You Won't Believe What You SAW
By Caroline Cooper, DC Film Society Member
Saw, which opens nationwide on October 29, is a nail-biting thriller with a simple message--value life every minute of every day. That message is conveyed expertly on screen by first-time director James Wan and through the script by screenwriter/actor Leigh Whannell.
The two Australian natives make their feature-film debut in the United States with a splash in this original indie horror-thriller, which combines skillful film techniques adopted by Wan from greats like David Lynch combined with his own unique directing style. The script was adapted from an original work that took Whannell nearly two years to complete, and was intended to be an acting project for his film school friends. But as luck would have it, the two film school friends successfully marketed Whannell’s screenplay and Wan’s directorial skills to several Hollywood producers by shooting a DVD short of one scene that they say captured the essence of the film.
With only five days of preparation and eighteen days to shoot, Wan effectively captures the audience’s attention from the opening sequence in which Whannell’s character Adam emerges from a bathtub to realize that the clock is ticking on his life. The fate of his life, and that of his roommate, a forlorn doctor played by Cary Elwes of The Princess Bride, depend on whether the antagonist “Jigsaw” is satisfied that both have seen the error of their ways and develop a new respect for life. The outcome becomes clear only at the very end of the film when Jigsaw’s true identity is revealed.
I participated in a small press conference with the screenwriter and director to discuss factors that influenced the script and film direction.
Caroline Cooper: What inspired you to write the film? You have said that you were in a “black mood” at the time, but the film had some very good messages.
Leigh Whannell: I wasn’t so much in a black mood, as I was having health problems… that put you in this weird sort of state. In terms of the actual film, that whole process was started just by us wanting to make a film. It just so happened that all of this stuff was going on that was bleeding into the script from our lives. That wasn’t what inspired the initial desire (to write the script)…When I got the all clear (on my health problems), I had this newfound appreciation for life, which started bleeding into the actual character of Jigsaw.
Responding to a related press question, Whannell described writing the film as a cathartic experience, prompting him to include some deeper meaning in the film.
Caroline Cooper: You have mentioned that you had only 2-3 takes for each scene and one of your favorite gimmicks is the “creepy doll.” What were some of the things that you wanted to put in the film to make certain points to the audience outside of the spoken dialogue? Do you have your own personal techniques or have you adopted certain techniques from other film directors?
James Wan: One of the things I’ve always wanted to do is not harp on blood and guts; I really wanted to create an atmosphere throughout the whole film. There are some directors that I truly admire like David Lynch, Italian director Dario Argento, and Hitchcock. But I’m hoping that the stuff that I like about their films influences me in such a way that eventually I find my own spin on that and put it onto my own film. Primarily, one of the big things I tried to do with this film was to create a pervasive tone throughout the entire film, and I guess elements like the creepy doll definitely helps add to that macabre freakishness I was going for.
Whannell commented that Wan has done a great job of conveying a key theme of the film, which is “as soon as you’re born, basically the clock starts…your whole life is basically a countdown to your death.” Whannell explained that this metaphor is examined throughout the film, starting with the opening sequence in which Whannell’s character Adam and Cary Elwes as Dr. Lawrence Gordon are “born out of the water in the darkness, turn on the lights and it’s a literal clock ticking down to their death.” Whannell adds that “the film gets more intense as it goes,” describing the feeling of the characters as being claustrophobic. He says Wan is trying to convey a sense onscreen that “life is closing in on you.”
Following a screening of the film, both Wan and Whannell discussed various benefits and disadvantages of making films in Australia. As a follow-up in our interview, I asked what was the biggest obstacle and advantage of making a film in the United States?
James Wan: I guess the most important thing would be finance…and to actually have people who would take a chance on genre material like this. We don’t really have that in Australia, so that’s definitely one of the biggest (advantages). We don’t even make that many films to begin with, but we make even less genre films.
Leigh Whannell: Practically, the biggest obstacle is the fact that we are not from the United States. That was a big obstacle. Getting visas and stuff like that especially in this day and age is pretty difficult… it is very hard to come here. The big advantage is that here people really understand the genre, they are not afraid of it, and they really dive into it. The producers we met were like “Let’s do it.” They got it straight away. There are countless advantages.
Caroline Cooper: What advice would you offer to fledgling filmmakers?
James Wan: Two factors we realized out of our own experience: one, we realized that the quickest way to get into the industry is literally writing a good script. Hollywood just does not have a lot of good scripts; you see a lot of bad scripts floating around… If you can write something that is half decent, it can really get you noticed, and pretty much open a lot of good doors based on a good script. The guys who wrote the The Butterfly Effect literally got their other writing assignments based just purely on the script they had written for that movie.
Leigh Whannell: You can reuse technicians but you can’t shoot the same script, although Hollywood would try. (Scripts) are the coal that (keeps the Hollywood) engine burning. And if you manage to write a good one, one that is readable, someone will be interested. Take it from us, who have read many of the scripts out there.
