NYFF 2011: Pina: Dance Dance Otherwise We Are Lost(2011)

Wim Wender's tribute to choreographer Pina Bausch is one of the best uses of 3D I've run across. This is what people should be doing with 3D, namely using it to enhance a film with a glorious sense of place and space. But don't kid yourself, the film also works 2D, thanks to the marvelous dancing and mindblowingly wonderful soundtrack.

Okay, now that I've started in the middle let me start over.

Pina is a film that is made up of dance sequences from various pieces that were put together by Pina Bausch and her troop. The dances have been staged in the groups theater or in many of the most breathtaking cases in the real world (The tram bits are amazing in 3D). Interspersed with the dancing are brief statements by the dancers and friends of Pina.

For me the film started off as nothing special as we see some longish dance sequences. Then the film shifted from the theater into the real world, and director Wenders began to use film tricks for some stunning effects and suddenly this became a real joy to watch. Things got even better as the sequences became shorter and the world began to collide the stage.

You will forgive me for not being able to adequately describe this film, but I am not a dance fan. You could not get me to see any of these dances in a theater, so my vocabulary for describing what I saw is even more limited than normal. the best I can hope for is to describe the wonder and magic that is in this film.

I think the best way to express it might me to say "way cool".

I really liked what I was seeing and I was carried along by it all.

Keep in mind this is not a documentary. I know some places list it as such, and while to a small degree it kind of is, its really simply a dance film. If you are not a dance fan you may not like it, but if you're open to dance and want to see truly wonderful 3D see this film.

This film gets a US release December 23rd from IFC Films.

Tintin and the Blue Oranges (1964)

Second live action film about Herge's classic character is a step in the wrong direction despite being written in part by Asterix the Gaul creator Rene Goscinny. Actually the film isn't a step rather it's like being hit over the head, put in a bag then locked in a trunk and sent off to the south sea in the bowels of some ship.

The film concerns Professor Calculus making a plea for the world's scientists to come up with a means of feeding the hungry by using the deserts for food production. Several days later he receives in a mail a blue orange which was sent by one of colleagues. It has the ability to glow in the dark. When the orange is stolen, Tintin, Calculus, Snowy and Captain Haddock head off to Spain to meet with the creator only to find he's gone missing. Soon Calculus is missing and Tintin and Haddock are on the run

About this time I was asleep. Actually I was zoning in and out since this film is deadly dull. Everything that the first film did right this one did wrong. Where the first film was real people in the real world this one is carton characters ins a make believe world.

The casting which pretty much replaces everyone except Jean-Pierre Talbot as Tintin is poor. It's not so much they act badly as they act like bad cartoon versions of the characters.

I was bored.

In all honesty Had I not picked up this film because I liked the first film and left a slot for it here I never would have mentioned this film here at Unseen Films.

The film is one to miss.

Currently out on DVD everywhere but in the US. There is a BFI edition from the UK which is nicely put together especially the insert book. It's not a reason to actually pick up the disc however...

...I do expect it to show up in December with the release of the animated films. Don't buy it then either.

End of Animal (2010) The Korean Cultural Service's screening Tuesday

Tuesday is the next free screening at the Tribeca Cinema's in Manhattan from the Korean Cultural Service. The doors are at 630 and the film is at 7. This time out the film is a disturbing off kilter film called End of Animal. I was lucky enough to be able to see the film a couple weeks back thanks to the good graces of the KCS. What follows is what I wrote up right after I saw it.

A truly unique film that defies conventions and creates perhaps what is another world or reality a couple of degrees off from this world.

I'm left wanting to see it again but at the same time not wanting to feel that dis-eased (a term used in a review at Korean Film. org.) ever again. For give me for stealing the term used elsewhere but had you sat and watched this film you would understand what I mean about feeling dis eased.

The premise has a young woman heading to her mother's house so that she can give birth. The cab stops and picks up a stranger who seems to know everything, including about the impending moment when all electrical powered objects will cease to work. What happens after that is a quietly disturbing tale as the young woman meets and interacts with some people in the area where she is stranded.

I'm not going to say more other than if you want to feel ill at ease see this film. There is a slowly building sense that all is night right with the world either in the film or elsewhere. Its quietly disturbing because it's full of its own logic. The reason its all troubling is that things are just close enough to real that you're messed up by whats off- which very often you can't point out but which you know is wrong.

I know I'm not being forth coming with details, and that's intentional, partly because if I told you what happens you wouldn't think much of it, and partly because if you see it and not know what is happening it will mess you up. As I said I want to see what just f-ed up my head and yet I don't want to go back in that space. (And don't kid yourself I'm not talking about it because I can keep the film at a distance.)

Don't get me wrong there is almost nothing graphic or overtly wrong, its all subtle things that just build and make you wonder what it's all about. And the question of what it's all about has resulted in long conversations between Mondocurry and myself. We've both been trying to get a handle on some of this film.

The thought of sitting in a theater and watching this film is kind of not a pleasant one. I don't like the idea that one can't look away or attempt to distract one's self in a theater.

Then again I've already seen this film and I don't have to dive back in and see it.

If you want to see something special, if you want to see something that you may find disturbing and the source of long conversations do try to get to the Tribeca Cinema's Tuesday

I don't know what to say- largely because I don't know what to think or feel.

In all seriousness do go see the film. Its been a few weeks since I saw the film and it's still hung around the corners of my head. If I wasn't going to the New York Film Festival on business related to this blog I would probably be heading down to see it again. If you haven't anything planned for Tuesday night, and even if you do, head to Tribeca and see this film, because it's a really wicked little film.

TintIn and the Mystery of the Golden Fleece (1961)

After two solid weeks and reviews of well over thirty films from the New York Film Festival we're going to start to shift back to our more regular programming. Not to worry we'll still be reviewing films from the festival in bonus posts almost every day, but as the number of films we're attending lessens we're going to blend our coverage with some films chosen to get you in the mood for the New York Comicon which starts Thursday in Manhattan. To start things off this weekend, we're looking at the first two Tin Tin films.

First live action adaption of the classic comic by Herge was one of the few adaptions to meet with his approval. I'm guessing it's because it's one of the few to actually get it right.

Starting rightly with the assumption that we know the characters we're thrown right into the middle of things. It seems Captain Haddock has been left a ship by an old crew member. Flying to Turkey with Tin Tin, he finds the ship is in fact a beaten down old cargo ship. Uncertain it's worth keeping the pair is intrigued when they are offered a fortune for the ship for no good reason. Deciding to hold off on officially accepting the ship they take it on a trial voyage to Greece. Along the way things become tense as attempts are made to kill the pair and take the ship.

A ripping good film it's easy to see why the film was a popular one with kids across England, a fact which is related in the insert book that comes with the BFI edition. Played more or less straight and real, as any Tin Tin adventure should, here is a film that logically brings in all the characters and allows them time to take center stage.

