Twenty Minutes with the Yes Men
By Adam Spector, DC Film Society Member
It seems no World Trade Organization (WTO) conference is complete without massive demonstrations and arrests. Andy Bilchbaum and Mike Bonnano waged their fight against the WTO differently--by pretending to be the WTO. Bilchbaum and Bonnano practice what they call “identity correction,” portraying an organization as what they believe it really is, not how it portrays itself. They set up a parody WTO website, which worked so well that many people did not realize it was a parody. Bilchbaum and Bonnano found themselves receiving invitations to speak on behalf of the WTO, which they eagerly accepted.
The Yes Men, a new documentary from Chris Smith, Sarah Price (both of whom co-directed American Movie) and Dan Ollman, follows Bilchbaum and Bonnano as they speak on television and at business conferences under the WTO’s guise. Much of the humor comes from their outlandish presentations (such as offering a gold suit with a giant phallus as the latest in corporate efficiency). But what’s even funnier is that they get away with it. In some ways, that’s also the scary part--that so few people questioned what they said. Their audiences, filled with educated people, just sit and nod. The Yes Men skillfully demonstrates that many people will accept anything if the messenger has an appearance of authority.
Never ones to rest on their laurels, the Yes Men had just finished infiltrating the Republican National Convention when I talked with them a few weeks ago:
Adam Spector: It’s fall of an election year. There are plenty of politically themed, more left-wing films coming out. Do you think this is the right time for The Yes Men?
Andy Bilchbaum: Yeah, it’s great. George Bush has created an incredible ferment in the film community, and you see all of these incredible films coming out because of the situation where a completely unreasonable and bizarre radical government just spurs creative people to make films about it. So, yeah the ground has been laid by all kinds of films. Yeah, I think people are ready to see it. Maybe by MTV...
Mike Bonnano: Yeah, there’s a little bit of that too. So many reality shows have become so popular that I think people are much more accepting of documentaries as well. But also people are just craving in-depth material. You can’t turn on the TV news and expect to see anything longer than a 1½ to 3 minute segment about a really important issue. When somebody comes out with a film that treats the issues with more depth, or, in our case, more humor and not the depth, then people really want to go see it.
AS: Let’s stay on that for a moment. Many groups have gone after the WTO straight on. Why do you feel that humor is a more effective way to do that?
AB: We don’t think it’s a more effective way to do that. We just stumbled into it. We’re kind of comedians in a sense. We’re funny people. Really, we’re hysterical people, very clever. We’re extremely clumsy people. We stumble into things. We were doing a lot of stuff along this line for a couple of years in different ways and one thing led to another and we ended up... We’re also politically engaged of course. We’ve been doing politically engaged stuff forever.
MB: Do you even remember the question?
AB: Yes, I vaguely remember the question. It was all over the news that tens of thousands of people were converging on Seattle so we just set up this website and it’s how we stumbled on to it. It wasn’t that we chose the WTO as a particularly good target or this means of doing it as a better way of doing it. It happened and it turns out to be a good symbol... Humor has managed to get our story across to a lot of people but the other ways of doing things are more essential. Changing laws on the ground, going and lobbying to have things changed in a substantial way.
MB: But this is a great way to get people interested who might otherwise not be. OK, somebody who right now doesn’t care about what global trade might mean to them might go see this movie and think, the next time they hear the words “free trade,” they might think “Hey, I know that’s not necessarily what they say it is. Freedom for trade doesn’t necessarily mean freedom for people. It doesn’t mean that everybody is benefitting somehow.”
AB: And maybe they can’t necessarily trust the people who are working on this...
AS: You’ve done this type of thing before, but did it get any harder to go in and infiltrate these groups with this camera crew following you?
AB: Psychologically it was easier because there were people there who were friendly. But you mean was it technically more difficult? And no, they just seemed to think it was normal, the audiences we spoke to and the organizers. They just thought “Well the WTO is very important, of course they would have a camera crew. They (the crew) made up stories like we we’re doing a documentary about the textiles of the future. They always made up stories like that. But it wasn’t really that necessary.
AS: Along those lines, one of the reasons you’ve been able to succeed as much as you have is because of your anonymity. Now, with the film coming out, are you at all concerned that you will lose your anonymity, that it will be harder to do this type of thing in the future?
MB: Not to worry. We’ve got plans. If we get popular and famous enough to lose our anonymity, then we’re going to do an extreme makeover TV show. We’ll be the first guests and hosts. You’ll never know. We may just get ourselves made over to look like this guy [points to picture of President Bush], our smiling current President leader guy. Yeah, you never really know.
AS: And you were saying before we started that this was the next item on your agenda.
MB: Yeah, we’ve turned our attention to that fellow who lives in the White House. It’s an uphill struggle correcting his identity but we’re going to try.
AS: How do you two support yourselves? How do you make money for room and board? I wouldn’t think that this would bring in money.
AB: There’s a big market for it, it turns out, but yeah, we both have day jobs, or I used to have a day job. Recently I’ve been living off grants that we have gotten and savings. I’ve been fired from a number of different kinds of work. Computer programming, teaching, writing jobs.
MB: And I currently work at a university.
AS: Troy University?
MB: Yeah, very supportive, sort of. They don’t necessarily know about it, but I did just get tenure.[laughs]
AS: Well, I’m sure the students are (supportive).
MB: Yeah, they are. I care about teaching. I make sure they don’t get too frustrated by my weird other life.
AS: What are your hopes for this film, both in terms of your own organization and your greater goals?
MB: We hope that we sell more tickets than The Passion of the Christ. [laughs] We hope that church groups gather and promote it like they did The Passion of the Christ.
AB: If we gross even 3/4 of what The Passion did we’ll be happy. [laughs]
AS: Did the directors make demands on you as they were filming or did they stay back and let you guys do your thing?
AB: They all stood back and followed us basically. We would do things and they would ask us to recapitulate. We would have to stop, look at the camera and say something periodically but the interference wasn’t greater than that. Very often we forgot they were there.
AS: Both when you were giving your presentations and when you were planning them?
AB: Yeah. Surely we ended up thinking “Wow, this might be in the movie.” So that influenced us in some way, but it wasn’t the main thing. The main thing was to keep trying to make the message get across to the audiences.
AS: The golden phallus uniform, for lack of a better term, is certainly a striking visual component. Did you do that in particular because there was camera there or have you done things like that beyond just your PowerPoint presentation without the camera there.
AB: Beyond being good on camera, it’s good in the media. You can take a picture and immediately it’s as a snapshot of what the WTO is, so it works that way just as well as it does on camera. Everything we’ve done has been that kind of thing. It’s been the kind of thing where you could take a figurative snapshot of it and just say one word. We’ve sent out press releases about things for eight years or so now systematically and the headlines are always snapshots, if that makes any sense, which it may not. [laughs]
AS: You said you got some flak from the WTO early on. Do you expect any more once the movie comes out?
MB: No. The WTO underwent a transformation during the time we were impersonating them. In 1999, when we first put the mimicking website up, they sent a press release calling it deplorable, saying these fake websites were terrible... And they sent us legal threats, not very threatening letters, but just asking us to stop basically. But then, over the years they sort of changed their tune until at the very end when we dissolved the WTO in Sydney, Australia, announcing the end of it and the replacement with a new, more humane Trade Regulation Organization that would have human needs as its bottom line. By then they sort of knew not to criticize us directly.
AS: Because it would get you guys more publicity?
MB: Exactly. They actually said in response to the journalists who asked about us and about the event, dissolving the WTO, they said “Well, these guys are really funny. We admire what they’ve done. But we’re addressing issues they’re concerned about.” That was their response. So it changed drastically over the years. And we think that there’s no way they would actually have an interest in suing us. Also, it’s not like a corporation that’s protecting its intellectual property. There are ideas there that they are protecting, its intellectual property, but it’s much more nebulous. It’s a large bureaucracy composed of many different member countries. They don’t have an apparatus for attacking people who are criticizing them the way corporations have. It’s an important part of a corporation.
AS: The same question then, with corporations. One of the things you did in the movie was a very pointed proposal for a McDonalds type restaurant, for recycling food, for lack of a better term. Any flak from the corporations, or for that matter from any of the conferences you have gone to posing as the WTO and then later found out who you are. Have they ever gotten on your case?
AB: No. We’d love to get in trouble with McDonalds though, because legally, we asked around about this actually, we had to get second opinions and all this stuff for legal reasons. The lawyers basically said “For them to sue you, you’d have to argue that an audience could reasonably be confused and believe that this was a real McDonalds program.” And so, if they have to argue that, that’s fantastic... let’s see them argue it. And no, we’ve never gotten in trouble with any (of the conferences)... actually one guy did say (to the WTO) “Are you going to stop them? Are you going to sue them?” And the WTO said “Well, no.”
AS: I read in some of the press materials that your success has spawned a lot of fellow Yes Men. I assume this is something that you’re proud of. Do they come to you for advice?
AB: They’re these two guys from Denmark who have been going around the country as “Danes for Bush.”
AS: Their country or here?
AB: The U.S. in a van as “Danes for Bush” campaigning for Bush, meeting with G. Gordon Liddy. They were just on the front page of the New York Times. A big picture of “There’s kooky Republicans, including them.” It’s unbelievable.
MB: Yeah. They’re out there. We’d like to have 300,000 Yes Men, but there are still millions of open positions. We’re hiring for metaphysical money.
AS: You must be proud then. You feel like you started a movement?
AB: I don’t think we’ve started a movement.
MB: No, but a lot of people are doing creative activism. It’s fun and we enjoy it.
AB: And it’s easy relatively, compared to changing laws.
AS: So it sounds like you’re happier having people with you than being the lone voices in the wind.
AB: Yes. We’re glad that they’re a lot of other people doing the kind of stuff we’re doing. Many have been doing it for longer than us and it’s great.
The Yes Men opens October 1.
I Heart Huckabees: Q&A with Director David O. Russell and Actor Jason Schwartzman
By John Suozzo, DC Film Society Member
At a preview screening of I Heart Huckabees at Landmark's E Street Theater on September 15, members of the audience had the opportunity to query the director, David O. Russell and actor Jason Schwartzman.
Question: I may need to see the movie about 5 times to understand it. It was really fascinating. Tell us about how this movie came to be made.
Jason Schwartzman: I met David in 1999. He said he liked a movie I had done called Rushmore and expressed an interest in working with me one day. He wrote a script in 2000 but for several reasons he was not able to make it the way he envisioned it. Originally, the genesis for David and this film came when he had a dream one night that he was being followed by a woman detective--not for criminal reasons but for metaphorical and existential ones.