James Wan: My second point was actually shooting the short. It really allowed the money people to see what the film was going to be like. It gives them a lot of confidence that you can actually do it. Not only does it give them confidence of how the film is gonna look, but that you can do it as well, especially if you are first-time filmmaker. My advice would be to pick a scene that really sums up the whole film.
Leigh Whannell: From our experience, and we have only made one film, if you have a script and you really love it and someone else will really love it, shoot something from it if you want to make it to show people that you can.
Caroline Cooper: You said you only had five days to shoot, how did you find a good combination of actors? You had some experienced actors recommended by producers and some newer faces. Some of the actors include well-known stars such as Danny Glover, Monica Potter, and Cary Elwes and lesser-known actors such as Tobin Bell, Ken Leung, and Makenzie Vega.
James Wan: Well, I guess in my experience the first time, I realized that even with experienced actors, you still really need to rehearse. We just did not have rehearsal time in this film; there was none at all in this film. We were pretty much shooting our rehearsals and I guess what I realized from making this film and what I’ve learned and taken away from this film is that you might be really experienced, but it’s still very important that you give your actors rehearsal time. But we just could not afford that in this film.
Caroline Cooper: Where was your set?
James Wan: The whole film was shot in Los Angeles in a converted warehouse. The bathroom was the only set that we actually built. All of the other locations were basically taking existing rooms in this warehouse and just converting them into a hospital, a garage. That was the only way we could (make the film).
Caroline Cooper: Let’s talk a bit about the music, some of your selections. How did you decide on the composer?
Leigh Whannell: We had someone else lined up, but something happened and they had to drop out and so we were looking around for someone else. James was interviewing different composers, and he (Charlie Clouser) was one of the guys and we knew of him already from Nine Inch Nails and he kind of had the edge over the other guys because we love Nine Inch Nails and all of the other stuff he has done.
James Wan: I guess for Leigh and myself, we really went into this film knowing that it would have some aesthetic to it, even down to the music and the sound design. Leigh liked to describe the film as "drenched in rust." And who better than someone who used to be in Nine Inch Nails that has a dirty, dusty industrial grunge background? Charlie’s stuff just fit in really well.
Caroline Cooper: I was reading your bio (James) and noting some of the short-films you have made, and I noticed that Stygian was one film you made and that you inserted that name into SAW. How many gimmicks, etc. from your previous films did you use in this film?
James Wan: The biggest thing that you take away is literally stuff that you have learned. The thing that you learn the most is what you wouldn’t do again next time.
Leigh Whannell: There is a lot of stuff from our lives in the film. A lot of the characters are named after people that I know. And of course, then we see a review noting biblical metaphors in our work, but that’s not the case. Art is the experience of what you take away from it.
Finding Neverland, Q&A with Director Marc Forster
By John Suozzo, DC Film Society Member
A screening of Finding Neverland took place on August 24 at Landmark's Bethesda Row Theater. Director Marc Forster took questions from the audience and DC Film Society Director Michael Kyrioglou was emcee.
Michael Kyrioglou: I have to start off by saying kudos on the casting, which is just stunning, from Julie Christie down to the kid (Fred Hightower). Do you want to start off by telling everybody how you got involved with the project?
Marc Forster: I actually read the script before I directed Monster’s Ball and thought it was beautiful. At first the studio was nervous because of my previous work. But eventually they agreed to a meeting and the first question they had was, “How dark is Finding Neverland going to be?” And I said that I was a very positive person, I loved life and not all of my work dealt with the dark side. Eventually, they said yes.
Q: Miramax has kept your movie has kept your movie on the shelf for a while. What were the reasons for that?
Marc Forster: I finished the film last summer and it was supposed to come out last fall but there was that other Peter Pan film. But PJ Hogan and Sony Universal owned all of the rights to Peter Pan, the play. First, Miramax asked us if we could just go with the rest of the story and cut that part [the play] out of the film. Finally they realized you couldn’t cut the play parts out without ruining the rest of the movie. So Miramax said we couldn’t release the film until we had the rights for the play sequences, which was March 25 of this year.
Q: I was very impressed by the young actor who played Peter (Fred Hightower). Any comments on his experience and how did you motivate him?
Marc Forster: The casting director saw over 500 kids and I saw about 75 of those. When I asked Fred why he wanted to be in the movie, he said that he knew a famous English soccer star had appeared in movies when he was a kid. So Freddy thought that if could be in the movie, he’d grow up to be a famous soccer star. Johnny Depp also became a big fan and he talked Tim Burton into using Freddy on Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, which they are shooting right now.
Michael Kyrioglou: He was a perfect foil for Johnny Depp--he had such a child-like innocence about him.
Marc Forster: That’s why I wanted him.
Q: I got the impression that the children were actually watching a real play during the scene where the orphans watching the play. Were they?
Marc Forster: No. They were just watching the bits and pieces of the play that you saw in the film.