I also love that the film feels real. It was clearly shot on location and the film is all the better for it. (The weak sequel which I'll discuss tomorrow could have been shot anywhere). I loved that we are in real places with real people who are doing real things. At no point does the film feel fake or staged or at least filmed on a sound stage.

Watching the film I was struck by how I wished it was a rainy Sunday afternoon instead of a sunny Saturday. This is a film that is one you'll want to watch repeatedly curled up on the couch with a big bowl of popcorn.

The DVD was given to me by Bully, John and Randi because they thought I'd like it, and because they thought it might go well on Unseen Films. They were right on target.

Currently out in a solid BFI region 2 edition that is both dubbed (its excellent) and subtitled. There is also an Australian edition, also region coded floating around. Look for a US release in the wake of the unnatural Steven Spielberg film.

NYFF 2011: Shame (2011) (An On Futher Review style review- with spoilers)

Steve McQueen's follow up to Hunger once again has him working with Michael Fassbender. Fassbender and the film are on the short list for Oscars come the end of the year. While I like the film, I can't quite give the film that much love.

The plot of the film follows Michael Fassbender's sex addict as he goes through life keeping everyone and everything at a distance. He's so disconnected that he won't even talk to his sister who calls him everyday and leaves long messages. Unfortunately for Fassbender he comes home one day to find his sister in his bathtub. She's got a singing gig in New York and she's planning on staying with him. It's a move that upsets his ordered life and sends him scurrying in all sorts of directions, including into a possible relationship with a woman from his office.

My first question is why is it that many critics rave about any reasonable performance by an actor when he does full frontal nudity? Apparently this is a big to do. To me the fact that Fassbender wanders through several scenes naked is nothing special, its simply how he would be in those scenes. I'm shocked that no one has talked about the fact that he urinates in an early scene, which is even rarer on screen.

I'm sorry, but Fassbender's performance isn't anything special. The big daring move here is the nudity, but outside of that, Fassbender doesn't really do much. Yes, there are some emotional moments but mostly he plays it silent. Fassbender says little and lets the audience read into what he is doing anyway that they want (at the press conference after the film director Steve McQueen said that he designed bits of the film that way). I suppose that's a good thing, but to me, I'd like to have the director and the actor give me a little bit more than a mirror, I mean a few more personal details would have been nice. To me other than some turmoil in a few scenes I don't think there was very much going on behind his eyes. He's a cypher to start and that's how he ends, even with some late in the game emotions.

Cary Mulligan as his sister is more interesting in her few scenes. There is clearly something more going on there, but again, so much isn't spoken. I would love to see a film about her character. ( I need to point out that Mulligan delivers one of the best, and most heart rending versions of New York, New York you'll ever hear. It's brilliant)

I don't think the film really works. I know people like Fassbender's character and in some ways I can relate to his obsessions (you've seen this blog so you know I'm obsessive) but there is something about him that doesn't quite ring true. It's not so much that what he does is wrong, it's that the weird swings he takes just don't seem real in the way they play out. They seem more constructed rather than natural, he will do this now and then that... Actually, yes what doesn't seem real is the construction of the film, which has the various characters rambling around for the first two thirds before Fassbender drops into hell in the final third, taking his sister with him.

I need to ask, am I the only one bothered by the film's equating gay sex and threesomes with a descent into depravity? I have nothing wrong with either, but the fact that McQueen uses them as a shorthand for Fassbender going off the rails is just wrong and borederline offensive. Actually the whole sequence from the hooker, to bar to gay club to threesome felt gratuitous and off base and like I was being cheated or treated like a child...or more like McQueen decided to come clean and say "you've sat for an hour of no sex so here's everything we promised you in one shot".

I won't go into the life changing sequences that follows Fassbender's binge when he heads home... all I'll say is that I can't believe that McQueen actually did it since it smells of the tendency to have great art go tragic just to bring about catharsis or bring about the desired end of the story (never mind if it's out of place and made me think of former Saturday Night Live and National LAmpoon writer Michael O'Donoghue's piece The Way to Write Good which says effectively the way to be taken seriously is bring in tragedy at the end).

Because I've been bad mouthing the film I need to say that this isn't a bad film. It really isn't. It's just not what all the many reviews I've read have made it out to be. Its good, but no religious experience. Personally, I think it's simply the sort of film that has a "daring" subject which has gotten under the skin of some critics and audiences who are used to more sedate subjects.

If the subject intrigues you give it a shot, just don't feel the need to go running out to see it.

NYFF 2011: This is Not a Film (2011)

The camera's must keep recording

Highly touted and much heralded "important" film for the festival actually lives up to the hype. This is simply put one of the best films at the Festival so far. It's getting one screening on October 13th and you owe it to yourself to go see it.

The film is a day in the house arrested life of Jafar Panahi. He's waiting to hear what happens with his appeal of his sentence for making a film the Iranian government didn't like. He's been sentenced to 6 years in prison and is to be banned from making a film, writing a screenplay or leaving the country for 20 years. Needing to pass the time he calls up his friend and documentary filmmaker Mojtaba Mirtahmasb to come over and go over somethings with him. What transpires is a look back on his films, a semi performance of the film he was making, and a look at his life and the life in Tehran.

I loved it.

I didn't think I would. The film starts with a groan inducing filmmaker films his own breakfast/phone calls. Its been done to death and I had fears that this was going to be something along the lines of Tahrir's home video approach.

I shouldn't have worried because very quickly the film shifts gears and it hooks you in the time it takes from the film to simply cut from one shot to another. In literally the split second I went from not wanting to see any more to willingly wanting to follow it anywhere. Talk about the magic of the movies.

This wonderful film is not only a day in the life, but also examines life in Iran (and what it takes to get by there), the need to create, the need to record, and just the human condition. Yes it's a trip through the life of the director, but as things happen and as we reflect on them we begin to realize that some how there are other issues at play.

When it was done I wanted to see it again.

I can't recommend this film enough.

I have no idea if the film has secured a regular US release but I hope it has, partly because it may help keep Jafar Panahi out of prison but also because it's a damn good film and I want to spend more time with the people inside it.

(And you have to see his pet lizard....)

NYFF 2011: Not a review of Policeman (2011)

This is not a review. I refuse to review this film. It's the first film that I've seen at a film festival since I started this blog that I simply don't want to review or acknowledge exists.

I know you're saying if the movie isn't something you like, why even mention it?

I mention it because my personal mandate is that if I see a film at a film festival, especially at a press screening I mention it.

This one I probably shouldn't.

In fairness I need to mention that I walked out of the film about 45 minutes in. Nothing much was happening and I figured my life has only so much time and I could better spend it not watching an anti-terrorist cop wander about massaging his pregnant wife's legs and dealing with a sick friend who he wants to take the fall for a raid that went partly wrong.

I'm not sure what happens in the second half, but I didn't much care. The festival write up for the film said something about it being a nail biting political thriller about the anti-terrorist squad and a group of wealthy anarchists. When I left we had the anti-terrorists but no anarchists.

