OF A DOG (2015) New York FIlm Festival 2015

It took me about five minutes to get past Laurie Anderson's mannered narration before I fell into her arms and joyfully went along with her where ever she wanted to go in telling the story, nominally, of her late dog Lolabelle who painted and played the piano.

The film is structured as an essay and celebration of Anderson's dog, but as things happen it becomes a meditation on life, death and the ones we lose along the way, in this case her mother and her husband to whom the film is dedicated and whose music closes the film.

I have no idea what to say except this film rocks.

This film did what all truly great films do and that is take me on a trip I've never been before. Yes I've lost people, yes I've read the Tibetan Book of the Dead, yes I've thought about life and death in my own way and yes I am familiar with many of the places in New York where Anderson shot her film, but never before had I thought about things in this way or seen neighborhoods I know like this. with this film I saw the world with a new set of eyes.

Being billed as a documentary, the film will eventually be shown as part of HBO's documentary series, the film is instead more an essay. It is kind of like the work of the theater group Complicite which very often starts you in one place only to finish up in another. Their show MNEMONIC began with the director coming out to say a few brief words abut the show and the next thing you knew you were in the middle of several stories, one of which was the last hours of an ancient man found in ice. What started as a few words of introduction ended with a tearful audience weeping for a chair that stood in for a long dead man. If that sounds a bit WTF, know that HEART OF A DOG being about starts off being about her dog but ends up with a memory that will bring a tear to your eyes.

I know that you want some sort of explanation but I really don't have one. This film just kind of is. When I spoke with the Quay Brothers a couple of months back about their body of work they talked about how some films like, works of music can not be described with words, they simply are. Essentially the only way to know what they are about is to experience them for yourself. They said that the only ones dumb enough to do so are critics. I suppose that these futile paragraphs mean I'm a stupid critic for trying to corral Anderson's film.

HEART OF A DOG is a unique and beautiful thing. It will both move you emotionally and intellectually. Love it or hate it you will be affected by it, just as you are by all of life. It is a much more than a piece of cinema or television, but rather a living breathing statement of what it means to be alive- for Laurie Anderson if no one else. It is a singular achievement and a must see.

HEART OF A DOG plays October 8 at the New York Film Festival. For tickets and more information go here. The film will hit theaters in two weeks and will eventually run as part of HBO's Documentary series

Sunday Nightcap: New York Film Festival 2015, Lotsa Links, and Fish*

Sorry, no, Shelly the Little Otter Puppet: that's the New York Film Festival, where our usual Unseen Films host, "Spectacular" Steve Kopian, has been the past week and a half, viewing all the great (and a few not-so-great, right, Steve?) movies and tellin' you all about them! That's why he got me, Bully the Little Stuffed Bull, the internet's favorite blogging bovine (and occasional movie reviewer and contributor to these here digital pages) to provide you good folks with a proper Sunday evening nightcap! Hope you're ready for all the excitement!


Well, that guy's ready for bed, but I'm pretty sure that's not what kind of nightcap we mean. What we want is a wrap-up of the week to cue you in on all the cool news. It's kind of the Unseen Films version of the Scrubbing Bubbles: we work so you don't have tooooooooooooooo. (PS: please do not use this knowledge for evil!)

---

Steve sees Steve (Jobs), plus more of the week's NYFF reviews, and some great press conference photos!

• Cemetery of Splendour (directed by Apichatpong Weerasethakul)
• De Palma (directed by Noah Baumbach and Jake Paltrow) • press conference photos
• Ingrid Bergman: In Her Own Words (directed by Stig Björkman)
• The Lobster (directed by Yorgos Lanthimos)
• The Mountains May Depart (directed by Jia Zhangke) • press conference photos
• Mia Madre (directed by Nanni Moretti)
• My Golden Days (directed by Arnaud Desplechin) • and press conference photos
• No Home Movie (directed by Chantal Akerman)
• Projections at NYFF: Program 7 • Program 8 • Program 9 • Program 10 • Program 11 • The Free Collections
• Steve Jobs (directed by Danny Boyle) • press conference photos
• A Touch of Zen (directed by King Hu)
• Where to Invade Next (directed by Michael Moore) • press conference photos

---

Movie news and features: spanning the globe to bring you the constant variety of film!