Q: I got the impression that the orphan children were really enjoying interacting with the actors in the play.
Marc Forster: I always try to have the actors in the movie play off against other [real] actors in the movie and not stand-ins just out of camera range. I try to have the real actors there so that the ones on-camera can play off the actual character in the movie.
Q: During the cricket scene, you make a big deal of cutting back and forth between the match and picture of a peacock, a crumpet and a teacup on the sidelines. Why did you design it that way?
Marc Forster: You know, there are just some things that the British do that are just soooo…(shrugs) verry British. I’m into symbolism and that just seemed symbolic to me. Is that something that bothered you?
Q: No, I guess I was asking why the bird was included?
Marc Forster: It may not have come across as I intended, but it meant something to me. A lot of people thought I should cut that. There are certain things you just get attached to, I guess.
Q: Who was your editor and had you worked together before?
Marc Forster: I worked with an editor named Matt Chesse, who has cut everything I have done so far. We did Monster’s Ball together and now this film. I just finished shooting another film in New York, called Stay, and we did that together as well. I also used the same DP on all my films as well.
Q: Where were the exterior scenes filmed?
Marc Forster: All in London--everything was either in or around London. The theater was Richmond Theatre, outside of London.
Q: How did you film the scene where the kids flew in under the doorway?
Marc Forster: Well, since her door is never open because of the deadbolts you need to shoot the scene from both sides of the door [separately] and then marry the images from the two sides of the door in the editing room. First you shoot it from one side of the door with the door in place. Then you remove the door and change the camera so that you shoot the same scene from the other side of the door. When you marry the shots, you have one long, smooth sequence.
Q: This and Monster’s Ball are two very different films. Was there anything that you learned on Monster’s Ball that you used in this film or were they two different things?
Marc Forster: I think the approach was different in each film. The visual approach in Monster’s Ball was very simple--there were no special effects. The movie was really about the performances and being observant more than anything else. The one parallel between this film and Monster’s Ball was that both films deal with mortality. Both are very different--but I wanted them to be different.
Q: Congrats on an excellent movie. There was a scene near the end when they were moving the mother downstairs and they were performing Neverland for her in the garden. And that’s when it seemed like her world got frayed a little bit. Could you expound on this?
Marc Forster: When I read the script, it said that he brings the play to the house and they perform the play for Sophia. At the end of the play, the script says that Peter takes Sofia’s hand and takes her into the garden, which has become Neverland. What I imagined that as Peter leads her outside, the wall into Neverland disappears, Peter Pan then flys into Neverland and Sophie walks into Neverland.
Q: I especially liked the last scene of the movie. Can you share your thoughts about it?
Marc Forster: I shot that scene twice - once with the fairies and once without. Originally I thought the fairies were just too kitsch, too cute. But then I saw the dailies and I thought…they were perfect, we have to go with the fairies.
Michael Kyrioglou: Did you find there were other areas of the script that you changed?
Marc Forster: Any time you read something and then try to make something out of it, you see things that you want to add to make it your own. But the script was pretty tight. The thing like putting Neverland in the garden - I added that to make the film more visual.
Q: I enjoyed your use of symbolism throughout the film, like the journey from the house out into the garden. Did you see any parallels between your film and the film of C.S. Lewis’ Shadowlands?
Marc Forster: I definitely watched that film and it was very well done. I do feel this is a little different but I liked Shadowlands.
Q: I loved your ending. Were you trying to portray the feeling of belief in the ending scene with the umbrella?
Marc Forster: Yes, and also for me it symbolizes faith. We’re all going to die--we’re only here for a certain amount of time and then we’re all going to disappear. We’re all going to dissolve but the bench [and the umbrella] stays behind. Ultimately it’s about the belief that we, as human beings, if we really believe in something and are passionate we can make anything happen.
Q: Did you pursue Dustin Hoffman for his role? And was Johnny Depp your first choice?
Marc Forster: No, actually it was the other way around. The producer had given Dustin the script to read and Dustin said he really wanted to work with Johnny Depp and me. When the producer asked me how I felt about Dustin coming on board, I told him I thought he was too much of an icon and would overshadow everybody. And the producer “Oh. I thought you would love the idea. He’s flying on a plane to London right now to meet you!”(LOL) And I was thinking “Oh my God. Dustin Hoffman! It’s such a small role. Why does he want to do it? And how will he get along with my other stars here. Will he fit in?” And I thought maybe I should talk him out of it. So I went to his house and we sat in his kitchen talking about why he would want to play such a small part. And he said, “Look, I love Johnny Depp and wanted to work with him. I really loved Monster’s Ball and wanted to work with you. I’m in London now and will be here for a while so why don’t we just do it!” He said “I do think that the part is a little small and maybe we could make it a little bigger. And I would love to have a scene with Kate Winslet.” And I said that I didn’t think we could rewrite the part at such a late date. And to answer your second question, Johnny Depp was always my first choice.
Q: Was Dustin Hoffman’s character based on a real person?