I'm sorry, I shouldn't be bothering to write this up but as much as I have not liked some films at the New York Film Festival (say Miss Bala or Tahrir) those films at least had something about them that made me watch them. They had something to engage me to make me angry or annoyed or something, Policeman has nothing. Its dull people doing dull things, filmed in a manner that is the dullest I've run across in years (The open bicycle ride goes in and out of focus).

Perhaps it gets better, perhaps there is something there...and had I been engaged I might have stayed, but having seen Shame and Pina earlier in the day, and police films like Unjust earlier in the year, you need to show me something that makes me sit up and take notice. There is nothing in the film that made me sit up and take notice.

Anyway...the point is this isn't a review and I never made it to the end.

NYFF 2011: 4:44 Last Day on Earth (2011)

I attended the first public screening of Abel Ferrara's 4:44 Last Day on Earth with Mondocurry. It was a very special evening. Not only was the director there, but also stars Willem Dafoe, and Shanyn Leigh. This is a completely atypical film from Ferrara who is best know for his gritty and often violent films like King of New York and Bad Lieutenant.

The plot of the film has the end of life rapidly approaching. Our abuse of the enviorment has depleted the ozone layer and it's believed that at 4:44 (give or take a few seconds) the world will end as far as life is concerned. In their apartment on Essex Street and Delancy in Manhattan a couple tries to come to terms with the approaching end of everything.

I had been warned at several press screenings that Abel Ferrara had made a mess of a film. It was self indulgent and rambled on and on to no point. I was told that I was going to be bored to tears.

What film did the critics who spoke ill of the film see?

Okay yes the sex scenes get monotonous, but outside of that this is an intriguing film that upsets everything you know or expect from an end of the world tale.

First off in typical New York fashion, life goes on. There is traffic and food delivery.(The food delivery results in an extremely moving scene when the delivery man asks to use Dafoe's Skype hook up to say good by to his family on the far side of the world.)

Secondly there is no crazed behavior. The world seems to have accepted the end and waits for it to come. as Ferrara said after the film what would be the point of going crazy? He added that there would be no point in looting since you'd never be able to use the TV you stole.

The film is a wonderful mediation on religious thought. As the world ends Leigh is constantly watching Buddhist lectures. We see symbols from various churches. The film is very Zen, a point pointed out by the director who said the film is ultimately about how we might react if we saw the world as having no tomorrow. In the films case there is literally no tomorrow, however in our lives, there is a choice. Those choices will effect how we interact with the people around us.

Did I mention that the film is also a love story?

One of the things about the film that I loved was that it doesn't do anything you think it should. As I've said the film takes every end of the world cliche and tosses it out the window. For the most part this is a film about real people and not the movies' idea of what people are.

...though I will be the first to admit that in a couple of places the dialog can get a little too philosophical..on the other hand I can't imagine not trying to come to grasp with the end with out looking to philosophy.

I'm not going to lie and say this film is for everyone, it's not. After all I was told by several people at the press screening that the film wasn't really good. I on the other hand really liked it, especially the more I think about it.

Will you like it? Well, if you want action and sex and violence look elsewhere. As I said, this is not your typical Abel Ferrara film. If you don't like thoughtful meditations you should also look elsewhere. The same goes for anyone who wants to see the same old same old. If on the other hand you want to see a unique vision about the end of the world that is also about other things, then see this film.

Frankly, this is the sort of treasure that I think of when I think of what a film festival should be.

If you want a challenging little confection see this film.

(If what I heard was right this film is due for release on Valentines Day from IFC Films.)

Here's Willem Dafoe, Shanyn Leigh and Abel Ferrara at the post screening discussion (A huge thank you to Mondocurry for the photo)

The 99 Unbound (2010) — NYFF 2011

This feature film is the first four episodes of a TV show which is based on a comic book. The story has the possessors of the magic noor stones coming together to fight evil. There are 99 stones each of which give the owner some sort of power. The first episodes show how the groups first five members are brought together...and things are set in motion for the remaining episodes of the TV series (22 more for season one and however many that are in the now in production second season.)

As a superhero TV show this is a very well written show with real characters and no sign of the typical American cartoon stupidness. If writing and characters are enough this should run for a very long time. The problem is that the animation is very uneven computer animation that just seems really cheap at times. Its the sort of thing that Cartoon Brew and others rake of the coals as being poorly done. I'm not a fan and if I was just looking at the show on TV and not in a theater I would have just turned it off...which would have been my loss because the story gets better as it goes on.

This is a really good series and when it finally shows up on the Hub it's worth seeing.

Actually I should have said if the show shows up on the Hub since despite buying the series a year and a half ago they refuse to show it.

Why?

Because the 99 is based on the 99 attributes of Allah, which pisses off the right wing pundits in the media. Since the series, and the comic it's based on, are based on some Islamic ideas they say they are jihadist.

Of course it's not true. The comic and the TV series were started to counteract extremist ideas. The 99 is so anti-extremist that some Islamic fundamentalists are against it.

As the 99's creator Naif A Al-Mutawa said "My Characters are being judged my the color of my skin" and it's true. If I didn't tell you that the 99 was based on Islam you'd never know since there is no mention of it, and barely any mention of even nationality. It's simply good people fighting bad people for the betterment of mankind. Its all of your typical American superheros reconfigured and they can and do fit nicely with people like Batman.

Its sad that a few small minds are keeping us from seeing what is a great little TV show.

Do yourself and your kids a favor write the people at the Hub network and tell them you want to see this show. This is a really good show that will teach them to be better people all the while entertaining you and them.

NYFF 2011: A Dangerous Method (2011) (or Keira Knightley's Chin)

This film began life as a screenplay called Sabine by Christopher Hampton about Sabine Spielrein, a patient of Carl Jung's, and one of the factors that caused a rift between Jung and Sigmund Freud. The film collapsed and Hampton turned it into a play called The Talking Cure, which David Cronenberg read and liked and decided to turn into a film (adding material from a book called A Dangerous Method).

The film A Dangerous Method is one of the big films of the New York Film Festival taking a featured spot as Gala Presentation. It is also on many people's short list for a slew of Oscars come years end.

Let me cut to the chase, this is a good, but overly praised film. Its an almost (intentionally)comedic film from David Cronenberg that suffers because it isn't as meaty as most of his other films are. There is also a good chance that if enough people don't find Keira Knightley's performance as silly as I did then she may get an Oscar (for best performance by a chin).

The plot of the film has Knightley's Sebine being brought into the hospital where Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) is a doctor. He begins to use Freud's talking cure on Sabine to great effect. Eventually (about 50 minutes into the film) Jung and Freud meet and become great friends. Then things begin to sour as Jung heads into other directions and patient sent to him by Freud, nudges him into a relationship with Sabine.

It's an interesting story that never really gets all that detailed. I kept wanting to know more, but it never really told me enough that I felt like I had the whole story. To me it was a highlight reel spiced up by a couple of kinky sex scenes. (We do know that Jung did sleep with Sabine, we just don't know if spanking was involved).