David O. Russell: Tell us about the sex scene with Isabelle Huppert.
JS: The first thing I noticed when I read the script was the line “They [make love] on a rock.” I was blown away that it was alone on a page and so…succinct. So when we started shooting I was so nervous about it I would always check the shooting schedule to see when it was coming. Sure enough, the day finally came and we had to go shoot this scene in the forest, together with a few other scenes that had to be shot in the forest. The first schedule had the scene scheduled for before lunch…then it was after lunch…and then a little later and a little later. Finally, it turns out that we had only 10 minutes left because the sun was going down and we’re still trying to shoot the sex scene. How’s that for existential angst: 9 months of waiting, 10 minutes to do it. So I just pulled my pants down around my ankles and said, “Let’s do it”. At that exact moment, Isabelle Huppert, who plays Caterine and has been in 70 movies, 35 of which she’s totally naked and other 35 of which she’s totally perverse...
DR: That’s no exaggeration. She’s made like 70 movies. She’s the Meryl Streep of France. She’s won a ton French Oscars…
JS: So there I am, with 10 minutes left to go and my pants around my ankles.
DR: True to the tradition of actors, she says…
JS: (French accent) David, I don’t want to do eet. I find it vulgar. To which David and I both go “What??” So David tries to explain that it’s not a sex scene.
JS: They go back and forth. Finally David says “Let me shoot it once on video and play it back to you, to prove to you that it’s not vulgar.”
DR: It’s just a vulgar joke.
JS: Anyway, we did it. She watched it. She got the joke.
Q: Great film. Loved it. But the word that comes to mind is “audience”. Who do you feel is the audience for this film? What kind of audience do you hope to find?
DR: I don’t think that way. When someone tells me “People say”, I always ask, “Do you mean people or you?” Do you mean “the audience” or you? Let’s just talk you and me. I try to make a movie from my heart as well as I can. I can’t worry about the other stuff. I think that if [the movie’s] funny, it’s funny. That was the main intention--to make a comedy, really.
Q: I was wondering if any religious influences contributed to this film?
DR: I grew up an atheist at home but at 15 I read a book called Franny and Zooey by J.D. Salinger. There were some obvious questions in that book so it sort of started me on my way. When I went to Amherst College I met Professor Robert Thurman, who also happens to be Uma’s dad. He’s a scholar in Tibetan studies and I’ve known him now for 25 years. He has many ideas about infinity and connections that I think you’d find in many religions. But I learned mine from him through Buddhism. Isabelle (Huppert) is probably a cocktail of Zen, nihilism and Sartre. But I can identify with both aspects--I think they’re both useful. I think the biggest dare in the movie, the most daring thing, is that it is sincere about these ideas, even though it’s a comedy, and it dares to be optimistic in a way.
Q: For Jason, to what extent are you playing David O. Russell?
JS: I never set out to play anybody but the character David had written. But there are two parts to the answer. In watching David fight to get the movie made, I found the inspiration to fight for the environment in the movie. That was the “fighting” part of the character I took from David. I knew David was an activist when he was younger and that was also inspiring. But it meant even more to see him fight for something he believed in. Also, I think script is so personal for David; I think he’s “outing” himself as a person. I believe every character in the film is a part of him in real life. So I was playing the part that he gave me but I never tried to imitate him.
DR: The reason I was drawn to Jason was I thought his character in Rushmore could have been my brother. I was and activist in my 20’s and didn’t get into movies until my 30’s. This character is also very much Jason as he was in Rushmore. So the character is a strange blend, like Da-son or Ja-vid.
Q: Jason, how was it to work with your mom in the movie? How did she get involved in the film?
DR: Does everybody know that it’s Talia Shire who plays his mom in the movie?
JS: David asked me if I was alright with my Mom playing my Mom when he was thinking of casting her and I had no problems with that at all. I thought it was a great idea since (a) I missed seeing her on the silver screen just from a fan’s viewpoint and (b) I thought she would be great in the part. She’s a great actor who should be working. She was actually the one with the qualms about it. She kept saying no. She told David she didn’t want to cramp my style. But eventually she was fine. The first day of work I took all my stuff out of this trailer I was using and gave it her. She got mad and said, “Don’t do that. Don’t treat me like I’m your mother. We’re actors. I’m a day player.” But it was a little bit bizarre to pretend that she’s not my mother but then be an actor and pretend that she is my mother. Whew!
Q: I thought the soundtrack was great. Could you tell us a little bit about it?
DR: John Brion is a beautiful composer who has written scores for Paul Thomas Anderson’s Magnolia and Punch Drunk Love. It was Punch Drunk Love that really moved me and we were so blessed that he loved our movie--he doesn’t do many movies. He also did Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind and he’s produced Aimee Mann a lot. He’s a good musician who plays every night in LA. We both liked melodies and shared a like of Burt Bachrach and The Beatles.
Q: Could you tell us what the casting was like?
DR: Well, first there was Lily Tomlin, because we’ve worked together before and we knew each other. And then I thought wouldn’t it be great if Dustin Hoffman was her husband. He’s the reason I work in cinema now, because I saw The Graduate when I was 15. Interestingly, we used a set at The Ambassador Hotel, where Robert Kennedy was killed. It’s abandoned now and used for movie sets and will soon be destroyed. Dustin hadn’t been there since they shot The Graduate so it really meant a lot to me to get him to set foot on that set. When I first showed him the script he invited me to his house and he asked me to read it to him out loud over a period of 2 days. And the Isabelle Huppert part was originally written for Catherine Deneuve, but it’s a good thing she was busy because she’s a bit old to be rolling in the mud with Jason. And Isabelle is perfectly complex, dark, sexy, French and did an amazing job. And Naomi and Jude had never done a comedy before. Well, at least before this. I had been speaking to the both of them for a little over a year and Jude was going through a divorce and he really wanted to get out of England. He put a lot of energy into his performance--he only has 6 movies coming out between now and Christmas! Oh, my mother-in-law Angela Grillo plays the City Council member with the big glasses. She’s a natural--she was a Councilwoman in real life. Who else? Tippi Hedren, Richard Jenkins and Jean Smart. And Mr. Nimyieri, played by Ger Duany, who was in The Lost Boys of Sudan.
Q: Could you elaborate on the writing process a little bit?
DR: I’m pretty controlling, but on the other hand it’s usually much more fun to write with another person. I originally wrote this with Richard Appel, who’s a writer on The Simpsons, but he to leave and do another TV show. And so I wrote by myself for a while. And then my assistant, Jeff (Baena) would write with me. Then he got promoted and we would sit together and outline--we did a lot of outlines. For each character, we took all our fun ideas, put them all down and played them all out. But we ended up with a 300-page draft so we had to chop out quite a bit.
Give My Regards to Rick McKay!
By Cheryl Dixon, DC Film Society Member
It was an absolute pleasure to attend a summer screening of the movie, Broadway, the Golden Age, and to have an opportunity to participate in a Q&A following the movie with the engaging Writer/Director/Producer Rick McKay. It took McKay on a journey of five years and four continents to determine whether a golden age ever truly existed and, if so, why it had never been documented. 100 interviews later (of the Broadway actors/ legends themselves) he reveals that, unlike film that can be restored or literature that can be kept in print or digitized, the very nature of live, theatre performances renders this a “lost” art, endangered, and existing only in the memories of those actively engaged, both the performers themselves, and their audiences. McKay sets out on an ambitious project, to record those memories of these performers on film before they too are lost.
This could have been a “talking heads” film, filled with endless chatter about the good old days, but it is definitely anything but that. Instead, McKay has effectively captured, through skillful film editing, numerous interesting perspectives on specific, general subjects as well as unique, special memories. It’s got insightful, witty, and heartfelt commentary from the actors and is riveting from start to finish. It’s an Oscar-worthy documentary; you might still have the chance to see it on the big screen, but you’ll probably want to purchase it on DVD for your home collection anyway.
The Method: McKay takes on the challenge of interviewing over 100 Broadway actors during the “heyday” (roughly from the 40’s-70’s) of theatre when there were scores of different shows available for viewing, when show tickets were affordable for all except the struggling actors themselves, and when actors dazzled audiences without the benefit of microphones and other high-tech gadgetry. It’s a virtual who’s who of participating actors, including Marlon Brando, Carol Burnett, Carol Channing, Ben Gazzara, Robert Goulet, Kim Hunter, Jeremy Irons, Frank Langella, Martin Landau, Karl Malden, Shirley McLaine, Ann Miller, Charles Nelson Reilly, Chita Rivera, and Leslie Uggams. For a complete listing of the featured actors, check out the movie website.
Responses to questions such as what was it like to see Times Square, the theatre district, or a Broadway show for the first time capture the wonder and excitement of each heart-pounding story. McKay skillfully interweaves responses from various actors who all seem to be telling the same story. There is a sequence, for example, where several actors discuss “second acting,” the process by which actors could fill the empty seats of paying theatre patrons after these patrons had left after the first act to go on to see another show! Similarly they discuss their favorite hangout places (Sardi’s, various drugstores), or their financial hardships. Carol Burnett reveals that she lived in Manhattan with three roommates and that they were so poor, they shared a single dress, to be cleaned after each wearing for the next person, for auditions and other important occasions. Actresses like Kim Hunter reveal how arresting it was for her to work with hottie Marlon Brando in “A Streetcar Named Desire.” Years later, of course, many of these actors are part of the “Broadway Goes to Hollywood” phase and go on to fame and fortune in film (including the musicals we love) and television. Shirley McLaine discusses how she moved instantly from “background” to “star” in a show where the star was unexpectedly unable to perform. Her performance led to a movie contract. Certainly their tales of struggle in their early days on Broadway lend resonance and poignancy and an appreciation for their later financial success. These actors did what they did on Broadway, however, obviously for their passion of the theatre arts. Finally, McKay uncovers footage, including a Hollywood screen test, of outstanding actresses like Kim Stanley and Laurette Taylor, the actors’ favorite Broadway performers, who were not snatched up by Hollywood, and until now had been forgotten.
The Man: This movie would not have been possible without the dedication and persistence of Rick McKay. The ability to draw out the innermost memories of these fine actors is certainly due in part to McKay’s charisma. An Indiana native in NYC, McKay’s passion for the theatre, these actors, and his filmmaking are all evident. His engaging manner and personal charm won over Marlon Brando who, for example, arranged for him to speak with Karl Malden. Malden initially agreed to allow McKay to tape his voice only for the film for a mere 15 minutes. An hour later, Malden was annoyed to realize that he himself had forgotten to keep to that initial timeframe! McKay knew that actors don’t like empty space. They will fill it. So he decided to ask his questions, keep quiet, and let them talk as the camera rolled. The movie would not have been made in the first place if he had listened to concerns that no one would be interested in seeing a movie of 100 stars over age 60. With his camera in hand, ever ready to capture additional footage, McKay continues to vigorously promote his film across the U.S.