Marc Forster: He played an American producer from New York, Charles Frohman, who produced a lot of J.M. Berrie’s plays.
Q: I have a question about Ian Hart’s character. It wasn’t until I saw the credits that I realized he was supposed to be Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. I thought he would have had a bigger role in the movie. Was his role bigger in the script at one point?
Marc Forster: No, he always was a pretty minor character in the story. In early versions he came up after the play to congratulate Johnny’s character and say that he really enjoyed the play and he was introduced as “Sir Arthur Conan Doyle” but I felt there was no need to keep that introduction in the final version.
Q: Did you find it hard to wait around for the release of the movie for so long after you had completed it?
Marc Forster: Yes. That’s why I went right away to start another project. It was very strange to see the movie again tonight after so long. I felt, “My Gosh, it’s been so long. Did I really make this movie? I can hardly remember it. My head has been somewhere else for so long.”
Q: You talk about how death is a constant theme throughout your movies. Something that I’ve noticed is that there is a parallel theme of immortality: Neverland never dying and the mother living on in Peter’s journal. I was wondering if you could comment on that.
Marc Forster: Yes, I personally believe in immortality. I have had a lot of people in close proximity [to me] die over the years. My family and others. So I just feel it’s a concept I believe in that I keep coming back to over and over again.
Q: Is that what happened with the hat and umbrella at the end? They didn’t fade away, there was still something left behind of them that carried on.
Marc Forster: Yeah, I think we all leave some energy. I don’t want to get too much into that because I’m sure everybody in this room has a different belief system and everybody should have their own interpretation of this. I don’t really want to preach my interpretation to the exclusion of everybody else’s.
Kinsey: Audience Q&A with Writer/Director Bill Condon
By John Suozzo, DC Film Society Member
This Q&A took place on October 21 after a screening of the film at Landmark's Bethesda Row Theater. The film opens November 19.
Q: Could we talk a little bit about the development of this project?
Bill Condon: The producer, Gail Mutrux, sent me over a box of stuff. I had already read an article about Kinsey in The New Yorker Magazine so I was already somewhat interested. She sent over this box and in the middle of reading through it, I thought this could really be an interesting subject for a movie. All this stuff about him--the bisexuality, the open marriages he encouraged among his team --all of that didn’t come out until the 90’s. Until then, he had cultivated his image as a devoted family man. He died in 1956 and that [image] had endured for 50 years--and that would not have made such an interesting movie. But the connection between the work and the private life was really fascinating, I thought.
Q: In doing all your research, where did all that information finally come out?
Bill Condon: It was actually the Tim Hutton character, Paul Gebhard, that I spoke to. He was the source for all that. He’s in his late 80’s now and he decided it was time people knew all that. Once he started to talk then everyone else talked, too. Kinsey’s son, while there was no big break with his father, was always a little bit embarrassed about the project. The two daughters remained devoted to not only their parents, but also the ideals their parents were working on. They’ve seen the movie and they approve of it, except for all of the revelations about their mother sleeping with Clyde Martin. They still refuse to believe it. You can imagine what it’s like to be in your 70’s and find out for the first time stuff like that about your parents. It’s a tribute to the Kinseys, as parents, that they shielded their kids from all that.
Q: It’s turning out to be a “Kinsey year” with this film coming out and T.C. Boyle also has this book that came out called “The Inner Circle” that sort of told a fictionalized version from the standpoint of one of the assistants about Kinsey. Have you read that?
Bill Condon: I haven’t read it yet. I’m going to do a panel discussion with him in about six weeks. Right now, I’m touring with the movie and I want to finish that and then see because when you research something like this there are so many approaches you could take. His is very interesting--he deals mostly with the issue of the open marriages and how Kinsey, this rather forceful figure, imposed himself on all his assistants’ lives. It’s sort of a different period that he’s dealing with but I can’t wait to read it.
Q: Were there any parts of the film that were embellishments or was it pretty close to the truth?
Bill Condon: I think pretty close. I think you have to be because he’s such a controversial figure. You know there were two men who wrote major biographies of him--one spent 25 years at The Institute and the other spent over a decade there. And they both have the same facts but have completely different interpretations of it. So it’s very important not to whitewash the story in any way. I was trying to show the flaws as well as the good side. For example, no one had a tape recorder the day Kinsey came home and told Clara he was exploring his bisexual nature. I don’t know exactly what her reaction was and certainly the words are something you dramatize. There are other examples of that where you combine things, combine characters and try to make things visual. But there’s nothing left out and the things that were might have made him into a warmer, “cuddlier” character. For example, Clara and Kinsey lost their first child at the age of four. He died of a diabetic coma and that was a great tragedy in their lives. That would have been a scene that made you sympathize with him more because he’s somewhat clinical and cold. But inevitably in a two-hour movie you are leaving things out, but I don’t think there were any big omissions.