Forgive the disappointment, it comes from the lack of meat. After listening to David Cronenberg Saturday at the New Yorker Festival and again after the screening I really would have liked more of the details of the relationship that he kept talking about being contained in the letters of all the principles. Again and again he spoke of how they recorded everything but we don't get it, we just get the highlights, especially with Freud, who is reduced to simply saying clever statements that just move the plot along. If he wasn't a real person I could argue he's simply a deus ex machina.

If you want a perfect example as to the lack of details consider a meeting around the time of the final break where Freud collapses. A meeting is adjourned Jung and Frued spar verbally and then Freud collapses as he is leaving. Why or what brought it on is never mentioned, it's simply used to give Freud a chance for a witty line to Jung. I'm sure the scene has great power if you know the story, but in the film, where its uncconnected to so much, the sequence just sort lies there. Clearly Cronenberg and Hampton and the rest of the cast and crew know way more than they ever impart on the audience.(This seems to be a common thread running through too many films at this years NYFF)

Its not bad, it never bad. Actually it's quite good...it's just not the great film that many people have said it is.

Lack of meatiness aside the films biggest problem is Keira Knightley. If her performance hits you wrong, you will be, like me chuckling through much of the film. Its a performance that is calculated to be showy and win an Oscar.

Its a performance that was worked out between the actress and director in an effort to show the effects of hysteria for what it is. Cronenberg said that what Knightley does is mild compared to what the records in photos and on film show of the disorder. Sabine was sent to see Jung because he was suppose to be able to help her with her hysteria but we don't see any anyone else so we are seeing Sabine in a vacuum with the result that her thrusting jaw seems laughable. I really mean that, devoid of anything we can compare it to, we see no other patient with the maladay,it comes off as a great deal of jaw motion and body twisting that just seems like show offy behavior from a well know actress. Actually we see no other patients for much of the film, we only see one of Jung's patients late in the game and she is sedate.

Cronenberg said that he wanted Knightley to behave like this because she was going to have to say dirty things and that the battle to say the words and repress them was going to make her thrust and move her jaw. I can buy the reason but did anyone actually look at it and her performance which in the early part of the film makes her look like Terry Gilliam in one of his maddest moments during a Monty Python sketch.(I have yet to see any of it in any clips because does look silly)

I probably shouldn't say that once she is cured we are left with a Russian accent that seems overly silly...but it's there and it's never real.

I'm not going to blame Knightley for any of it since it was clear that it's all Cronenberg's doing.

Again I need to say this is not a bad film, but it's not a great one either. Its a pleasant time killer that will be worth seeing when it comes out in a couple of weeks, I can't see running off to the Gala at the Film Festival.

I'm disappointed.

Partly because the earlier reviews promised so much, but also because I kind of expected something... more... from director Cronenberg. I've been a fan for decades and always left one of his films feeling like I had a big sit down meal. This time it's more like having a donut on the fly.

(I know I promised a greater discussion of what Cronenberg said at the New Yorker Festival, but the shape of the review hasn't allowed for it. Maybe I'll whip something up once the festival is over)

NYFF 2011: Miss Bala (2011)

Let me not beat around the bush, I think this is one of the stupidest films of the year. It's a film that makes no logical sense from the get go and makes less it goes on.

This is being picked as a shoe in for at the very least on Oscar nomination.

Really?

Are these people seeing the same film as me?

Apparently.

(The next three paragraphs are all spoilers)

The plot of the film concerns Laura, a beauty contest wanna be. She and her friend manage to get themselves into a beauty contest. Before they can go buy a dress the friend's boyfriend shows up and she goes off to party with him. Laura tracks them down at a club and tries to talk her friend into leaving. While in the bathroom a bunch of drug dealers come in and kill a good many of the people in the place. Laura escapes in part because the head bad guy takes a shine to her and tells her to just leave.

The next day Laura tries to find her friend but can't do so. Distraught she turns to a traffic cop who turns her over to the drug dealers. The drug dealer takes a bigger liking to her and asks her to drive a car and leave it where he tels her. She does so...

As the film goes on we get some bizarre turns of fate as Laura's house is taken over, she's used as a mule for money, gets involved in a fire fight, and wins a beauty contest (the last three on a single day), raped, used as bait for a traitor, gets involved in another fire fight, is set up, arrested, paraded in front of the media and then dumped on a street handcuffed.

(End the major spoilers)

I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I wanted to leave, but I found that every time I started to get up some whacked out twist happens and I stayed because I couldn't believe what I was seeing.

None of this makes sense.

First off how stupid is Laura to begin with? Is she that out of touch at the start Apparently. In a city where the cops are better armed than many armies and the sky is filled with the smoke of their clashes she seems to be rather oblivious to what's going on. Worse she continually does stupider and stupider things...like going back to the drug dealer when she was free.

And there are other things that don't make sense, for example the drug dealers continuously drag Laura along. In the middle of a fire fight they go to great length to drag her along. Why? To protect themselves? She knows nothing? Simply because if they don't the film stops.

Laura signs up for a beauty contest and wins it two days later...two days despite needing to learn dance steps...and never mind how she just steps into the event...huh?

And if someone can explain the bedroom shoot out let me know since I have to no idea what happens...it makes no sense. (actually none of this does)

I know some one is going to say that the film is just a metaphor, and I say nertz to you. Even a metaphor has to make sense on some level, here it doesn't. (as for it being based on a real story, maybe but they drained the reality from it)

What is it suppose to be, everyone is corrupt?

Bah.

The good characters are simply too stupid. The bad guys aren't that much better. I don't blame the actors who are good, I blame the writer and director who came up with this mess.

The only thing I can say is that the bridge shoot out is great, but everything else is just jaw droppingly stupid.

I know some of you may say I'm missing something, or that I don't get it. But trust me I do, I really do. I just can't forgive the film its numerous omissions and stupid turns (and they are stupid, watch the film and see what happens and you tell me its not dumb). This is one of the stupidest films of the year.

Stupid? Does that mean it's bad? Yes, because it's so illogical that anything that might be good is wrecked by the stupidity.

Avoid this one...and let's hope this doesn't get noticed by Oscar.

NYFF 2011: Susan Orlean, Rin Tin Tin, a big thank you and other tales

a
This is not going to be a straight review. As we wind down our last week of dedicated New York Film Festival (we shift gears Saturday with the first of the two live action Tin Tin films plus a review of End of Animal, the next film at the Korean Cultural Service next Tuesday night) I'm going for something a little different.

First and foremost I should take this time out and thank the staff and particularly the volunteers of the New York Film Festival. I may be mixed about the films at this years festival but everyone from the festival has been great. They have made the experience in both the public and press screenings a true joy. Why anyone would give them a hard time beyond me, and when it's happened (I've seen some really bad behavior) they have dealt with it with grace and smiles.(I'll relate an example in a bit)

Today was a long day, starting with press screenings for two films I'll have reviewed in the next couple of days This is Not a Film , which is one of the best films I've seen, and A Dangerous Method which is good but being over praised.