The Next Generation: Who would be interested in seeing a movie of Broadway legends over age 60? Well, I would. These actors open a window on a past that is gone. Today there is no such thing as “affordable theatre tickets” although the folks at TKTS would argue! It’s still a major rush to be in Times Square at night and to see all the lights on Broadway, but regular attendance at Broadway shows is something of the past for most of us. It’s now more of a special treat. Few people can afford to see live shows as much as they would movies. McKay has effectively captured the glory of that era of the Broadway “Golden Age.” Unfortunately, some of the actors in his movie did not live to see it. Thanks to McKay we have their memories. And, yes, a sequel is in the works, “Broadway: The Next Generation” picks up where this one leaves off with stories of actors, singers, dancers, writers, composers, and directors who arrived in NYC in the 70’s and thereafter. Sweet.
The 31st Telluride Film Festival
By Nancy Granese, DC Film Society Member
The air in Telluride continues to be short on oxygen, but that didn’t seem to sap moviegoers’ energy at the 31st Annual Telluride Film Festival which took place as always over the Labor Day weekend. Remember, this is the festival that reveals nothing in advance--not the films, artists, panelists, honorees or schedule. And it’s also the festival that gives no prizes--“it’s just about the movies.” Ticket sales are limited, and since the town is so difficult to get to, the crowds are manageable thanks in part to obstacles such as this year’s three inches of snow as well as a thunderstorm that dropped sleet and hail instead of rain. Popular films are shown again at different venues, and the schedule is set each night, so if you can’t quite get to the first showing of a film, you have a reasonable chance of catching before the weekend is out.
Like any film festival, anonymous movie fans aren’t the only ones attending. This year’s recognizable names and faces included Joan Allen, Ellen Barkin, Annette Bening, Gael García Bernal, Ken Burns, Daniel Craig, Johnny Depp and Vanessa Paradis, Harrison Ford, Buck Henry (Guest Director), Laura Linney (2004 Silver Medallion), George Lucas, Elvis Mitchell, Sally Potter, Fred Roos, Peter Sellars, Todd Solondz, Istvan Szabo, and Zhang Ziyi, as well as plenty of unrecognizable bigwigs.
There weren’t as many documentaries this year, there didn’t seem to be any particular standouts, and the subject matter was all over the lot, but I actually found the festival more satisfying. Maybe it’s because there wasn’t any movie that I completely hated! There was certainly a lot to like, as noted below in alphabetical order.
Adam and Paul (Mark O’Halloran). This was one of the two “downer” movies that audiences split on. I liked it. It opens in a desolate patch of Dublin on a grimy dawn. Two passed-out druggies are just waking up. (Which reminds me: why do the Irish always depict themselves so negatively? But I digress.) Overnight, Adam has managed to become glued to the abandoned mattress on which he passed out. His first preoccupation then is not for drugs, but to harangue Paul to help him become unglued from the mattress. Being hardcore addicts, one might note that they are already unglued, but the film sees these feckless sods as Laurel (Paul) and Hardy (Adam). In some ways, they are--fundamentally aimless, hapless, constantly scheming to get money, get drugs, avoiding responsibilities, avoiding family and friends. The film was written and directed by Mark O’Halloran, who plays Adam. O’Halloran, a stage actor who moved to Dublin from the Irish countryside, had never seen people living on the street, let alone desperate drug addicts. “I fell in love with how they moved,” O’Halloran said, and he was struck by the failure of Dubliners to see, let alone acknowledge, the junkies that he saw everywhere. The film follows Adam and Paul through various, sometimes inventive, encounters, several of them comical, but ultimately grim--it’s hard to make a comedy about drug-addled young men. The film’s producers--O’Halloran’s mates, really--were an interesting pair: one was a producer of commercials and the other has a Stanford degree in philosophy. He decided, he said, “to leave grad school in California to make movies in Dublin--don’t ask.” The film was a genuine exercise in “guerilla” film-making, they said. They had no permits, and followed around a Hollywood set, filming off to one side while the bigger film was arranging lighting, etc. After seeing O’Halloran’s wretchedness on screen, it was a treat to run into him and his mates on Telluride’s main drag--they were definitely high, but it was due to the largely appreciative reception of their film, or maybe it was just the lack of oxygen.
Bad Education (Pedro Almodóvar). A successful young film-maker is approached by an old school friend who has written a script about their shared childhood. From that straightforward premise Almodóvar splits his film into three stories: past, present and celluloid. Like all his films, Bad Education is a typically complex story involving transvestites, impersonators, liars, seducers, children and the Catholic Church. The wonderful Gael García Bernal plays multiple roles, and he’s excellent in each. You just need to sit back and enjoy the ride. I admit it: I’m a fan. I think this guy’s about the best there is. I cannot decide whether this wonderful film is his best--I think Talk to Her still holds that place in my heart--but this is right up there.
Being Julia (Istvan Szabo). I’m a fan not only of Mephisto, Szabo’s Oscar winner of several years ago, but also of the hardly-seen Sunshine. This film is a total departure. The other films were both powerful political dramas; this, based on a Somerset Maugham story, is total fluffo. Except… the story, set in postwar London, is about an aging actress, nicely played by Annette Bening, who’s had virtually no life outside the theater. She has a son she barely knows and rarely sees, a bored and philandering manager-husband (wonderfully played by Jeremy Irons), a lesbian admirer and an encroaching boredom due in large part to her fearful dismay of aging. The script, written by Ronald Harwood (The Pianist), said Szabo, was meant for Lubitsch or Wilder; “they’re dead,” said Harwood, “and you’ve carried the burden of Europe on your shoulders long enough,” so how about it? Szabo said he took it on because he identified with Julia: This film “is about myself… I’ve been working for 40 years--what can I tell to young audiences? I need a language to speak to new audiences.” The result is a light, yet serious look at middle age trying, fighting to stay relevant. In Szabo’s words: “I am happy I covered this dark story with chocolate.” Don’t expect too much and you’ll have a fine time.
Enduring Love (Roger Michell). This wonderful but disturbing film wasn’t shown very often, which was unfortunate because it was an interesting mix of spooky stalker flick and classy mainstream thriller. Michell, who’s also directed Persuasion and Changing Lanes, does a first-class job of rendering one of Ian McEwan’s offbeat novels into a very good, but I fear surely to be under-appreciated film. The cast was uniformly excellent. Daniel Craig (The Mother and Road to Perdition) is the protagonist who begins to lose his confidence, his wits, and maybe even his life, quite convincing as the Hitchcockian hero who can’t convince his friends that he’s not losing his mind, it’s the other guy who’s already lost his. The much admired Samantha Morton plays his significant other--I’m personally a little tired of those spooky translucent eyes, but clearly I’m in the minority. She’s good, but for a change, she’s not the driver in this film. Other important roles are well served by quirky, fabulous casting: Rhys Ifans (Hugh Grant’s nutty roomie in Notting Hill) and Bill Nighy (the naked nutty rock star in Love, Actually). Both performed against type and both were terrific. I recommend this one, though, be warned, it’ll give you a case of the creeps--be sure to sit through the credits until the absolute end!
Finding Neverland (Marc Forster). Okay, here’s Forster’s attempt to show he can do anything--he also directed Monster’s Ball, and with this movie, he’s certainly convinced me. It’s based on a true incident in J. M. Barrie’s life when his marriage was foundering and his most recent play had flopped. The seeds of his most successful play, Peter Pan, grew from this period in his life when he befriended a young widow who was the mother of four rambunctious boys. This movie was wildly popular--check out the IMDB votes--every demographic rates it an 8 or a 9! One guy in his late 20’s told me it was the best movie he’d ever seen, and another, in his late 40’s, said the same thing. It is wonderful. Here’s Johnny Depp playing the perfect Edwardian gentleman. He’s wonderful. The kids are wonderful. Kate Winslet is wonderful. Dustin Hoffman is wonderful. Julie Christie is still one of the most beautiful women in the world--but couldn’t they have bought her more than one dress--and she’s wonderful. Forster executes some very effective tricks to demonstrate Barrie’s imaginative view of the world. But it’s a G-rated movie--okay, not according to the MPAA, but what does it know--so the profundities have to be searched out. It’s charming, moving, touching and it’ll be the holiday movie to see with the whole family.
Gunner Palace (Michael Tucker and Petra Epperlein). This touching documentary came through the festival’s submission process, so it was another world premiere, I guess. I’ve seen many of the Iraq-related documentaries; this is the best. It has no bias. Tucker latched onto a gunnery battalion as it moved into Uday Hussein’s palace and then spent two months with these young soldiers. They were of course skeptical, but ultimately he became part of their family, and it is obvious they grew to trust him. Tucker joined them on day and night patrols, every one of which seemed to be a harrowing experience. He followed them into the homes of Iraqis who were suspected of harboring people the US military or the Iraqi police were seeking. And he filmed them letting off steam inside the palace. Some of the young men were reserved, others full of fun and jokes. Among the most articulate and affecting were young men who could only express themselves on camera through rap poetry. Some who saw it criticized Tucker for showing the soldiers at occasionally disreputable play, but I thought he did a wonderful job of conveying a sense of what it must be like to be there, in harm’s way every day. The film may not change anyone’s view about US involvement in Iraq, but it’s fascinating to listen to those on the front lines who explain why they’re proud to be there, just as it’s fascinating to hear another young man make the point--in rhyme--that it “may be entertainment for you, but this is my life!” Sure to be controversial, but very good.
House of Flying Daggers (Zhang Yimou). At the outset, I should admit two biases: I’ve never seen a Yimou film I did not like, and I did not like Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, which this movie closely resembles. But I cared much more about the characters in this than I ever did in Crouching Tiger. Yimou’s most recently released film, Hero, had opened wide the same weekend as the festival and all the insiders were talking about how wonderful it was. I liked House of Flying Daggers better. First of all, it doesn’t have the talky scenes that interrupt the flow in Hero. And in House of Flying Daggers, Zhang Ziyi is in almost every scene, which ought to make anyone with an eye for delicate beauty quite happy. She is beautiful and shockingly effective as a blind girl with secrets. If you have an eye for more rugged beauty, there is the incomparably handsome Andy Lau, who believes he knows her secrets, but he’s in for a few surprises. Both are manipulated by Takeshi Kaneshiro, a fine and deservedly well-known Japanese actor. Okay, the story’s a little weak once you figure it out and there’s a slightly silly (actually, laughable) series of events that close the film. That being said, go see it anyway because it is one of the most visually arresting films you’ll ever see. The colors, the movement, the martial arts, the flying, the love scenes, the bamboo battle, the Echo Dance--these are not to be missed. The closing sequence, which evolves from a brilliant fall day into a blinding snowstorm was the result not of meticulous planning and elaborate computerized special effects--nope, just an unexpected snowstorm and Yimou kept the cameras rolling. Enjoy.