Q: You spoke with the character Gebhard. I’d like to know what other characters did you speak with? And if so, how do their accounts stack up? Are they positive or negative?
Bill Condon: It’s a little hard, because he died in 1956 so there aren’t that many of them left. I just missed Pomeroy, who Chris O’Donnell played. There’s a character who I originally had in the script called Clarence Tripp who just died 6 months ago, who was a major source but so many of them are gone now. But Gebhard has written about Kinsey, as has Tripp, so their accounts are pretty consistent over the years. And I think they all thought he was a complicated man--there’s no hero worship there.
Q: What happened to his wife?
Bill Condon: She died in 1990.
Q: Did she carry on any of his work?
Bill Condon: No. And I think it’s interesting because they were such intellectual partners. She was never involved in his work except as a traditional helpmate. She was very involved with the Girl Scouts; she was a great outdoorsman, a prominent figure in Bloomington, in the IU community and lived a long life after he died.
Q: When you made this movie, did you see any relevance between Kinsey’s work and issues in modern day America?
Bill Condon: I hope you notice when you watch the movie that on one hand you say “Oh my God, it was so different back then” and on the other hand it’s so similar on what’s happening today on some level. Certainly the difficulty Kinsey had in separating morality and religion from the science of studying sex is true even today if you look at the stem cell research debate. I’m still surprised that some of the more ignorant questions from students back in the ‘50s come up today on hotlines and other places today. But more than that, it tells me that there was on big idea that Kinsey had that is still so relevant today. He was a man who collected 8 million galwasps--not 1 million, as I say in the movie--and discovered that not any one of them was alike and applied that idea to Human Sexuality. Nobody’s sexuality is the same as somebody else’s. It’s not just whether you like men or women, it’s the whole range covered by the 800 questions in the questionnaire. But, there is this basic human need to fit into the group. Inevitably, these sessions would end with people asking “Am I normal? Am I normal? Am I normal?” It is the desire to feel that in something as private as sex, that what you’re doing is what everyone else is doing. And I think that he would say that even though the dialogue is more open today, the need to fit in to the new mores is just as strong now as it was then. There are still people who are fighting to accept their individual nature and not feel so strongly that they have to fit into the group.
Q: I notice that in the movie, you didn’t touch much upon his siblings. I know his father was domineering but were the siblings ever embarrassed by the reaction to the book?
Bill Condon: Good question. The siblings of Kinsey seem not to be given too much time. And that’s true. It’s impossible to do everything in a 2-hour movie. Neither of them is alive today. Kinsey would be 110 now--he was born in 1894. But I do know they were very much under the thumb of their father; Kinsey was the only one able to escape and get out, having discovered nature and science. The two siblings never did get out.
Q: Given the subject matter, did you and the producers have a difficult time shopping this around or getting the support of the studios.
Bill Condon: Yeah, it took a long time to get this movie made. It was actually made by a British financier for a relatively low budget of $11 million as an independent movie that Fox Searchlight is distributing. There’s a tradeoff there but one that I would always take. In a movie that had more money riding on it, there would be more pressure to simplify his character and make him simply more heroic, which I don’t think you could do with Kinsey.
Q: Could you talk a little bit about the casting, both the leads and some of the supporting performances? One thing that occurred to me was that Tim Curry, best known for playing Dr. Frank-N-Furter in Rocky Horror, as the voice of sexual prudishness.
Bill Condon: Or Liam [Neeson], who is well known as a ladies’ man, as someone who doesn’t know his way around his marriage bed. In my mind, this is an actors’ movie. Kinsey’s genius was to sit opposite you or anybody else and within 5 minutes make you feel comfortable enough to open up about this incredibly intimate part of your life. There are a lot of different parts and that is one reason we made the movie in New York, even though there was only one scene set in New York. It just felt important to have great American actors and so many great theater actors in it. You know, like Jefferson Mays, who just won a Tony this year for I Am My Own Wife, plays a small part in the gay bar scene. As you know, there was not a lot of racial diversity in the film until the moment he sets out across the country. I wanted to use actors of all types at least for that part because that is when this heretofore all-white world was kind of exploded and they went out and really talked to everybody. So the actors are what make the movie--the most important aspect of it.
The Venice Film Festival
By Cheryl Dixon, DC Film Society Member
The waters keep rising in Venice, the fabled city of art and architecture, gondolas and canals. However, it remains one of the most beautiful places on earth and the perfect setting to hold the Venice Film Festival, also known as the “Mostra” (Mostra Internazionale d’Arte Cinematografica) held this year from September 1 through September 11. The Mostra is the world’s oldest film festival (established in 1932) and is second only to Cannes, in prestige and in the enormous gathering of international stars, directors, producers, and other filmmakers. Both seasoned and up-and-coming filmmaker alike compete.
For a complete description of the Festival’s mission, competition categories, and a complete roster of films, please see last year’s Storyboard article on Venice in the September 2003 edition, or check out the Festival’s website.