• John Guillermin, British director of Towering Inferno, dies aged 89: obituary (The Guardian)
• Jafar Panahi’s Taxi Is a Strange, Wonderful Film (Vulture)
• A Film Festival on Four Legs (It’s Not What You Think) (The New York Times)
• Midnight Madness: where weird meets film (The Eyeopener)
• Rocky Horror Is Doing the Time Warp, Forever (The New York Times)
• What is your favourite Shakespeare adaptation? (OUPblog)
• "You can't unring the bell": match the business advice to the movie (The Guardian)
• Film Snob? Is That So Wrong? (The New York Times)
• "Scrap accuracy — give me Ringo Starr as the pope": the 10 quirkiest historical films (The Guardian)
• Sorry, Matt Damon, the Plan to Rescue Someone From Mars Hasn’t Even Been Created Yet (Vulture)
• Space for a spud: The Martian offers to mail filmgoers a free potato (The Guardian)
• The Story Behind Jason Segel's Dracula Puppet Musical (Vulture)
• “Shut the f**k up, Donny”: This mashup of The Big Lebowski's Walter Sobchak silencing Donald Trump is everything (Salon)
• This Avengers: Age of Ultron gag reel makes us feel better about ourselves (Radio Times)

---

BBC Radio iPlayer: film shows and features to listen to

Currently on the iPlayer for a limited time (episodes may expire within the next 28 days):

• Hooray for Bollywood with Shilpa Shetty: Bollywood superstar Shilpa Shetty presents her guide to the world of Bollywood, playing her favourite music from India's biggest movies, and telling stories from behind the scenes. (BBC Radio 2)
• And The Academy Award Goes To...: A fifth series of Paul Gambaccini's history of the Oscars and stories behind award-winning films. Mrs. Miniver, Chariots of Fire, and Midnight Cowboy are each profiled. (BBC Radio 4)
• Gurinder, The Movie: A repeat of the 2009 program: director Gurinder Chadha tells the story of how her "dual nationality" and her early life in Southall in west London have informed and enriched her hit films including Bend It Like Beckham. (BBC Radio 4 Extra, available beginning Thursday, October 8)
• James Dean: The Last 10 Weeks: "Everyone grapples for a fresh angle on the life and death of Hollywood actor James Dean, and here we have it in documents locked away for more than half a century." (BBC Radio 2)
• Stage and Screen: Julie Andrews: A repeat of the 2003 program: the Broadway and Hollywood star Julie Andrews looks back over her career, with anecdotes about many of the big names she worked with, in conversation with Edward Seckerson. (BBC Radio 4 Extra)
• Educating Archie: A rare early radio appearance by Julie Andrews on this episode of the 1950s British ventriloquism comedy featuring comedians Peter Brough, Tony Hancock, and Hattie Jacques join Archie Andrews. From October 1951. (BBC Radio 4 Extra)
• You and Yours: Is the British film industry value for money?: The British film industry receives hundreds of millions of pounds of state support in tax relief and subsidies. But does it deliver in terms of jobs and economic payback? Documentary from 2012.

Regular weekly iPlayer shows:

• The Film Programme: Weekly news and review show covering the latest releases, the hottest stars and the leading directors, plus news and insights from the film world. (BBC Radio 4)
• Kermode and Mayo's Film Review: Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo give their verdicts on the week's movies. (BBC Radio 5 Live)
• Sound of Cinema: Matthew Sweet reflects each week on film music which revels in the history and culture of a specific theme. Currently available: episodes on Scotland, mountaineering, crime movies, Hammer Studios, and more. (BBC Radio 3)

So there you go! Steve will be back after the New York Film Festival finishes, and then he sleeps for a thousand years.

*Actually, there was no fish in this blog post.

Steve Jobs (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

If you were to ask me what I took away from Danny Boyle's STEVE JOBS it would would be that he was an absolute dick. Why no one didn't haul off and cold-cock him remains a mystery that eludes me. Personally I would have beaten him to death and danced around his body laughing maniacally had he treated me the way he treats the people in this movie. Why anyone put up with his shit amazes me, especially since he fell on his face a good number of times.