Kinsey (Bill Condon). You may have seen press reports about how Telluride stole Toronto’s world premiere thunder for this movie. Wait till this very fine film opens in mid-November--that’s when the thunder will hit. Even though Fox Searchlight is releasing Kinsey, Fox News is already calling it “sicko flicko” and conservative lunatics as well as protective loving parents will find this film difficult. You should see it because Liam Neeson, Laura Linney, Peter Sarsgaard, Chris O’Donnell and Timothy Hutton, Oliver Platt, John Lithgow and Lynn Redgrave are excellent and because it’s about a topic that’s as timely today as it was when Kinsey burst into America’s consciousness. The topic, surprise, isn’t sex--it’s about how difficult life can be for those who see with new eyes something otherwise taken for granted. Even though this movie will be rated R, because, Condon was told, “it’s educational,” it’s occasionally pretty raw stuff; consider yourself warned. The opening sequences of the young Kinsey, whose childhood was definitely not golden, as he meets, courts and marries his wife are charming. But when Kinsey moves from gull wasps to human beings, the tone turns. You end up being thrilled by his courage. He took everything he learned and applied it to his own life, occasionally at terrible cost to himself and others. John Lithgow’s performance as Kinsey’s repressed father is brilliant. He and Neeson share one of the most powerful scenes in the film that kept everyone talking--the Academy voters just can’t overlook Lithgow come February 2005. And Lynn Redgrave, who doesn’t appear until the final moments of the film, is as powerful as anything that comes before.
Proshanie [Farewell]. (Maria Saakyan) and Harvest Time (Marina Tazbezhkina). This sort-of double bill--a 25-minute short, and a 68-minute feature--evoked significantly different views. The short, which suffered from a lack of subtitles, even though it had no dialogue, was a young woman’s re-imagining of her father’s life. Saakyan’s father died shortly after her birth, and all her life, whenever she’s asked her family about her father, “they don’t tell me about him--they tell me about how they felt about him.” Unfortunately, she didn’t get to say this before the film and so it was very difficult to understand what the film was about. Harvest Time is the first feature made by a well-regarded documentary Russian film-maker. She wrote the script after a hospital stay when the woman in the next bed told her about her life. The power of the film (which I thought was considerable, but not everyone shared my view) comes from the straightforward, yes documentary-like, presentation of this woman’s story. She and her small family live on a collective in a remote part of the then-USSR where she is the leading worker on the collective. World War II has only recently ended. All she had wanted was that her husband come home alive and he has, but horribly wounded. And now all she wants is a bolt of calico. Such limited desires. Such a moving story.
Kontroll (Nimrod Antal). Winner of Un certain regard at this year’s Cannes festival, this movie was completely unexpected. It’s about ticket inspection crews in an Eastern European subway system. Thrilling, huh? Well, someone’s pushing passengers in front of trains, one of the ticket inspectors has narcolepsy, another is a failed professional, a third must be significantly beyond retirement age--they’re a mess. The scene near the beginning of the film where the teams of ticket inspectors get their orders is an hilarious depiction of the bureaucracy we all confront. So where can you go with this? You can go pretty much anywhere so long as you stay underground. It gets surreal at moments, but fundamentally the film is the story of Bulcsu--the failed professional--and how he finds the courage to change his life. The film has been submitted by Hungary as its entry for Best Foreign Film. Trivia: Antal was born and raised in Los Angeles, but he went to Hungary to become a film-maker. A sleeper, worth seeing.
Nobody Knows (Hirokazu Kore-eda). Based on a true story, this film follows a young boy, the eldest of four children, who takes on the responsibility of caring for his siblings when his flighty mother takes off every time she feels the need for a new husband. This movie crept up on me--I was enjoying it so much that it wasn’t until the very end that I realized that it was one of the most depressing films I saw all weekend. I am always fascinated by the distinctive tone of Japanese films, the sinister foreboding just beneath the surface, that reaches out and grabs me every time. Not for the faint of heart, but a very powerful film.
Up and Down (Jan Hrebejk). Each year, in addition to the overall secrecy surrounding the films, there are others that are slotted in at the last moment, with minimal publicity or background information. Up and Down was one of those films. Hrebejk said that the film is based on the experience of one of his friends--an immigrant to the Czech Republic. The script, which he wrote with his longtime writing partner, Petr Jarchovský, evolved into a touching examination of the racial issues associated with immigration in modern Europe. It follows several characters: a son returning to see a father he’d abandoned when his parents were divorced because Dad fell for his son’s girlfriend, a childless couple, wild soccer fans, all of whom were people to care about. It’s a subtle, complex film, absorbing and moving. Vaclav Havel shows up in a cameo and Jan Triska, one of the leading actors, is immediately recognizable because he’s done extensive work in US films. A close associate of Havel’s, Triska emigrated after the crushing of the Prague Spring, but has now returned to his homeland. Hrebejk was effusively grateful for the support of both Havel and Triska. At the time I spoke with Hrebejk, the film had no US distributor, but hopefully it will find one. Its showing at Telluride was its US premiere. It’s very good, a little rough in terms of production values, but that actually served the story well. Hrebejk also is sufficiently in love with technique that scenes placed in Australia were bathed in a lemon yellow light that everyone loved. Well worth seeing.
I also saw the digitally remastered THX 1138 and heard Elvis Mitchell of The New York Times interview George Lucas for nearly an hour about film-making in general, and specifically about the making and remastering of the film. Lucas commented that there were more people in the theater “than saw the film in its original release,” though I did see it when it came out in 1971. This new print is magnificent. It was shown on a new technology developed by Texas Instruments that truly was amazingly clear and bright. It is visually arresting and filled with moments that one recognizes because Lucas went on to use many of them in Star Wars, but to my mind, THX remains a film only for hardcore sci fi fans--like me.
Two other films that created a lot of buzz were Todd Solondz’ Palindromes--most people hated it (people actually booed when it was mentioned during discussion of another film), but a few people said it was excellent. Yes, Sally Potter’s contribution to the ongoing debate about Americans and whether we hate the world or the world hates us. Friends who saw it spoke of it in rapturous terms, but the usually reliable Joe Morgenstern at The Wall Street Journal disagreed, saying, “No.”
So there you go. Looking forward to next year--four days in paradise, seeing movies and eating popcorn.
Q&A with Alexander Payne, Director of Sideways
By John Suozzo, DC Film Society Member
Director Alexander Payne answered questions from the audience following the screening on September 21 at Landmark's E Street Theater.
Q: Was there something in particular about the book Sideways that attracted you?
Alexander Payne: The book was more of a return to the feeling I felt when I read Election. I love the combination of comedy, high slapstick and sadness. I think I was able in this film to go even farther than I had in Election. After all, this movie was my third crack at moviemaking. And it was also my first attempt at a love story.
Q: How close in tone is the movie to the novel? Did you heighten the comedy a little bit more?
Alexander Payne: I think in prose, everything is tempered by the even voice of the narrator. In film you have an opportunity to make things more vivid in the comedic scenes and more melancholy in the sad parts.
Q: The ending of this movie and the ending of About Schmidt had someone at the end of their rope receiving a message of hope that helps bring them back to the real world. Do you think that feeling is where you’re going in your career?
Alexander Payne: You mean more optimistic? That would require a little more self-awareness than I actually possess. But yes, there’s a similarity in both endings. People liked Schmidt and respected him, but he was sort of a downer for a lot of people. So in this one, I really wanted to keep an eye on Miles and make him entertaining. So, if Schmidt sort of defaulted in relaxed moments to a more tragic view of life, I wanted Miles to default to comedy--and just have fun. I just succumbed to the beauty of the area and the wine. I was having such a good time with the romance. Plus, I had a new cinematographer on this one. I’d ask him “Do you think the shots are too pretty?” and he’d say “Shut up. This is a side of you you’ve kept hidden for too long.” Maybe I had. Maybe my attitude towards life and my attitude towards directing is loosening up a little bit.
Q: I’m wondering whether the location of the film in the beautiful sun-drenched wine country versus your other films set in Nebraska affected the [more optimistic] mood of the film?
Alexander Payne: You could be right. I have to say this though about Nebraska. We shot three films there and I always happened to shoot in the spring and fall. And the skies were very overcast during those times. And some Chamber of Commerce types there said “Oh, you always show Omaha as being so dreary. How could you do that to us?” And I said, “Those were the days that we shot. What was I supposed to do, demand that the sun be shining?” And I think the vineyards and the sunshine and the harvest [in California] did seduce me. I really love shooting outside and dread shooting inside. I love exteriors so maybe in that way the location had something to do with it, but it wasn’t my intention to show one place in a good light and another place in a bad one.
Q: Did you have anybody in mind for any of the roles in this film? I think Paul Giamatti was wonderful in American Splendor and that he even exceeded that role here.
Alexander Payne: Before I began shooting, I knew that Stephanie the wine porter would be played by Sandra Oh, because I was living in the same house that she was living in, because I recently married her. The other actors I met just auditioning. And it was my first opportunity; in this my fourth feature, to cast all the character parts by just auditioning people. It just so happens that the two leads weren’t very famous actors.
Q: I personally thought Virginia Madsen was an inspired choice.
Alexander Payne: She’s wonderful.
Q: I must admit I had some trouble believing that that Maya could fall for Miles. Could you comment on that?
Alexander Payne: We deliberately cast babe-alicious, though aging babe-alicious, Virginia Madsen for the part (and I mean that in a good way). I wanted [to make] a film about adults. I did not want a film about “aged adolescents” which you see so often in American movies today. And I thought I detected in Virginia Madsen a wisdom and maturity about her, and not just looks. And I think the chemistry between those two works because of their character. Their “love scene” is a love scene of words. Later, when they do it physically, I don’t care about that. What’s interesting to me about their relationship is how two 40-ish adults, damaged by divorces, can find the wherewithal to begin to love again. So in terms of their looks, if perhaps that is what you’re asking about, I personally don’t have a problem with that.
Q: Who else could you have seen playing Miles?
Alexander Payne: The only other actor I seriously considered was David Hyde Pierce, from Frasier, and he was unavailable. He was very good in Full Frontal and I thought he could do it.
Q: In your previous films you found local players to play major roles, like Chris Klein in Election. Did you find many local actors to use in Sideways?