After that I went off to lunch and for a long walk before heading back to Lincoln Center.

Standing on line to get into the Susan Orlean talk I had to deal with some rude behavior from one lady who refused to get into the line. She wanted to know what the line was for, so I told her...over and over again...she then insisted she didn't have to wait because she had a ticket. I said so did I, and then she said, no she had a ticket and showed it to me, so I and several other people showed her ours. Undeterred she headed in until she was gently steered to the back of the line by a volunteer. (Inside this person tried to take other people's seats because she wanted an aisle one...that lasted until she was yelled at by another patron)

The thing I bought a ticket for was Susan Orlean:A Lecture on Rin Tin Tin plus a screening of 1925's A Clash of Wolves. What I got that had almost nothing to do with Rin Tin Tin, and a great deal to do with Ms Orlean. (Ms Orlean is the author of a recent book on Rin Tin Tin that has just hit the bestseller list.)

We first got a video that told briefly of Ms Orleans' interest in Rin Tin Tin and a very very cursory bio of the dog.

Then we got some thank yous and Ms Orlean introducing one of the dogs from the NYPD canine unit (who has no connection to Rin Tin Tin other than being of the same breed)

Ms Orlean then read a couple of passages from the book, about her travel to find Rinty's birth place, a passage about her going to find his grave and a passage about how Rin Tin Tin will last forever. There was only fleeting references to the bio of the dog. And when it was over I learned almost nothing about Rin Tin Tin, but a great deal about Ms Orlean and her travels. (I've read a couple of reviews for the book which indicated that her book was the same way)

It was, simply put, the biggest waste of time I've ever had at the New York Film Festival (and possibly at a Lincoln Center event of any sort). It was hands down the most inane talk I've seen. While I think that the idea of a talk on Rin Tin Tin in connection with the film festival is a great one, I think someone should have checked her notes and kept her on point. I paid to hear a talk on Rin Tin Tin and not on Ms Orlean's travels.

After almost an hour she said that they were going to start the film and that she would come back with a Q&A and a book signing.

Clash of the Wolves is a once thought lost film that was found in South Africa in the 1970's and restored a couple of years ago by the Library of Congress. It's the story of Lobo (Rin Tin Tin) a half wolf half dog who along with his pack is forced into the desert from the forest by a forest fire. The wolves begin hunting cattle, however Lobo becomes domesticated to a certain degree when he is helped by a tender foot looking for borax. Add into the mix a romance, a dopey ranch hand and a claim jumping chemist and you have the making of a good, but not particularly great comedy western.

For me it was nice to see a Rin Tin Tin film on the big screen. Is it the best I've seen? No, but it still was a great deal of fun. If you get the chance to see it do give it a shot.

When the film ended Ms Orlean reappeared and started a brief Q&A. I on the other hand disappeared, I had no more patience for her self-centered nonsense.

For me it was a day of good films ruined by some idle chatter.

Sorry Ms Orlean I wanted to hear about the dog, not you.

NYFF 2011: Sleeping Sickness (2011)

Disappointing film about Ebbo, a doctor in Cameroon. He and his wife have been in the country for many years treating the locals, particularly a local outbreak of sleeping sickness. However time is running down and Ebbo and his wife are going to be heading back to Germany where their daughter is in school. However as time winds down Ebbo is having second second thoughts about leaving.

Three years later Ebbo is still there, though his wife and daughter are still in Germany. This second half of the film is more focused on a French doctor of African descent who has been sent into the bush to assess Ebbo's work on combating the title disease.

This is a just okay little film. Despite some great performances, particularly Pierre Bokman as Ebbo, the film never really amounts to much. The trouble comes from the films construction, which switches tracks just as things are getting interesting.

The first part of the film, where Ebbo and his wife plan to leave and struggle with it's implications, seems at first to be going over well worn ground. We've seen these Europeans in Africa stories before and it's not until late in the first half, as Ebbo breaks down and begins to realize he really can't go home that the film gains traction.

Sadly the film then suddenly jumps three years ahead and we're in France watching a young doctor making the choice to give things up and go to Africa and do something important. Again the film begins to hit all of our cliched notions of a fish out of water (intensified by the idea of it being a black European). The film then begins to gain traction as he at last connects with Ebbo who has now clearly been too long in the bush. As the film begins to once more to spring to life the film then again switches tracks but instead of staying on some course it goes off the rails as the film careens to a close with a night time hunting sequence. What happens is not what you think, the film has suddenly become an exercise in magical realism and it wrecks the film. My attitude was you must be joking...apparently not.

Its not a bad film, but I can't see actually going out of my way to see it. Its a film that goes over familiar thematic territory even as it's charting new places visually. This is more the sort of film I wouldn't have minded stumbling across had I found it on cable or Netflix, but it isn't something I'd have been happy to have made a special trip to see in a theater.

We interupt coverage of the NYFF to talk about SCARY MOVIES

As of right now there is no second post of a New York Film Festival film tonight. We have more posts coming, but we're taking the night off to chill and decompress...

...or we were until the press release for this years Scary Movies at Lincoln Center arrived in our mailbox...

What you're not impressed? You should be since last years festival not only gave us a bunch of great old films, but also the new classics or near classic films Stake Land, Village of Shadows and Black Death.

This year has lots of potential with a chance to revisit Reanimator with the director and star in attendance, Dark Waters one of the best horror films you never heard of (trust me this is a great film), plus a rare chance to see one of the Roger Corman Poe films on a big screen.

I can't wait.

For those who are interested I give you the good parts of the press release:

SCARY MOVIES 5
October 27-31

FSLC’s popular Scary Movies film series returns with a collection of hair-raising premieres and fright classics. The schedule of films includes highlights such as the first New York showings of Ben Wheatley’s genre-crossing KILL LIST, Ti West’s supernatural caper THE INNKEEPERS, Scott Leberecht’s fresh take on vampirism MIDNIGHT SON, and the deliciously grotesque multiple-director omnibus THE THEATRE BIZARRE, as well as Mariano Baino’s 1993 nunsploitation film, DARK WATERS.

Scary Movies will also offer a very rare live-stage performance in concert with the films screened, as FSLC presents a special live performance of “Nevermore,” Jeffrey Combs’s one-man portrayal of the Father of Gothic Horror, Edgar Allan Poe, directed by Stuart Gordon and written by Dennis Paoli. The performance will mark the first-ever staging in New York City. The presentation of “Nevermore” will help kick off a Halloween dedicated Poe, including screenings of Stuart Gordon’s “The Black Cat” from the Masters of Horror season 2, as well as the Roger Corman/Vincent Price gem HOUSE OF USHER.

Finally, “The Black Cat” will be part of a trio of feline terror within the Scary Movies series, including the North American premiere of the brand-new K-Horror film THE CAT and a rare showing of the 1969 film EYE OF THE CAT, starring Michael Sarrazin and Eleanor Powell.