What Boyle has done, working with an Aaron Sorkin script is to fashion a very compelling, frequently funny look at the man who gave us the iPhone and other monstrous devices of the modern world. What we do is to drop in at three points on Jobs life, right before major product launches. The first is the release of the Macintosh computer which failed to find an audience and got him fired from Apple. Next we see him on the day he unveiled the NEXT computer which was super expensive and didn't work- but which Jobs created with the hope of eventually getting back to Apple. Lastly is the launch of the iMac which set Apple onto domination of the computer market. Along the way not only does Jobs deal with his underlings but also his daughter and her mother(the former he shows almost no affection)

Watching the film I wondered how a man so anti social, so not in touch with any reality except his own could be hailed as the second coming by so many people. The man is an absolute asshole who refuses to believe his daughter is his because the paternity test said there was only a 94% chance she was his. He twisted it so that in his mind one of 28% of the population of America could have actually been the father. How that works makes no logical sense but it gives you a clue to Jobs screwed up view of reality. It almost beyond belief that a man who couldn't construct a computer or program one was considered a computing genius.

And yet in this small dose Jobs is a fascinating main character. Watching this guy go through his paces and change the world is amazing. You can't take your eyes off him. I suspect that much of the reason it's so fascinating is that we know how it ends and we wonder why no one killed him. Watching it from a distance you realize that had Steve Wozniack or Andy Hertzfeld had told him no his whole life would have gone differently.

I have to applaud Boyle and Sorkin for they have crafted 95% of a truly great film. This is largely a wonderfully constructed portrait of a man and our time. And I do mean it is a construction but one based on truth, since there is no way that all of the things that fall together on these three days at exactly these moments. It would be nigh impossible. And yet it all feels organic. We willingly believe that all of the bullshit about technical problems, personal hurts and familial problems really would crash together in the 40 minutes before each launch.

I said that the film is that is only 95% great and that's because there is a shift that comes in the final minutes that doesn't ring remotely true (even if it is emotionally moving). In the final minutes the film shifts from feeling real into one that is highly manipulative. What happens in the final minutes is that Steve Jobs, one of the biggest sons of a bitch you'll ever see suddenly has a an epiphany and turns out not to be so bad after all. Suddenly he realizes that he might have been wrong about things so he will pay his daughter's college tuition (which he was with holding), he will admit he named a computer for his daughter and ah,schucks, he will reveal he really loved her all along (its a great movie moment but doesn't belong to this character). Oh yea and if  that wasn't enough he gets the idea for the iPod too.  

Where did all of this come from?

The sudden change felt completely wrong and left me wondering what the point of it all was. Yes it's Jobs life- but what was the thematic point? What are we supposed to get from it? I could accept that had Jobs remained a dick we could take away that being one is okay if you're like Steve Jobs, but the out of the blue change of heart muddies things terribly. I have no idea what I'm supposed to think.

I do know that the film is really good. Ending weirdness aside I enjoyed the hell out of it. It really was worth standing on line in the cold rain for two and a half hours to get into the New York Film Festival press screening. I say that simply to illustrate that the film over came my mental blocks. I was so sold and tired by the time the film started that it was going to have to be super or else I was going to hate it. It was great fun and worth the wait.

I have to add that the cast is first rate and look for Kate Winslet to get on the Oscar short list. She is fantastic and I kept waiting for her to show up for half the film, before I realized that she had been on screen the whole time.

Reservations aside put STEVE JOBS on your must see list.

The film is done with it's New York Film Festival screenings. It will open Friday in limited release before going wide shortly there after.

My favorite pictures from the STEVE JOBS press conference at the New York FIlm Festival 2015

I posted a bunch of pictures from the STEVE JOBS press conference at our Tumblr page (Go Here) and the one's below are my favorites of those.

Michael Fassbender and Kate Winslet

Seth Rogen, Michael Fassbender and Kate Winslet

Fassbender makes a face

Everybody laugh

Kate Winslet

Jeff Daniels ponders 

More laughter

Michael Fassbender

Danny Boyle laughs

Many more pictures at Tumblr- and my hard drive- I may post more later that I realized I didn't post.

Where to Invade Next (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Michael Moore's latest film has been called his most optimistic and least angry film. I don't know if it's less angry, however it definitely is hopeful.

The film begins with Michael Moore being called into the Pentagon and asked by the Joint Chiefs where America could invade in order to determine where we could invade and actually win. Moore then goes across Europe looking for places to invade and what we should take from the various countries.  On his travels he discovers:

In Italy that many weeks of paid vacation, long lunches leads to greater productivity, less stress and less absenteeism.

In France  good school lunches get the kids to eat better for less money. They also have sex ed that reduces teen pregnancy and STDs

Finland has shorter school days and no home work and has students now considered the best educated in the world.