Alexander Payne: No, because there weren’t many major roles to cast after the four main actors. There’s the mother (Mary Louise Burke), a very accomplished New York stage actress. There’s Gary the bartender (Patrick Gallagher), a very good Canadian actor. There’s the waitress, Cammi (Missy Doty), that Jack has a thing with at the end. This is her first film; she’s from Chicago and trained in comedy. The wine porters and people at the vineyards were all locals. Plus all the Armenians that showed up for the wedding scene were all local. Actually, what I’m really proud of in this film are the extras. Extras are huge contributors to the credibility of films. The casting director spent a lot of time poring over photographs of people who would ultimately appear way, way in the background.
Q: The dialogue for the wine tasting--when you were doing the dialogue, what were you trying to convey through the characters?
Alexander Payne: If I understand your question correctly, there definitely was an intention, first on the part of the novelist and then on the part on the co-writer and myself, to have the “wine talk” always have a purpose. You don’t want the wine talk to be so arcane that it turns people off. And it really came true, thank God, that this dialogue really came together when Maya and Miles discuss why he likes being there and why she likes wine in general. I didn’t think the scene was that great but audiences have really responded to it.
Q: I work in theater and I’m sure that scene will soon turn into an “audition monologue”.
Alexander Payne: Her speech--that’s already being talked about as a great one.
Q: About the cinematography. I felt that the change of location [from your previous films] gave the movie a different feel. I thought the split-screen montage while they were traveling was great. Was that more your idea or the cinematographer’s idea?
Alexander Payne: The cinematographer had nothing to do with it. That was 100% an editorial decision. Kevin Tent, my editor for this film, has worked with me on all my films. On one level we were making a '70’s film. My goal is to pretend it’s still 1972 and I’m going to make an interesting character based-movie like they used to make back then. And my editor and I wanted to have fun with it. And we could really show a lot of the road trip with the split screen. For movie trivia buffs, we used The Thomas Crown Affair as our inspiration for the look of this film.
The 29th Annual Toronto International Film Festival
By Ron Gordner and Gina Berg, DC Film Society Members
The 29th Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) was held September 9-18, 2004. This year 328 films were shown (about 253 feature films or 82% were North American, International, or World premieres) from 61 countries. The program was divided into sections such as Gala Presentations, Masters, Visions, Special Presentations, Canada First, Contemporary World Cinema, Discovery (first time directors' films), Planet Africa, Real to Reel (documentaries), Wavelengths (new section devoted to experimental and avant-garde films), Dialogues: Talking with Pictures (current directors present their favorite retrospective films), and Midnight Madness (usually fringe, outrageous or horror films). The country whose cinema was highlighted this year in the National Cinema Spotlight was South Africa, which presented ten recently produced or co-produced films.
TIFF is generally considered to be the second most important film festival after Cannes. Unlike Cannes however, the public screenings are a large part of the festival. Being held in September is also an excellent time for the major Hollywood studios to preview their fall films, and for some independent film and foreign films to still capture distribution, and for any film to capture a buzz for Oscar time. Since 9/11/2001 and last year’s SARS scare, TIFF was this year well attended by public and industry and has come back with a really top-notch film schedule. A few critics complained about several films missing from the TIFF schedule such as new films by Mike Leigh, Ken Loach, Wong Kar-Wai’s feature 2046 (which is being re-edited), and others that were in Cannes this year. But most critics such as Roger Ebert agreed that it was one of the strongest film schedules for Toronto in recent years, including many first-rate documentaries. Studio and premiere parties were also back in full swing. We found that 75% of our screenings had someone associated with the film in attendance (usually the director and actors) for Question and Answer sessions.
Extra commotion was seen with fans lining up to catch a glimpse of Orlando Bloom entering or leaving the screening of Haven. Further excitement in Toronto was added the evening Canada won the World Hockey Championship: televised interviews on the streets, Canadian flags waving in support, and beeping car horns electrified the usual late evening walk back to the hotels.
A large number of films were picked up for distribution also at TIFF this year. The industry daily newspaper Screen was very informative on film industry interests and business dealings to add to the general Daily TIFF News, providing an interesting double view of the festival.
The festival is usually very well organized. Our concern was that with the demise of the historic Uptown Theatre at Yonge and Bloor last year, would cineastes be able to get to get to one part of the city to another for tandem screenings in time this year? The Uptown had three of the larger screening rooms at the festival with 922, 604 and 404 seats in the three theaters. Most of the second screening of gala presentations (previously shown at the Uptown) were held at the 1200 seat Ryerson University Theatre. It was near our hotel and the screen and sound were fine, but the seats were very hard and one needed to really scout for seats with some good cushioning left to endure watching the longer features.
Two larger stadium seating theatres at the newer Paramount Theatres downtown were also used for many screenings. The Paramount Theatres had 14 varied-sized screens and included an in-theatre food court with a Burger King, Taco Bell, Boardwalk Fries, as well as, the usual popcorn, coffee, and refreshments. It was about a 30 minute trip south on the TTY subway in the new Entertainment area of Toronto.
The Toronto International Film Festival Group (TIFFG) has started development and construction of a Festival Centre which will be far downtown near the Roy Thomson Hall, which now screens the premiere Galas. Planned are at least three state-of-the-art cinemas (with additional space for one or two more screening rooms), an exhibition gallery, rooms for educational seminars, a box office, bookstore, bar/café restaurant, and a film reference library around the corner at the King and John Streets area. Completion of these facilities was not projected until late 2005 or 2006.
Awards
Although it is not really a contested festival, TIFF does announce a few awards:
AGF People's Choice Award for the most popularly voted film of the festival by the audience was Terry George’s Hotel Rwanda (U.K./South Africa/Italy) which recounts the true story of a man (played by Don Cheadle) and his courage during the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
The Volkswagen Discovery Award voted by festival journalists went to Pete Travis’ Omagh (Ireland/U.K.) about a community and family surviving a tragic IRA bombing in 1998.
The Toronto City Award was given to Michael Dowse’s It’s All Gone Pete Tong about a funny club denizen. The other Canadian film award, the City TV Award went to Daniel Roby for La Peau Blanche, an interesting film about Montreal Haitians, race relations, and a horror genre film as well. The Best Canadian Short Film was awarded to Dylan Akio Smith for Man Feel Pain.
The Fipresci Award from the International Film Critics' Association was awarded to Brad McGann’s In My Father’s Den (New Zealand/U.K.) which deals with a journalist prodigal son returning to his hometown after 16 years absence.
Recommendations
In our opinion, this was a very good year for films at TIFF. The following are recommendations from films we saw this year, with a few added from feedback from other reliable sources:
Must See: 3-Iron, Kim Ki-duk (South Korea); Downfall, Oliver Hirshbiegel (Germany); L’Equipier (The Light), Philippe Loiret (France); Hotel Rwanda, Terry George, (United Kingdom/South Africa); Kinsey, Bill Condon, (United States); Moolaadé, Ousamane Sembene (Senegal/France); Private, Saverio Costanza (Italy); Sideways, Alexander Payne (United States); Turtles Can Fly, Bahman Ghobadi (Iraq/Iran).
Very Good: 10e Chambre, Instants d’Audiences (The 10th District Court, Moments of Trials), Raymond Depardon (France); L’Automne (Autumn), Ra’up McGee (France/U.S.); Brødre (Brothers), Susanne Bier (Denmark); La Femme de Gilles (Gilles’ Wife), Fredérick Fonteyne (Belgium/France/Luxembourg/Italy/Switzerland); Gunner Palace, Michael Tucker and Petra Epperlein (Germany/U.S.); Horem Pádem (Up and Down), Jan Hebejk (Czech Republic); House of Flying Daggers, Zhang Yimou (Hong Kong, China); Inconscientes (Unconscious), Joaquin Oristrell (Spain/Germany/Portugal/Italy); Kontroll, Nimród Antal (Hungary); The Machinist, Brad Anderson (Spain); Mar Adentro (The Sea Inside), Alejandro Amenábar (Spain); Meng Ying Tong Nian (Electric Shadows), Xiao Jiang (China); My Summer of Love, Pawel Pawlikowski (United Kingdom); Nobody Knows, Hirokazu Kore-eda (Japan); P.S., Dylan Kidd (United States); Les Revenants (They Came Back), Robin Campillo (France); Stage Beauty, Richard Eyre (United Kingdom); Sommersturm (Summer Storm), Marco Kruezpaintner (Germany); Tarnation, Jonathan Caouette (United States); De Zaak Alzheimer (The Alzheimer Case), Erik Van Looy (Belgium).
Good: 5x2 Cinq Fois Deux (Five Times Two), François Ozon (France); Bombón, El Perro, Carlos Sorin (Argentina); Le Chiavi di Casa (The House Keys), Gianni Amelio (Italy); A Good Woman, Mike Barker (United Kingdom/Italy); I Heart Huckabees, David O. Russell (United States); Innocence, Lucile Hadzihalilovic (France); Karpuz Kabugundan Gemiller Yarmuk (Boats Out of Watermelon Rinds), Ahmet Uluçay (Turkey); Khâkestar-O-Khâk (Earth and Ashes), Atiq Rahimi (France/Afghanistan); Lalehet al Hamayim (Walk on Water), Eytan Fox (Israel); Millions, Danny Boyle (United Kingdom/U.S.); Noel, Chaz Palminteri (United States); Ray, Taylor Hackford (United States); Red Dust, Tom Hooper (United Kingdom/South Africa); Rudao Longhu Bang (Throw Down), Johnnie To (Hong Kong, China); Stray Dogs, Marziyeh Meshkini (Iran/France); Sud Pralad (Tropical Malady), Apichatpong Weerasethakul (France/Thailand/Italy/Germany); Temporada de Patos (Duck Season), Fernando Eimbcke (Mexico); Uno, Aksel Hennie (Norway); Whiskey, Juan Pablo Rebella and Pablo Stoll (Uruguay/Argentina/Germany); The Woodsman, Nicole Kassell (United States).
Awful: (Unless you are a die-hard Godard fan) Notre Musique (Our Music), Jean-Luc Godard (Switzerland/France).
Oscar buzz from TIFF films for possible Academy nominations included for Best Film or Screenplay: Sideways, Hotel Rwanda, Kinsey; for Best Foreign Language Film (assuming their country nominates them): Moolaadé, 3-Iron, The Sea Inside, The Alzheimer Case, House of Flying Daggers,The World, Private, Brothers, Turtles Can Fly, and Downfall; for Best Actor: Liam Neeson in Kinsey, Jamie Foxx in Ray, Don Cheadle in Hotel Rwanda, Paul Giamatti in Sideways, Christian Bale in The Machinist, and Kevin Bacon in The Woodsman; for Best Actress: Annette Bening in Being Julia, Laura Linney in Kinsey or P.S., and Maggie Cheung in Clean.