Combs and Gordon will also be on hand to introduce a screening of their gore classic RE-ANIMATOR. And last but certainly not least will be the screenings of two masterpieces of the occult and the supernatural: THE SEVENTH VICTIM and POLTERGEIST.
Scary Movies 5 was programmed by Laura Kern & Gavin Smith.


Films, Descriptions and Schedule

THE CAT (2011) 106min
Director: Byun Seung-wook
Country: South Korea
Following the mysterious death one of her clients, young pet groomer So-hee (an very engaging Park Min-yeong) temporarily inherits the deceased woman’s cat, whose presence proceeds to open the door to a ghostly past. Koreans have been known to categorize cats as wicked creatures, but this quietly creepy tale cannot be accused of animal cruelty. In fact, it manages to serve as something of revenge for those that have been abandoned and mistreated.
THE CAT screens at the Walter Reade Theater on Thursday, October 27 at 7:00PM and Friday, October 28 at 4:15PM.

DARK WATERS (1993) 94min
Director: Mariano Baino
Country: Russia/Italy/U.K.
A woman returns to the island of her birth to investigate a convent her father had been financially supporting and discovers it houses a group of deadly nuns at the service of a demon cult. The film stars Louise Salter.
DARK WATERS will screen Friday, October 28 at 6:30PM.
Director Mariano Baino will attend and participate in a post-screening Q&A.

EYE OF THE CAT (1969) 102min
Director: David Lowell Rich
Country: U.S.
A mod rarity with Michael Sarrazin as an estranged nephew who resurfaces just in time to try to make it into his sick aunt’s will. Following a scheme concocted by an alluring stranger (Gayle Hunnicutt), the feline phobic moves into the house, unaware that his aunt redefines the term “cat lady.” A twisty, stylish thriller with a fun score by Lalo Schifrin, costumes by Edith Head, and stunning San Francisco locations.It also features human catfights and co-stars Eleanor Parker.
EYE OF THE CAT screens Sunday, October 30 at 4:45PM.

HOUSE OF USHER (1960) 79min
Director: Roger Corman
Country: U.S.
Corman’s classic treatment of the Poe story focuses on Phillip who has arrived at the Usher mansion to discover that his loved one, Madeline and her brother have been afflicted with a family curse. The film stars Vincent Price.
HOUSE OF USHER will screen Sunday, October 30 at 1:15PM and Monday, October 31 at 4:30PM.

THE INNKEEPERS (2011) 102min
Director: Ti West
Country: U.S.
Two hotel employees scheduled to work during the hotel’s final weekend in business decide to explore the place and investigate whether or not the place is haunted. The film stars Sara Paxton and Kelly McGillis. THE INNKEEPERS is a Magnet Releasing film.
THE INNKEEPERS screens on Friday, October 28 at 9:00PM.
Director Ti West will attend and participate in a post-screening Q&A.

KILL LIST (2011) 95min
Director: Ben Wheatley
Country: U.K.
Ben Wheatley’s follow up to DOWN TERRACE focuses on a war veteran suffering through a long and stressful period of unemployment coaxed into joining an old army buddy to perform a series of hits for pay in order to support his wife and little boy. However, the deeper they delve into their “kill list”, the deeper they descend into the clutches of a murderous cult. The film stars Neil Maskell and MyAnna Buring. KILL LIST is an IFC Films release.
KILL LIST screens at the Walter Reade Theater on Thursday, October 27 at 9:15PM.

MASTERS OF HORROR: “The Black Cat” (2007) 58min
Suffering from writer’s block and short on cash, Edgar Allan Poe (played by Jeffrey Combs) is tormented by a black cat that will either destroy him or inspire him to write one of his greatest works.
With..
“Nevermore – An Evening with Edgar Allan Poe” 90min
Director: Stuart Gordon
Live stage performance of Jeffrey Combs’ critically acclaimed one-man show/portrayal of Edgar Allan Poe. The production is a dramatic re-creation of the readings that Poe performed during the final years of his short life. Set in 1848 a year after the death of his beloved young wife Virginia, and at the height of his fame as the author of “The Raven,” we watch as he is undone by his own self-destructive tendencies, or in his words: “the imp of the perverse.”
MASTERS OF HORROR: “The Black Cat” and the live stage performance of “Nevermore – An Evening with Edgar Allan Poe” will be presented on Monday, October 31 at 6:30PM.

MIDNIGHT SON (2011) 88min
Director: Scott Leberecht
Country: U.S.
A young man with a rare skin disorder that gives him an insatiable appetite for blood and sensitivity to light meets and falls in love with a beautiful bartender with secrets of her own. The film stars Zak Kilberg, Maya Parish and Tracey Walter.
MIDNIGHT SON will screen Sunday, October 30 at 7:00PM.
Director Scott Leberecht, producer Matt Compton and Jo D. Jonz (from the cast) will attend and participate in a post-screening Q&A.

POLTERGEIST(1982) 114min
Director: Tobe Hooper
Country: U.S.
Produced by Steven Spielberg and directed by Tobe Hooper, the classic thrill-ride of a horror film focuses on a family that discovers they share their home with a host of malevolent ghosts.
POLTERGEIST will screen Saturday, October 29 at 5:15PM.

RE-ANIMATOR (1985) 86min
Director: Stuart Gordon
Country: U.S.
A dedicated student at a medical college and his girlfriend become involved in bizarre experiments centering around the re-animation of dead tissue when an odd new student arrives on campus.The film stars Jeffrey Combs, Bruce Abbott and Barbara Crampton.
RE-ANIMATOR screens Sunday, October 30 at 9:30PM.
Director Stuart Gordon and Jeffrey Combs will attend and introduce the screening.

THE SEVENTH VICTIM (1943) 71min
Director: Mark Robson
Country: U.S.
A woman in search of her missing sister uncovers a Satanic cult in New York's Greenwich Village, and finds that they may have something to do with her sibling's random disappearance.The film stars Kim Hunter, Tom Conway and Jean Brooks.
THE SEVENTH VICTIM screens Sunday, October 30 at 3:00PM.

THE THEATRE BIZARRE (2011) 114min
Directors: Douglas Buck, Buddy Giovinazzo, David Gregory, Karim Hussain, Jeremy Kasten, Tom Savini & Richard Stanley
Country: U.S./France
A young woman is obsessed with what appears to be a long abandoned theatre. Sneaking inside, she discovers a show unlike any other being performed for hosted by an eerie human puppet. The mechanical MC proceeds to introduce six tales of horror for her “entertainment”. The film starsUdo Kier, Tom Savini and Debbie Rochon. THE THEATRE BIZARRE is a Severin Films release.
THE THEATRE BIZARRE screens Saturday, October 29 at 7:30PM.
Udo Kier and directors Douglas Buck, Buddy Giovinazzo, David Gregory and Jeremy Kasten will attend and participate in a post-screening Q&A.