The Lido Lowdown
It was wonderful to be back in Venice. As was true of my Cannes experience, the second time around was every bit as sweet. Not much had changed, I just learned to improve upon my experiences--the movies were plentiful and interesting, and I saw more of them this time, parties were fewer, but easier to find, celebrities were more plentiful, or maybe more accessible, the beaches and Italian culture were marvelous! The Hotel Excelsior remains the place to see the celebrities and the jet set in suits and dresses styled and cut to perfection, but everywhere on the Lido island is fair game. I met Quentin Tarantino in the parking lot behind the Palazzo del Cinema, for example. The Palazzo del Cinema looked completely different this year: gone is the blue carpet, replaced with the standard red carpet with a façade featuring hundreds of golden lions. Furthermore, ten internationally famed designers have been invited by the Venice Biennale to compete for a new Palazzo del Cinema building on the Lido. Director Marco Müller awarded the two Golden Lions for Lifetime Achievement to Manoel de Oliveira, a master of Portuguese cinema, who has for years concentrated on literary themes of the frustrations of “impossible” love, most importantly, the work of writer Camilo Castelo Branco, who inspired Amor de perdicão (Doomed Love, 1978) and Director Stanley Donen whose masterpiece musicals include Singin' in the Rain (1952) and Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (1954).
No excursions to the islands of Murano (known for glassmaking) or Burano (known for lacemaking) this time. However, I did take partake in the grandeur of a romantic evening stroll through the vast, awe-inspiring St. Mark’s Square. Then, there’s nothing quite like roaming through dark, narrow, deserted Venetian streets, and walking across bridges, like the historic “Bridge of Sighs.” You’ll have to trust me on this. Better yet, come to Venice and check the festival out for yourself. Almost all of the non-English made films have English subtitles and you’ll find the Italian people very helpful and friendly. Don’t be shy! Have a gelato, a cappuchino, or industrial-strength Italian coffee. Unlike Cannes, the Venice Film Festival is also geared for the public and it treats its audiences to at least a glimpse of their favorite celebrities. Al Pacino and Denzel Washington were two of the most popular guests, and although I was disappointed that I didn’t meet them, I was ecstatic to meet and/or talk with Tim Robbins, Quentin Tarantino, Johnny Depp, Kate Winslet, Marc Forster, and Mike Leigh. See you on the Lido next year!
And the Winner is…2004 Awards
Official Awards of the 61st Mostra. The international Jury of Venezia 61, composed of British Director John Boorman (Chairman), Wolfgang Becker (Germany, Director), Mimmo Calopresti (Italy, Director), Scarlett Johansson (USA, Actress), Spike Lee (USA, Director), Dusan Makavejev (Serbia-Montenegro, Director), Helen Mirren (UK, Actress), Pietro Scalia (Italy, Editor), Xu Feng (Taiwan, Producer) assigned the following awards for feature-length films in competition, in the following categories: Golden Lion for Best Film; Jury Grand Prix, Silver Lion; Special Prize for Best Director, Silver Lion; Coppa Volpi for Best Actor; Coppa Volpi for Best Actress; Osella for an Outstanding Technical Contribution; and "Marcello Mastroianni" Award for Best Young Actor or Actress.
The winner of the Golden Lion was Mike Leigh's Vera Drake; the Silver Lion Grand Jury Prize went to Alejandro Amenábar for Mar adentro; the Silver Lion Special Prize for Best Director was Korean director Kim Ki-duk's Bin jip; Javier Bardem won the Coppa Volpi for Best Actor in Mar adentro; Imelda Staunton won Coppa Volpi for Best Actress in Vera Drake; Studio Ghibli won the Outstanding Technical Contribution award for Hauru no ugoku shiro, directed by Hayao Miyazaki; and the "Marcello Mastroianni" award for best young actor went to Marco Luisi and Tommaso Ramenghi for Lavorare con lentezza--Radio Alice 100.6 Mhz, directed by Guido Chiesa.
So, Who was There?
This is a partial listing of filmmakers, actors, and other celebrities attending this year’s Mostra: Stefano Accorsi, Lauren Bacall, Javier Bardem, Valeria Bruni-Tedeschi, Claude Chabrol, Fruit Chan, Geraldine Chaplin, Park Chan-wook, Clovis Cornillac, Tom Cruise, Jonathan Demme, Robert DeNiro, Johnny Depp, Emmanuelle Devos, Stanley Donen, Joseph Fiennes, Frédéric Fonteyne, Stefano Dionisi, Marc Forster, Jamie Foxx, Tom Hanks, Jeremy Irons, Kim Ki-duk, Michael Mayer, Nicole Kidman, Scarlett Johansson, Angelina Jolie, Spike Lee, Mike Leigh, Anthony Mackie, Michael Mann, Mira Nair, Al Pacino, Michele Placido, Violante Placido, Michael Radford, Jada Pinkett Smith, François Ozon, Charlotte Rampling, Tim Robbins, Steven Soderbergh, Todd Solondz, Steven Spielberg, Imelda Staunton, Quentin Tarantino, John Travolta, Denzel Washington, Reese Witherspoon, Kate Winslet.