This was an excellent year for documentaries at TIFF also. Gunner Palace was shot in 2003 and 2004 about U.S. soldiers in Iraq headquartered at the late Uday Hussein’s Al Azimiya Palace in Adhamiya, Baghdad; the directors and two of the soldiers in the film were in attendance; eight soldiers in the film have died since the filming. The 10th District Court, Moments of Trials directed by Raymond Depardon (France), presents 12 chosen cases or 169 court cases filmed and is surprisingly entertaining and educational about human nature with a little touch of a kinder Judge Judy. Other interesting documentaries included Going Upriver: the Long War of John Kerry, Shake Hands with the Devil: The Journey of Roméo Dallaire, The Last Victory, Final Cut: The Making and Unmaking of Heaven’s Gate, Double Dare, Z Channel: A Magnificent Obsession, and Jonathan Nossiter’s Mondovino about the winemaking industry.
Other than a few of the Midnight Madness slasher films like Creep, we found the other science-fiction/horror films viewed more in the vein of David Lynch or Twilight Zone than gore feasts. Innocence is an odd coming of age tale that begins with 6 year old Iris emerging from an opened coffin in her new school. Christian Bale lost 55 pounds to portray a skeletal insomniac worker in The Machinist; director Brad Anderson said he was inspired by Dostoyevsky and Kafka. The Hungarian Kontroll is another fascinating subway thriller with bits of droll comedy and outstanding cinematography. The one that really sticks in your mind is Les Revenants or They Came Back, Robin Campillo’s French film where one morning a town’s streets are filled with a parade of recently (last 10 years) deceased residents. This is not Night of the Living Dead, no flesh-eating ghouls, just your relatives come back to life, who are now healthy (even with their lowered body temperatures) and want to go back to their jobs, but are still not quite normal. This intelligent film follows closely the plight of three returned residents (a child, a husband, and an older family matriarch) and how their families deal with the issue. Campillo remarked that “the dead are with us until we are willing to let them go.”
Some films with gay or lesbian characters or issues included Summer Storm, a fresh look at coming out; Walk on Water, an Israeli film that the director Eytan Fox said “shows it is good for a straight man to have gay friends, and is based on a true story of an Israeli soldier who returned home to find his wife hanging, went back to school, fell in love with a fellow male student, met his lover’s sister, and then married her and had a family;” My Summer of Love, directed by Pawel Pawlikowski (The Last Resort) with Paddy Considine as an evangelist conflicting with his sister’s lifestyle; and Gregg Araki’s new film, Mysterious Skin, a coming of age road movie.
A few comedies seen were: Oyster Farmers, a slight Australian film that shows us a new area and occupation of the Land Down Under; and three droll Spanish language slice-of-life films: Whiskey from Uruguay about a garment factor worker who is asked by her boss to pose as his wife; Bombon, El Perro, from the Patagonia area of Argentina by director Carlos Sorin (Minimal Stories), a tale of a laid off middle-aged worker who finds a new life when he is given a dog; and Duck Season, a black and white Mexican film about a day in the life of three teenagers in a high rise who try to trick a pizza delivery man.
Other favorite films were: 3-Iron (Venice Festival winner for best director) from South Korean director Kim Ki-duk (Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring Again) is a transcendent film with little dialog about a young man who leaves restaurant flyers at homes and then returns at night to break into homes with the flyers still on the door. The Light starring Sandrine Bonaire is a lovely film and a look at the rarely filmed Britanny area of northwestern France and a wife’s ordeals and loves. Another French (Belgium) film from director Fonteyne (The Pornographic Affair) called Gilles’ Wife has little dialog also but is beautifully photographed and has a remarkable performance by Emmanuelle Devos who is determined to keep her husband. Downfall is a fascinating new German film with Bruno Ganz as Hitler during his last days in the bunker and with Eva Braun and secretary Trudl Junge. Autumn is a French language film directed by American Rá up McGee (who did not know French but worked for years) as an homage film to 1960s film noir dealing with three friends (two boys and a girl) who meet years later and find they are all working in crime.
Three films viewed about sexuality were Kinsey, Anatomy of Hell, and 9 Songs. Kinsey, about pioneering sexual researcher Albert Kinsey, is a remarkable film by Bill Condon (Gods and Monsters) with starring performances by Liam Neeson, Laura Linney, and Peter Sarsgaard and deals frankly with sex. Anatomy of Hell directed by Catherine Breillat (The Fat Girl) was very boring and will probably get an NC-17 rating for pornographic scenes. 9 Songs by British director Michael Winterbottom (Code 46, Jude) contains 9 concert songs interspersed with a couple’s sex life. It was an interesting art film, if not soft-core pornography, and had no plot arc, but many climaxes.
There are always some feature films that deal with film making on some level. We saw two: Electric Shadows from China about an unwed mother punished by the village regime and shamed about wanting to be in the movies, and Boats Out of Watermelon Rinds from Turkey about two teenagers’ coming of age who also collect discarded film from the local movie house. Both are sweet and entertaining.
A few good costume dramas other than any already discussed were Unconscious, a mystery set in 1913 Barcelona, Spain and A Good Woman from British director Mike Barker based on Oscar Wilde’s Lady’s Windermere’s Fan and starring Helen Hunt, Tom Wilkinson, and Scarlett Johansson.
The largest group of films seen had a theme of human rights or their infringement. Moolaadé (Cannes winner for Un Certain Regard) from 81 year old master director Ousmane Sembane from Senegal, is a powerful film about a woman who tries to stop the ritual of female circumcision in her village. Hotel Rwanda tells about a hotel manager trying to protect hundreds of Tutsis who seek sanctuary from genocide. Red Dust is a South African film dealing with the healing process and the Truth and Reconciliation hearings and stars Hillary Swank and Chiwetel Ejiofor. Three films that deal with children in poverty or war areas in Afghanistan or Iraq are: Stray Dogs (will show at the National Gallery of Art Nov. 13, 2004), Earth and Ashes, and Turtles Can Fly and are worth seeing. Two films about men returning from war and having problems getting back into normal life that were good also are: Días de Santiago (Peru) and Brothers (Denmark).
A few of these films have opened commercially already. Surprisingly the foreign language film market seems stronger and films produced the same year are now sometimes being shown in the U.S. the same year such as: House of Flying Daggers and Moolaadé. Others will be opening soon or within the next few months at your theatres, or may come to the next EU Film Fest or DC Film Fest. Sadly, some may never be screened in DC.
For more description of this year's Toronto International Film Festival and the films screened visit their wonderful interactive website.
Down in the Hole with The Machinist: Interview with Brad Anderson
By Jim Shippey, DCFS Operations Director
On a beautiful Friday afternoon, instead of playing hooky from the office, I was beckoned to the inner holdings of a luxury hotel in Georgetown. My cab dropped me off in front of the rather austere driveway, where one hotel staffer was out washing a 2005 Mercedes SLK convertible (at least he was working outside on this day!). I went into the lobby and was met by the rep, who led me down the stairs, through a windowless hallway, and outside the room labeled The Chimney Stack. The door opened, and I was led into a missile silo of a meeting space. There, seated by himself at the diminutive round table was director Brad Anderson, a towering and somewhat lanky figure, dressed very casually, almost as if he was stuck at home sick. The door closed behind me, and I was immediately struck by the skylight: in fact, the whole ceiling was a glass window, spider pattern, within a long chimney stack that opened into the sky. The effect was a cross between being stuck in the well from The Ring while the glass made you expect jack booted commandoes would be rappelling right through, sending shards of candy glass in all directions. Brad got up to shake my hand as I blurted out my take on the space. He agreed, and was somewhat crestfallen being stuck inside this space. Nevertheless, we both sat down and got to the matter at hand. (Pictured above: Brad Anderson on the set of The Machinist).
Jim Shippey: Thanks a lot for your time here today.
Brad Anderson: No problem.
JS: I’m Jim Shippey, and I represent the Washington DC Film Society. We are here to talk about you and The Machinist. So the first thing I would like to ask you is how did this project come to you in the first place?
BA: It was the script. Scott Rosen wrote it as a spec script, right out of film school. Sort of a calling card. It was very well written and was making the rounds in Hollywood. A number of directors were interested, and it came and fell apart in several places. It was getting well known for not getting made. It came to my agent who gave it to me. I read it. I totally fell in love with the script, with the writing, the story, and especially the tone, the quality of the atmosphere that Scott created in this world of the script. So I was thinking ‘Wow! I really love this script’! I was looking for something I could just direct, because up to this point I had written or co-written everything I had directed. I was interested in finding something I could direct but not write. This fellow had written something I would have written if I were a better writer. So I said I would love to do this, but the problem was we couldn’t find enough money anywhere to do it. Then not so long after I read the script, Christian Bale read it, and felt much the same way I did; he was caught up in it, and he told me he would do whatever it takes to make this movie.
JS: So you were already attached to the script by the time Christian Bale had seen the script?
BA: Yeah, and he wanted to work with me. I had always admired his work, because he is one of those actors who are very committed to their Craft, first and foremost. He is willing to take chances with his roles. Beyond that, he was willing, literally, to transform himself for a role. As it turned out, it was necessary for him to do just that for this particular role. So he got on board, and well, he probably will be after his Batman film comes out, but he’s not an A-list type actor, one who gets a movie green-lit by being on board. So we still had trouble securing financing for the film in the States. We found a company over in Barcelona, Spain that was more willing to make the movie that I wanted to make.
JS: That was Castelao Producciones and Filmax?
BA: Yeah. It was a little bit of an odd thing, the idea of a film set in America being shot in Spain, but again, they shot Cold Mountain in Romania.
JS: Right. Wow, we can go in so many directions from here, so, how about talking about how it was working with a Spanish crew? Was it the first time you shot a film outside the United States?
BA: For me, yeah, it was the first time. It was great; in fact, it was one of the best times I have had with a film crew. They wee very professional, doing exactly what I needed them to do, particularly Xavi Giménez, my DP. I had a good time working with them. The only drawbacks were, well, you know, things take a little longer to happen in Spain, a slower kind of process.
JS: Maybe a European kind of thing?
BA: A Mediterranean thing, yes, exactly. That being said, if you are going to make a film overseas, a film in Europe, Barcelona isn’t a bad place to hang. Also, with the European producers, unlike American producers, there is a tradition of letting directors be directors, and not to meddle too much in the process. So I could really make the movie I wanted to make, without the producers breathing down my neck. They came forward with what we needed to make it. I think all of those things were wonderful.