Screening Schedule for SCARY MOVIES 5

Screening Venue:
The Film Society of Lincoln Center – Walter Reade Theater
165 West 65 Street, between Broadway & Amsterdam (upper level)

Thursday, October 27:
7:00PM THE CAT(106min)
9:15PM KILL LIST (95min)

Friday, October 28:
4:15PM THE CAT (106min)
6:30PM DARK WATERS (94min)
**screening followed by Q&A with director Mariano Baino
9:00PM THE INNKEEPERS (102min)
**screening followed by Q&A with director Ti West

Saturday, October 29:
5:15PM POLTERGEIST (114min)
7:30PM THE THEATRE BIZARRE (114min)
**screening followed by Q&A with Udo Kier and Buddy Giovinazzo, Douglas Buck, David Gregory and Jeremy Kasten as well as a post-screening reception

Sunday, October 30:
1:15PM HOUSE OF USHER (79min)
3:00PM THE SEVENTH VICTIM (71min)
4:45PM EYE OF THE CAT (102min)
7:00PM MIDNIGHT SON (88min)
**screening followed by Q&A with director Scott Leberecht, producer Matt Compton and Jo D. Jonz from the cast
9:30PM RE-ANIMATOR(86min)
**screening will be introduced by Stuart Gordon & Jeffrey Combs

Monday, October 31:
4:30PM HOUSE OF USHER (79min)
6:30PM MASTERS OF HORROR: “The Black Cat” (58min) +
Live Performance of “Nevermore – An Evening with Edgar Allan Poe” (90min)
**screening and live stage performance will be followed by reception

NYFF 2011: Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (2011)

One of the best films I've seen so far at the New York Film Festival, this is a long and slow (but in a good way) film that is absolutely a must see when it screens on October 8th.

The plot of the film has prosecutor, a doctor and some police taking two confessed murders into the countryside to find the body they dumped. The trouble is that with night falling and that much of the landscape all looking the same things become complicated (which fountain was it near? What tree?). As the night wears on we get to know more and more about what happened but also a great deal about many of the people in the caravan.

The first thing you need to know when you see this, is that you have to hang into the end. What you think is going on isn't always so and very often a glance, a look or an off handed remark will say way more than the seeming random nature at first indicates, or it is a clue to something else later on or earlier. Things build all the way to the end to the point that when you get to the end you'll want to jump back in at some point to see how it all goes together.

I said at some point because this is a long film (a solid two and a half hours) and it is very deliberately paced. What do I mean by deliberately paced? Things often seem to unfold in real time, with long takes of people standing staring or simply talking while they wait for one of the killers and his police minders to go off and try and find the corpse. Think of it as the reality of police work, a job that involves lots of waiting.

While it is deliberate in it's pacing the film is never boring. The dialog is often wickedly funny. These are hardened cops who are trying to balance their home lives (a cop is dealing with not picking up a prescription) with the job (there is a body to be found). We also get a few philosophical questions about whether things just happen or if what we take to be say a miracle have a real explanation (The answer here is heart breaking).

I was riveted, as was both John and Bully.

I can't recommend this film enough. Its a film that is both intellectually stimulating and highly entertaining, which is a combination is rare supply these days.

And if you can, go see this film on the big screen. Its shot in a gorgeous widescreen that is going to be lost an all but the biggest big screen TVs.

As I said one of the best films at the Film Festival so far.

NYFF 2011: Ben Hur (1959) Restored

This is only going to be a few random comments and not a full scale review because Ben Hur is too well known a film to fit the main criteria of this blog... on the other hand it's not everyday you get to see one of the greatest spectacles ever made on a truly huge screen. Yesterday at 1030 in the morning I got that opportunity when the New York Film Festival ran the 50th Anniversary restoration of Ben Hur.

This is being called a 50th anniversary restoration because it was begun on the 50th anniversary of the films release. This edition has been just put out on DVD and Bluray and can be had from the unusual places.

What can't be had at the usual places is the chance to see the film on a big screen, which is why when it was announced I plunked down my money for a ticket immediately. This film is simply so wide a widescreen that unless you are seeing it properly projected the image has been tinkered with.

Seeing the film again for the first time I was blown away by the sense of scale that comes across on the big screen. Those were big sets and it the effects, done waaaaaay before digital effects often put some of the computer generated crap of today to shame.(Though to be fair the restoration is so good you know can see what is real and what isn't in several scenes). Trust me, unless you have seen this film on a big screen you've not seen this film.

I should also state that seeing the film on the big screen I noticed something that I never really noticed before when I have watched the film at home, namely that the first hour of the film, basically everything until Ben Hur is sent to the gallies, is really bad. Yes, I know it's set up, but damn if it isn't painful to watch. It's at the point where Hur meet Christ for the first time that the film jumps suddenly and magically to life (Its goes from 4 out of 10 to about 24 out of 10). I should state that the reason I haven't noticed it is that because I frequently don't just watch an old favorite film like this, I watch and do other things, and honestly I must have been really not paying attention for a really long time. If you've never seen this before just stick with it because it gets a whole lot better.

Sadly, but not fatally the screening of the wonderful restoration was marred by technical glitches. The digital file got out of sync so that through a chunk of the first half the sound and picture drifted apart. The picture quality also degraded to the point that I was wondering what was so special about this version...and then they fixed the problems and suddenly it was like magic, I could see what they had done.

If you've never seen this film before you should do so. If you ever get the chance to see it on a big screen you must do so, because it will knock your socks off...

NYFF 2011: A Colt is my Passport (1967) (Nikkatsu Centennial)

Another film screening as part of this years New York Film Festival Salute to Nikkatsu Studios that is also available on DVD from the Criterion Eclipse imprint.

This time out it's a cynical spaghetti western style tale transposed to Japan and a Yakuza setting. Some may argue that the only thing that is spaghetti western like is the music which apes the scores of people like Ennio Morricone, but the basic story of an antihero who completes his task only to be be double crossed by his employer is pure Euro Western fodder.

The plot has assassin Joe Shishido and his partner asked to kill a crime boss with in a very short time. Told he will only be paid if his employer know the target is dead, Shishido kills him in his employers presence. They are grateful but some what not amused. Told to hide out in a flea bit motel the two assassins are constantly forced to take steps to remain alive as the bad guys come looking for them.

Why this film is considered Noir is beyond me since other than being a crime story the film has none of the hall marks of noir, there are almost no night scenes, there is no femme fatal, there is no doomed hero done in by hubris, nor is there any of the other criteria for being included in the genre.

I could argue that it's a western and make pretty good case for it, from it's music, dusty settings, a fallen woman with a heart of gold, rich bad guys wanting to consolidate power, and a hero who is way smarter and way more resourceful than the poor minions set to kill him. Compare it to any of the Sergio Leone films from the 60's and you'll see what I mean.

If it's not abundantly clear I love this film. To be completely honest I had the Nikkatsu box set for a while, but I wasn't in the mood to see any of it. Then I realized that the film was screening at this years New York Film Festival and pulled out my set. I sat down to watch this and Rusty Knife out of obligation and not genuine desire.