Venice Film Festival: Film Notes
By Cheryl Dixon, DC Film Society Member
Te lo leggo negli occhi: This Italian movie focuses on the relationship amongst three generations of mothers and daughters, i.e., mother, daughter, and granddaughter and all of the combinations and permutations in-between. Signora DeLuca (portrayed by the Italian actress Stefania Sandrelli) is a free-spirited singer, who after surgery, decides to spend more time with her asthmatic granddaughter, Marghi, despite the protests of her more traditional daughter, Chiara. So, Grandmother and granddaughter run away together and have a bonding experience. Meanwhile there’s lots of family drama unfolding: an estranged husband, a mother’s affair, a neglected daughter. This film had lots of potential but didn’t quite take off, however, I loved Sandrelli’s performance. Nice to see a beautiful and sexy grandmother! Checked out the imdb database and was really surprised that I had also previously seen her in Jamon, Jamon (sizzling scenes with a then unknown Javier Bardem) and Stealing Beauty. Look forward to seeing her in more movies….
Talking about family drama, the French La Femme de Gilles (2004) by director Frédéric Fonteyne, is quite the soap opera, and is quite depressing. Actor Clovis Cornillac plays the philandering husband, Gilles, who has an affair with his wife’s (Elisa is portrayed by Actress Emmanuelle Devos) beautiful, younger sister, Victorine. He becomes obsessed with his sister-in-law and confesses all to his “understanding” wife. Convinced that he will grow out of his seeming infatuation, his wife gives him the space and time to fall out of love on his own. He doesn’t, of course, come to his senses. Instead, he becomes increasingly obsessed even as the sister-in-law tries to break off the affair and marry someone else. I won’t give away the ending, but this is a progressively dark movie with disastrous consequences for all involved. Exceptionally strong performances all-around.
“Clever,” “amusing,” and “completely original, I’ve never seen anything quite like this before” is how I would describe, the Korean Bin-jip (2004) by director Ki-duk Kim, which also deals with an adulterous affair but with a decidedly lighter, even humorous, tone. An emotionally abused wife (Actress Hee Jae portrays Tae-suk) married to a humorless, crashing bore of an older husband, finds true love with a younger man (Actor Seung-yeon Lee portrays Sun-hwa) who has the remarkable ability to blend in with his surroundings unnoticed! He likes to enter people’s homes and lives, helping himself, e.g., to their pj’s when he sleeps in their beds. In a prison cell, because of this special ability, Sun-hwa is able to pace behind the guard who is searching for him, and eventually escape by walking straight out the door, completely undetected. There is also a great scene where the husband and wife Tae-suk are eating breakfast while boyfriend Sun-hwa stands directly behind the husband and helps himself to the food on the table. Best of all, the protagonists, Tae-suk and Sun-hwa, remain completely silent until the movie’s last scene. Don’t miss this one! Ki-duk Kim won the Festival’s Silver Lion Award for Best Direction. Well-deserved.
A Film Society preview screening of Finding Neverland(2004), allowed me to watch this movie before arriving at the Venice Film Festival. [See above for the Q&A from that screening.] So I was able to see this movie for a second time, and cry even harder than the first time! What can I say? Memorable dialogue, witty, moving performances, great cinematography, costumes, art direction, directing. Oscar nominations across the board! It was nice to be able to watch this movie with Italian subtitles and interesting to see how the English was translated into Italian (at times, not literally) and whether the international audience laughed at the same scenes (often, but not always). Most of all, it was great to be able to tell actors Johnny Depp, Kate Winslet, and director Marc Foster, who were all present at the screening in Venice, just how great their work was, and to ask them questions about working with child actor Freddie Highmore, “Peter,” who held his own against them. Another benefit of attending the Venice Film Festival. See you on the Lido next year!
Venice Film Festival: Hollywood in Venice
By Cheryl Dixon, DC Film Society Member
Last year I commented that there could be no more perfect venue for the Mostra--Hollywood could not have created a more perfect setting for this film festival. So true. Venice is a beautiful location, the perfect setting for its film festival’s stunning world showcase. Cinematic art at its finest. This year, then, it comes as no surprise that Hollywood came to Venice in massive numbers. The buzz was that (1) Hollywood was well-represented if the numbers of film principals, including A-list movie stars, renowned directors can be presented as evidence. Also, it was said that (2) the majority of Hollywood’s film picks for the Oscars were included in this year’s festival roster. Let’s examine the evidence.
I’ve already mentioned the staggering list of Hollywood royalty in attendance this year (above in “So, Who was There”). And what were those films that critics claim are destined for Oscar greatness? Well, it’s still too early to make the call, but here’s a list of some of the films featured in the festival along with my personal film notes. It’ll be interesting to compare this list when the actual nominees are selected. Oh well, I’ll have fun trying….