There were some issues of casting that came up. Being as it was a Spanish production, they had to have a certain percentage of Spanish actors in the cast to get the production subsidies from the government. I had to argue to get Jennifer Jason Leigh in the film. They would say to me “Why can’t we get a Spanish actress for the role?” I didn’t want to make the film with everyone speaking with a Spanish accent; it wouldn’t have the feel of being in America.
JS: It would be a dead giveaway that the film was shot overseas.
BA: But they finally came along with it. So it worked out very nicely. I would definitely go back there and do another movie there. When we set out to make our quasi-American, we sort of almost created a generic American reality. It is like ‘we are in America, just not sure where we are there.’ You aren’t really sure when you watch the film, and that creates an unsettling experience.
JS: Sort of like a surreal experience without being fuzzy?
BA: Yeah, with studio quality! This is what I was going for, to create that kind of tone with the film. The script was certainly nightmarish and surreal, not to the point of being fantasy, but it had this weird, unsettling quality. I wanted to capture that in the actual movie. I think the look of the film actually goes a long way in creating that feeling, so that certainly helped. If we had shot it in LA it wouldn’t have been so strange. It would have been more grounded and familiar. So Spain worked out fabulously for us.
JS: Do you speak Spanish?
BA: (laughs) No. Well that’s it, I don’t.
JS: So did you have a translator?
BA: I did. And most people I know on the crew spoke enough English to get through to them. I also found that it was to my advantage not knowing Spanish.
JS: How’s that?
BA: When you are on the set and the producers are having this big battle with the production designer or something. They would be shouting at each other in Spanish. I would have no idea what they were arguing about; unaware of any potential disasters looming. Ignorance was bliss!
JS: OK. Now with Filmax, this wasn’t the kind of film they normally were producing, like the Re-Animator sequels, or Dagon. The Machinist seems like a film that will be a stepping stone that takes them to the next level as far as prestige goes?
BA: I think that is what they (Filmax) saw it as. Those films you mention are actually under their Fantastic Film Factory aegis that is a division of Filmax. They have made somewhat more sophisticated films like Darkness and Second Name (El Segundo Nombre), most of which haven’t come out here except on video (NOTE: Darkness is tentatively slated for theatrical release sometime in 2005).
JS: Oh yeah, also Manolito Four Eyes (Manolito Gafotas), a film which was the closing film for Filmfest DC a few years ago, based on a Spanish comic character.
BA: Ok, but you are right. Most of the films they have made have been straightforward horror/ gore films. I think maybe they saw this as a chance to work with an American director, who was looking to do something a little more sophisticated, and give them a chance to break into the American market. The Machinist will come out and we will see how it goes, but I don’t think Filmax has had a theatrically released film in the US as of yet, except maybe Beyond Re-Animator. Did Beyond Re-Animator open theatrically here?
JS: No, not in Washington area (NOTE: It did play at the Philadelphia International Film Festival in 2003).
BA: Yeah, I guess it went straight to video here. The Machinist is a departure for them. They are smart not to be just making films for a certain niche audience. There is something about Spain. Spaniards are really into dark and creepy films. Maybe it goes back to Dali or some other tradition, but one of the biggest festivals over there is the Sitges Film Festival, which is all geared toward Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror type films. They have this real affection for creepy films, like my film Session 9 did its best business in Spain. One of the reasons Filmax wanted to work with me was because they were familiar with my work in Session 9. Every director seems to have their share of foreign fans.
JS: Your personal diaspora?
BA: Yeah, you could say that.
JS: Last night (during the Q&A at the DCFS screening of The Machinist), you mentioned that you weren’t looking to make a hipster film with The Machinist, like films by Quentin Tarantino or M. Night Shamayalan with a twist ending. Your film seems to owe more to the tradition of filmmaking that was in the vein of directors like Hitchcock. Do you see yourself as part of a trend moving away from those hipster filmmakers?
BA: Well, what I think I meant when I say that I didn’t go out to make a hipster movie, I wanted to make something that would appeal to someone of my age, late 30’s. Something with some sophistication that would push some buttons as well. I didn’t want to make something stylistically that felt that it was cool and trendy. I wanted to make something that had the appeal of earlier filmmakers, ones who were driven by their sense of craftsmanship of movies instead of the flash and dazzle of special effects. You know, the kind of film that gets a cool soundtrack with the latest bands. Stuff that is more marketing concerns, not moviemaking concerns. That’s how I think about ‘hip’; it’s about selling product: some hip MTV band, or some hip movie that is so cynical and glib. I wanted to make a film that was dark, but not dark in a cynical way. I think of David Fincher’s movies and to me, I like their style but I think they are so, so cold, emotionally and everyway else. They appeal to a certain kind of young, maybe disaffected kid who thinks ‘that’s cool, let’s kill ‘em all! Die!!’ Some people think The Machinist is like Fight Club. Beyond some similar motif of [character perceptions] ,but other than that, there‘s nothing at all similar. It doesn’t end with some apocalyptic display of pyrotechnics to the sound of the Pixies. The Machinist is more emotionally grounded, more like an emotional rollercoaster, a tragedy; a guy has committed this awful thing and in the end must ‘fess up to it. Slowly, over the course of the story, the character falls apart until he realizes that he is victimizing himself.
Everything about the films I have made has been a reaction to whatever is cool and trendy at the moment. I mean, look at my second film, Next Stop Wonderland. It was a romantic comedy, but the lead, Hope Davis, wasn’t a drop dead gorgeous girl, always giggling, rather more of an ice queen. It didn’t have any hot top ten bands on the soundtrack; it was Bossa Nova. I cringe when I see a movie that is designed to appeal to what Spin magazine or Details tells us is cool. Even in terms of casting, you know. I mean, I think Christian Bale is a great actor, but he isn’t some sort of heartthrob cover boy. Maybe he will become that, but knowing him, he will resist that as much as possible. I feel that my responsibility--if you can call it that- as an independent filmmaker is to be just that; is to make films that are alternatives to the mainstream movies. So the mainstream version of The Machinist would be like some hip thriller with a load of cool bands on the soundtrack CD, and there would be glib jokes every two minutes throughout. My film is an answer to that, an alternate version of that. Maybe it’s my own sensibilities or my own tastes, but I don’t like to see movies where I think they are winking at me, proclaiming ‘isn’t this so cool, man? Isn’t this just the coolest shit?'
JS: You mean films which are self-referential?
BA: Yeah, like Tarantino, I like his films, but I also feel I am being sold so heavily on what is going to be the latest trend of the moment, whether it is going to be the really cool Hong Kong action ballet thing, or some new pop tune, or something all the rage, or heroin-chic. (mutual laughter). I find it boring, movies about junkies, just so boring!
JS: Now the film premiered at Sundance?
BA: Yeah.
JS: And did Paramount come on board there?
BA: No. We took the film to Berlin and we made a deal with them there.
JS: And so far the film has been making the film festival circuit, like tonight at the Vancouver International Film Festival (9/24/04).
BA: Really, I didn’t know that! Interesting.
JS: Is there anything about the transition from moving the film on the festival circuit to commercial release that you have to adjust for yourself? Anything in terms of how you speak to people about the film?
BA: Some festivals can make a difference for setting up the film on the right course, getting good credentials. Having your film play at certain festivals gives your film credibility. I have been to these festivals and, really, the festival circuit now is all about celebrities. They attract some celebrities and then they celebrate the celebrities in their local rags. To me, the films at the festivals have become almost beside the point. Sundance used to be about the movies, but now it is about movie stars. The stories are about the deals that go down, not the movies themselves. To me, a festival premiere is about a chance to take a trip, kick back and getting all of my meals paid for.
How it affects the release or prospects for the film? I don’t know if people will really go to see The Machinist because it played at Sundance. I don’t think it makes a big difference. If anything, it may be a drawback I mean, gawd, Sundance movies, how many of those have you seen?
JS: Well, there was Jawbreaker (mutual laughing)
BA: Yeah, I suppose it’s a good way to see how audiences respond, but even that may not be true. Festival audiences are very different from real audiences. They aren’t a good cross-section of the kind of people who will go see your movie. They are already movie lovers, or they are there specifically to see certain kind of movies. They know you are going to be there so they are more polite, like that, except at Venice where apparently they just boo you off stage. I haven’t made it to there yet. Still, I would be happy with that, because I‘d rather they tell me what they really feel. Yes, festivals are fun. Maybe marketing people get some idea how to market the film after seeing how it does at festivals.
JS: Was there anytime during the production that you were concerned for Christian Bale’s health (Bale reported lost over 60 lbs for the role)?
BA: The only time was when we were in the sewers. We shot a couple of days in a Barcelona sewage tunnel, a functional tunnel with real raw sewage running in it under our feet. It was the second day, it was hot, it smells awful, and he was already so tired, as he had lost so much weight. The scene has him running through it. I was a little concerned that he would slip and hurt himself. I wasn’t that concerned that he would push himself over his limits. He would reassure me that he was OK, that he wouldn’t do anything like that. His wife was also there keeping tabs on him, and she seemed OK with him doing the scenes. And yes, he did lose a lot of weight, but he was also playing it up. He looks fatigued and tired, but some of that is performance, really.
JS: After seeing The Machinist last night, there was some discussion about not being able to apply a genre label to it. Is that something you are conscious of when you make your films, not playing to a genre?
BA: I don’t know if it is conscious. I don’t consciously try to make a movie that doesn’t slide into a genre perfectly. No, I think it’s more about the kind of stories I am attracted to, more complex, more unpredictable. That usually means that they aren’t summed up in a line. So it’s not something I seek out, but I am drawn to it.
The real question is how conscious I am being in appealing to the widest audience. I suppose you do that in the casting. You think of actors who are good for the parts, but who would also bring people into the theatres. But when I am shooting the film, all I am thinking about is what is good for the story. I’m not thinking about what would make it a more commercial film. Maybe I should? (laughs) In the end, that is for others to decide. I think there many examples of films, films like Memento, not a film like The Machinist, but it is a complex film, a complicated movie, with a lot going on in it. It’s a film that warrants watching it a second or even a third time. I think The Machinist is similar in that regard. I have heard from people who have seen it more than once that they pick up on a lot more things the second time around. Like a good novel, you read it once, then you read it again, better able to follow along. I think the marketing people have done a fairly good job with the trailer and the poster. They are trying to match the tone of the film, letting people know that they aren’t going to be seeing some outrageous thriller, but at the same time they aren’t going to be seeing some inaccessible art house film, either.
JS: You come across as having a great awareness of films. What do you list as some of your favorites? Not necessarily influences, but ones you enjoy watching?