Slovenia has free college for everyone (even people from the US)

Germany has spa stays for the stressed and they accept their dark past.

Portugal doesn't arrest anyone one for drug use. They also have a great treatment plan.(When Moore points out that drugs are ruining people's lives the Portuguese Minister of Health says so is Facebook but no one is banning it.)

Norway has a prison system where there are few guards and real attempts at correcting bad behavior

Tunisia has women health clinics and allows womena voice.

Iceland elected the world first female president.

Moore's film is another cinematic essay about what's wrong with America but this time out Moore actually tells us what we should do to fix the country. Most amazingly for those who think Moore hates America is that by the time film ends you realize that he does love the country and that he really wants it work. Hell the big denouncement of the film is that all of the ideas are originally American- they just were refined elsewhere in the world.

While far from perfect the film nay actually be very close to being Michael Moore's best film. The problem, is that with like many of Moore's other films is that he isnt always the best at organizing the material for maximum effect. I say this having recently gone back tosee some of Moore's earlier films again and realized that as much as I liked them, my positive reaction to the films was more the result of being carried along by his message rather than his filmmaking. He really can't make a polished film.

Here the problem is that after traveling around a good part of Europe we get to Germany. The talk about how Germany treats it's workers with free spa stays for those stressed out  is amusing. The problem is Moore makes a sudden turn into darkness with an examination of how Germany is dealing with it's genocidal past. Moore feels that we in America should do the same thing. I'm not going to dispute his point. I understand what he's going for however the problem is it's a sudden turn that breaks the momentum of the film.(Also it doesn't fit his ultimate point which is everything he's raiding from the world actually came from an original American idea)

If that was the only problem with the film it would be okay except that after that the focus of the film shifts from raiding good ideas from the rest of the world into a film that posits that world would be better if women ran it, or at the very least had a large say in it. Again- the problem here is not the  premise, rather it's that the film more or less throws away the idea of things to take from the rest of the world for a new direction just over half way in. Instead of lots of idea he simply repeats the same one in a couple of countries. There is nothing wrong with it except that it left me wondering what the film really is all about. Moore tries to weave the women should be in charge with the other ideas  and it kind of works, I mean the ending had me shed a tear, but at the same time the premise that women need to be more involved in the running of things should be a film of its own and not part of the rest of this film.

Should you see the film? Oh hell yea. Its a really good if slightly uneven film that is going to give you a great deal to think about especially when you realize that many of the things he finds wrong are there just to make some corporation richer and not to make our lives or children better.

The film has ne more screening at the New York Film Festival at 3 PM today (For tickets and information go here) and is do to be released to theaters some time soon.

My Golden Days (2015) New York Film Festival 2015

Arnaud Desplechin's MY GOLDEN DAYS was a big winner at this years Cannes Film Festival. The film is a quasi-semi-kind of sequel cum prequel to his earlier  MY SEX LIFE ...OR HOW I GOT INTO AN ARGUMENT. I say semi, ect because at the New York Film Festival press conference Desplechin said that he told the young stars of this film not to watch the earlier film since he wanted the film to stand on it's own.

The film has the adult Paul Dédalus (played by Mathieu Amalric reprising his role from the earlier film) remembering some early episodes from his youth, his crazy mother, the loss of his passport in Russia and his years long romance with a girl named Esther. We watch how the couple meets when Paul comes home from college for a weekend and follow it through to it's end.

For me the film the episodic nature of the film doesn't hang together. At the press conference Desplechin said that the film is a kind of Russian song with Russia, its culture and republic winding through it. I don't think that really works, nor do I think that any of the other thematic or plot threads do either. Yes each piece works on its own, but they don't hang together.

I'm also not to sure that the film's depiction of teens in the late 80's and early 90's really is true. I'm not that much older than the characters in the film and had a lot of friends about the kids age at the time. Maybe it's a French thing but for me and my friends life didn't involve sitting around chain smoking. I think the fact that during the press conference there was a friendly argument between the head of the film society Kent Jones and Desplechin got into a friendly argument about what the music in the film was called indicates that despite press pronouncements the director doesn't really have a things down as perfectly as many seem to feel (For the record Jones was dead right it was New Wave).

This is not a bad film. Its just I don't see the wonder many people see in the film. Worth a look, but nothing you need rush out to see...

There is one more screening at the New York Festival today at noon. For tickets and more information go here.  It will also be released by Magnolia soon