Sometime obligation is a good thing.

Putting the film on before bed I figured I'd watch this for a half an hour and then pick it up in the morning. Then I started to think maybe I should just wait and watch it with my dad...and then I said I'll watch it with my dad, but only after I watch the movie to it's end first.

What a joy this film is.

Smart and funny and tense, this is the sort of film that many recent American films strive to be. Pick any film where you have a hero who turns out to be wiser than the enemy that has come out of Hollywood in the last umpteenth years and you'll see that those films don't hold a candle to this one. Certainly this film is lacking in witty one liners, but when you're this well made a movie one liners aren't needed.

Shot in a beautiful widescreen that really uses the frame to it's fullest potential this is one film I highly recommend seeing on the big screen if you get the chance. Sure it will look good on your big screen at home, but trust me when I say that this really is a movie for a movie theater.(this film has only one screening at the film festival on the 12th at 640pm.)

One of my finds of the year, I suspect that this is going to be a film I return to repeatedly over the years.

David Cronenberg: New Yorker Festival 2011

Today was a busy day at the movies, It began with the restored Ben Hur at the New York Film Festival (a few thoughts will be posted tomorrow), continued on with The new HBO documentary on George Harrison (look for John to post a review soon) and it ended up with a 90 minute talk between David Denby and director David Cronenberg as part of the New Yorker Festival.

When it was over Denby was talking to several people waiting in line to get out and he remarked that Cronenberg was probably the most intellectual and smartest director he's ever met. Having listened to him speak I would agree, but I would add he is also one of the funniest.

Beginning with Cronenberg's latest film, A Dangerous Method, about Freud, Jung and the woman that came between them, and working backwards (kind of) this was a free form discussion of the films and the things that interest the director.

Because it was free form its kind of hard to talk really explain what was said, I'll have to see if this was recorded and put on line streaming. However I can give you some random highlights of the things that stuck with me.

-Cronenberg discounts the supernatural and religion and he said that the way he made the Dead Zone work for him was to view the Christopher Walken character as kind of psychotic.

-He has not discounted doing another horror film. He said that the problem was that the film scripts he's been offered have only been reworkings of things he's done before and he refuses to do that.

-He said that after Spider no one wanted to hire him. He said that being more or less an independent filmmaker allowed him to continue on.(He also said that he has been trying to sell out for years but no one will give him any money)

-He was condemned for making Shivers with money from the Canadian government, however it was the first film that they financed to ever show a profit.

-No one would talk either lead in The Fly or Dead Ringers. He said that with The Fly everyone was afraid of acting through all the make up, while with Dead Ringers everyone was afraid of the subtly required for the twins.

-Cronenberg said all of his films have elements of comedy and are very funny if you click with the humor.

-He said that he doesn't use storyboards and has no idea how a film will look before he's shooting. He said he will rehearse a scene with his actors with out the crew and then bring the crew in and show them the piece of theater they have created and then work out how to shoot it from there. He's always asked if the film looks as he thought it would and he really can't say yes because he doesn't know what it looks like until its done.

There was a great deal of discussion of the new film, however I'm hoping to be able to get into the film this week so I'll leave any discussion of that for when and if we run a review.

When the 90 minutes expired there was a general feeling of sadness. There was simply too much to talk to Cronenberg about and simply not enough time. All I can say is that if you ever get a chance to hear him speak, or better yet hang out and talk to him, jump at the chance. He is truly amazing.

Addendum:
It appears they didn't record the Cronenberg piece (officially). However there are other talks available for viewing on a pay per view basis. They can be found here.

NYFF 2011 Carnage (2011)

I saw some of Roman Polanski's latest film Carnage which is an adaptation of Yasmina Reza's award winning stage play God of Carnage about two sets of parents to discuss civilly the fight that occurred between their kids.

I saw the source on stage with the original Broadway cast (Marsha Gay Harden, Jeff Daniels, James Gandolfini and Hope Davis.) They were loose and real and very funny, despite the play seeming to be way too formal to ever completely shake the notion of being constructed, the cast sold it.

Polanski's film has Jodie Foster, Kate Winslett, Christoph Waltz and John C Reilly as the pairs of parents who end up reduced to their basest level. Sadly despite being opened up the film feels even more artificial than the stage play.

Blame it on Polanski who has made a too formal film. Also blame the actors who are all too obviously acting and never letting it all hang out. They simply don't feel like real people. Lastly blame the trimming down of the script which lost a chunk of material since the play which ran around 95 minutes on stage, now runs about 75 without end credits.

Admittedly I only saw some of the film, and I didn't make it all the way to the end but what I saw never clicked with me. Its not bad but it's way too artsy fartsy for my tastes. I'd wait for cable or Netflix.

NYFF 2011: Rusty Knife (1958) (Nikkatsu Centennial)

Screening as part of the Nikkatsu retrospective, but also available as part of the Eclipse set Nikkatsu Noir, Rusty Knife is for much of it's running time a solid little crime drama.

The film opens with a crime boss getting arrested yet again. Sadly the DA doesn't have enough evidence and is forced to let him go. Reading of the arrest one of three witnesses to a murder five years earlier writes a letter to the DA saying he'll testify to seeing the murder. He also foolishly sends a letter to the crime boss asking for more hush money. While the mob manages to remove this loose end, it also puts the two other witnesses (who've since gone on the straight and narrow) in danger when the police begin snooping around. The fact that no one, either on the police force nor in the mob, will let things alone set the rest of the film in motion.

Great looking widescreen black and white photography sets an instant mood. This is classic Film Noir territory, not to mention the territory that is pure Japanese crime film.

I don't know what it is but there is something about the cinematography, the use of light and dark and especially the use of widescreen that puts the vast majority of similar American films to shame. Sure Hollywood more or less invented the Noir genre but the Japanese managed to come up with way of shooting their stories that instantly suck you in and make you sit up and take notice.

For me the film is a mixed bag in regard to it's story. The basic plot of two gangsters who have given up the life and are now straight, only to be sucked in by the police snooping, is a good one. I like how the film sends up conventions to expand the story in ways neither we nor it's characters expect (there are revelations about supposedly long buried events that bring back old emotions).

What I don't like is that after about an hour the film takes a turn and the film sets off after the real mastermind behind it all. Its the point where a film that avoids convention by playing with them becomes down right conventional. To me it seems like it was simply added on to get the run time up to a certain length. Worse the identity of Mr Big is obvious from his first second on screen. Granted there aren't that many possible suspects but they could have used a tad more creativity, or better yet went completely off the board. It doesn't kill the film it just sort of deflates it.

Definitely worth seeing. If you can manage to get to one of the screenings at Walter Reed do so. The use of widescreen will be lessened on anything smaller than it's massive screen. (It screens October 8 at 640). If you can't make it do try and pick up the Nikkatsu Noir box set from Criterion's Eclipse label since it's five films worth your time.