BA: Among my favorite directors is Kubrick. Kubrick films, I can watch them again and again. They are like puzzles, in a way. I also like Peter Weir’s films. I appreciate his sensibility. I really like Master and Commander. I’m not really big on seafaring movies, but there is something really poetic about his films, and he is a studio guy! He does things that you don’t see in a lot of studio films. He takes his time. A lot of my favorite filmmakers are like, dead or obscure filmmakers. I don’t go for directors who are tasked to deliver something, like Tarantino with his Hong Kong action films. I like films that move me. Regardless if it is a horror film or a comedy, if it doesn’t appeal to me on an emotional level, I turn it off. These hipster films I was speaking about before, they are so terrified of tapping into something emotional, something powerful. They are all gloss, all surface, all about style, with nothing substantial underneath. Even Kubrick you could say that he was a cold filmmaker, but his films have an emotional reality that is really powerful.
JS: Really quick, is there any kind of music you are listening to these days?
BA: Right now I am listening to a lot of Bossa Nova and Brazilian jazz, because I am in the process of writing a screenplay about the emergence of Bossa Nova music in the early 60’s and how it kind of swept across the United States. So I am listening to a lot of stuff by Joao Gilberto, Jobim, and Stan Getz, these guys. Really, we just had a kid so I haven't had a lot of time to actually see a movie or listen to anything just for enjoyment. The last thing I listened to was The Itsy Bitsy Spider, you know, kids’ songs.
JS: The last thing here, what do you want people to know before they buy their ticket for The Machinist?
BA: Well (laughs) maybe nothing? I guess that’s why I make movies, so I don’t have to answer that question! I can just say ‘see the movie!’ I ‘m not a very good salesman; I’m no good at selling my own movies. Hopefully the movie speaks for itself. I think what you will get from this film is a really interesting puzzle. If you like a good puzzle, a good riddle, you like trying to solve an interesting mystery, I think The Machinist will provide you with the same kind of satisfaction. If you like a film that lives with you beyond the five minutes after the lights come up, I think this is that kind of movie as well. It proposes questions that hopefully will lead to discussion afterwards. I don’t want to make a movie that evaporates right after you walk out of the theatre. I want people to think about it. Those are the best kind of movies; they are intelligent.
JS: Brad Anderson, thank you very much!
BA: No problem, I really appreciate it!
Calendar of Events
FILMS
American Film Institute Silver Theater
The AFI takes part in the Korean films retrospective with eight films, mostly comedies. Titles include The Virgin Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors (2000); My Love, My Bride (1990); My Sassy Girl (2001); Marriage Story (1992); The Foul King (2000); Please Teach Me English (2003); The Waikiki Brothers (2001); and Bungee Jumping On Their Own (2001). Some of these films are also showing at the Kennedy Center's AFI Theater.
Films by Italian director Elio Petri include Numbered Days (1962); Property Is No Longer a Theft (1973); The Assassin (1960); The Tenth Victim (1965); A Quiet Place in the Country (1968); The Working Class Goes to Heaven (1971); Todo Modo (1976); Good News (1979); and We Still Kill the Old Way (1966). Some of these are also at both theaters.
Also in October are films starring Marlon Brando, a screening of Abel Gance's Napoleon with the Carmine Coppola score and The Battle of Algiers (Gillo Pontecorvo, 1966).
American Film Institute at the Kennedy Center
Some of the films of Elio Petri (see above) and the Korean comedies are showing at the AFI's theater in the Kennedy Center.
Freer Gallery of Art
The festival of Korean film concludes this month at the Freer and other venues. On October 3 at 2:00pm is A Hometown in Heart (Yoon Yong-kyu, 1948), one of the few surviving films made before the Korean war. On October 8 at 7:00pm is Aimless Bullett (Yoo Hyun-mok, 1961); on October 17 at 2:00pm is The Housemaid (Kim Ki-young, 1961); on October 22 at 7:00pm is A Good Windy Day (Lee Jang-ho, 1980); on October 24 at 2:00pm is To the Starry Island (Park Kwang-su, 1993); on October 29 at 7:00pm is Festival (Im Kwon-taek, 1996); and on October 31 at 2:00pm is Green Fish (Lee Chang-dong, 1997).
The DC Asian Pacific American Film Festival (see below) takes place at several locations including the Freer. On October 10 at 2:00pm is a series of short films; at 4:00pm is Daughters of Everest (2004) a documentary about an expedition of Sherpa women to climb Mount Everest; and at 6:00pm is a feature Indian Cowboy (Nikhil Kamkolkar, 2004). On October 16 at 3:00pm is The Ride (Nathan Kurosawa, 2003) and at 7:00pm is The Magical Life of Long Tack Sam (Ann Marie Fleming, 2003), about the filmmaker's great-grandfather.
National Gallery of Art
A retrospective of the films of F.W. Murnau (1888-1931) is the main feature for October. Films include Sunrise, Tabu, City Girl, Tartuffe, Faust, The Last Laugh, Nosferatu, Phantom, Journey into the Night, and The Haunted Castle. Note that two other films by Murnau will be shown at the Goethe Institute. A series of films "From the Lands of Abraham" begins October 31 with Distant (Nuri Bilge Ceylan, 2002) and continues in November. More films from the Middle East can be seen in Arabian Sights.
Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden
The Hirshhorn takes part in the retrospective of Korean film with Camel(s) (Park Ki-yong, 2001) on October 1 at 8:00pm and Invisible Light (Gina Kim, 2003) on October 21 at 8:00pm, with the filmmaker in person to introduce the film.
Taking part in the Asian Pacific American Film Festival, the Hirshhorn shows Take Out (Sean Baker and Shih-Ching Tsou) on October 7 at 8:00pm. On October 8 at 7:00pm is Cosmopolitan (Nisha Ganatra, 2003); a program of short films is at 8:15pm.
As part of the Hirshhorn's regular series of independent films is Tarnation (Jonathan Caoutte, 2003) on October 14 at 8:00pm; Balseros (Carlos Bosch and Jose Domenech, 2002) on October 22 at 8:00pm; and The Living Room Candidate: Presidential Campaign Commercials (1951-2004) on October 28 at 8:00pm with David Schwartz of The American Museum of the Moving Image to discuss this specialized type of mini-film portrait.
National Museum of African Art
Two short films Moko Jumbie: Traditional Stilt Walkers (1991) and Presenting Water Spirits (1994) are shown on October 14 at 7:00pm followed by a discussion; a pair of short films about art Ceramic Gestures: A Conversation with Magdalene Odundo (1995) and Batiks by Nike (1995) are on October 21 at 7:00pm; and Karmen Gei (Joseph Gai Ramaka, 2001), an Africanized version of Carmen is on October 28 at 2:00pm.
National Museum of the American Indian
Visit the newly opened museum and check out the theater. On October 14 at 6:30pm and October 16 at noon is a documentary Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance (Alanis Obomsawin, 1993) about community resistance in the village of Oka, Quebec. The filmmaker will be present for discussion. Reservations are needed--call 202-633-6644.
Museum of American History
As part of the DC Asian Pacific American Film Festival the museum will screen a series of films beginning at 12:30pm on October 9.
Films on the Hill
A series of films for Halloween include Rex Ingram's 1926 proto-Hollywood horror film The Magician on October 20 at 7:00pm based on W. Somerset Maugham's novel using notorious satanist Aleister Crowley as the model; John Barrymore in a double feature of Svengali (Archie Mayo, 1931) and The Mad Genius (Michael Curtiz, 1931) on October 27 at 7:00pm; and Bela Lugosi in a double feature of Mark of the Vampire (Tod Browning, 1935) and Night of Terror (Benjamin Stoloff, 1933) on October 29 at 7:00pm.
DC Jewish Community Center
On October 9 at 7:30pm is a lecture by Persian author Roya Hakakian, followed by a screening of the film Abjad (Abolfazi Jalili, 2003), based on Jalili's own adolescence in pre-revolutionary Iran of the late 1970s. Live Persian music follows the film.
On October 13 at 1:00pm is Crossing Delancey (Joan Micklin Silver, 1988), a comedy starring Amy Irving. Someone once said that there are Chinese restaurants in every corner of the world. Find out more on October 13 at 7:30pm when a documentary, Chinese Restaurants: Song of the Exile (Cheuk Kwan, 2003) is shown as part of the DC Asian Pacific American Film Festival. Call 202-777-3248 for more information.
Pickford Theater
Some films related to music include The Tami Show (1966) on October 1 at 7:00pm, Hair (1979) on October 5 at 7:00pm, and some TV programs from the 1950s about jazz on October 25 at 7:00pm. See the website for more.
Goethe Institute
The series of films produced by Artur Brauner continues in October with A Love in Germany (Andrzej Wajda, 1983) on October 4 at 6:30pm, After Your Decrees (Jerzy Hoffman, 1983/4) on October 18 at 6:30pm, and Angry Harvest (Agniezka Holland, 1984/5) on October 25 at 6:30pm. The series ends in November.
The Goethe Institute shows two films in the F.W. Murnau series (see National Gallery above). On October 15 at 6:00pm is The Grand Duke's Finances (1924) and at 7:30pm is Burning Soil (1922). Both are silent with piano accompaniment by Burnett Thompson.
A film for kids Annaluise and Anton (Caroline Link, 1999) is on October 23 at 2:00pm.
Three documentaries by Northern Ireland filmmaker John T. Davis will be shown on October 27 and 28. See above.
National Geographic Society
The All Roads Film Festival takes place from October 28 through October 30. Features, documentaries, music videos, shorts, animation--are by and about indigenous groups and minority cultures.
Griot Cinema at the City Museum
On October 3 and 10 at 3:15pm is Civil Brand (Neema Barnett, 2003); on October 17 and 24 at 3:15pm is Flag Wars (Linda Goode Bryant and Laura Poitras, 2003), a documentary about gentrification in a Columbus, Ohio neighborhood; and on October 31 at 3:15pm is Crazy as Hell (Eriq La Salle, 2002) just in time for Halloween.
National Archives
Check out the brand-new theater in the National Archives building. And show up on time--no late-comers will be admitted! On October 12 at noon is a presentation of historic films to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the patent Edison received for motion picture film. On October 19 at noon and 7pm is Anne Makepeace's 2000 documentary Coming to Light about Edward S. Curtis, preeminent photographer of North American Indians. Check the website for others.
National Museum of Natural History
A documentary about California's Hawaiian community, American Aloha: Hula Beyond Hawaii (2003) is shown on October 8 at noon, with an introduction by Dr. Adrienne L. Kaeppler.
FILM FESTIVALS