And the Nominees are:
(1) Birth (Jonathan Glazer). Nicole Kidman believes that a 10-year-old boy is her reincarnated husband. Read “controversy.” However, anything that Lauren Bacall is in makes this a class act! (2) Cinq fois Deux (François Ozon). A relationship between a man and a woman is examined in reverse in five stages, from the outset at the end of their marriage in a divorce court moving backwards and ending with their courtship and initial meeting. Very French. Actress Valeria Bruni Tedeschi is outstanding. (3) Collateral (Michael Mann). Enough about Tom Cruise’s hair! He makes a good bad guy and doesn’t seem to mind that Jamie “Ray” Foxx steals every scene in this movie! (4) Embedded/Live (Tim Robbins). Embarrassed to say that I didn’t see this movie, but it got great word-of-mouth around the film critic circles. Tim Robbins is just so wonderful and talented, I had to include him in this list. Should have seen his film, for some reason, kept on running into him on the Lido, and even at the airport! (5) Finding Neverland (Marc Forster). This story of Peter Pan author J.M. Barrie and the experiences that led him to write the classic story is a three-hanky weeper. Brilliant direction and across-the-board excellent performances by the entire cast, make this a definite contender for all the major film award nominations. I mentioned to Johnny Depp, Kate Winslet, and Marc Forster that they had all done a terrific job, and that the child actor Freddie Highmore’s performance was completely believable. They agreed that he’s a phenomenal actor. A Festival favorite. (6) Final Fantasy VII. Advent Children (Tetsuya Nomura). Amazing special effects. Very realistic animation in this story of people suffering from a strange illness and the hero who saved them coming to terms with demons from his past. (7) A Home at the End of the World (Michael Mayer). A love triangle amongst two men and a woman, but not in the usual combinations! Michael The Hours Cunningham’s engrossing story comes to the screen. Colin Farrell and Dallas Roberts deserve high honors for their knockout performances. Will we ever get to see Farrell’s nude scene? (8) The Manchurian Candidate (Jonathan Demme). Persian Gulf soldiers are brainwashed and forced to commit atrocities. I was terrifed that this remake would pale to the 1962 original, but Jonathan Demme succeeds in making this contemporary movie stand on its own merit. Denzel Washington? Terrific as usual. (9) Man on Fire (Tony Scott). See Collateral Denzel also makes a good bad guy. This time he’s out to settle the score with the folks who harm the young girl he was hired to protect in Mexico City. (10) The Merchant of Venice (Michael Radford). Written by William Shakespeare and Michael Radford, this film, based on Shakespeare’s play, and set in 16th century Venice, featured all around excellent performances. In one particular scene, Al Pacino, Joseph Fiennes, and Jeremy Irons perform in a single frame together: the acting energy is explosive! It’s difficult at times to hear the anti-Semitic tone. It’s wonderful to see “thinking women’ characters. This is a very visually appealing film. One of my Festival favorites. (11) Shark Tale (Victoria Jenson, Bibo Bergeron). This computer-animated tale of a small fish with big dreams has an even bigger story. The cast, which includes, Will Smith, Jack Black, Angelina Jolie, Robert DeNiro, Renée Zellweger, Peter Falk, and Mary J. Blige, does not disappoint. Finding Nemo with an urban edge. It is filled with enough film references to keep parents laughing along with the kids. (12) She Hate Me (Spike Lee). Fired Harvard-educated exec impregnates lesbians for money. Controversy. Spike Lee, however, uses this titillating, male-fantasy tale to explore the deeper themes of corruption and dishonesty in the high places. Lee continues his tradition of discovering outstanding actors, like Anthony Mackie and GWU’s own Kerry Washington. (13) The Terminal (Steven Spielberg). Tale of a man without a country who takes up residence in an airport and falls in love with a flight attendant. Tom Hanks rules! This is actually based on a true story. (14) Vanity Fair (Mira Nair). Written by William Makepeace Thackeray and Julian Fellowes, this is a story of two poor, but ambitious social climbers. The film’s tagline, appropriately is “All is fair in love and war.” Reese Witherspoon is terrific, and Mira Nair’s direction is sure-handed. The costumes and art direction are A+. (15) Vera Drake (Mike Leigh). Saving the best for last. Kudos to brilliant Writer/Director Mike Leigh (Topsy-Turvy, Secrets and Lies) and Actress Imelda Staunton. Staunton is Vera Drake, a mild-mannered 1950s Englishwoman helping out women “in trouble,” suffers dire consequences for herself and her family. Leigh handles the abortion issue with insight and intelligence. He observed that his film opens the debate about morals in society and illustrates that then, and now, the justice system functions differently according to the class of the individual.
The London Film Festival
By James McCaskill, Storyboard Special Correspondent
There is an affinity between London and film. From the nostalgically remembered Ealing comedies such as The Lavender Hill Mob and Kind Heats and Coronets and those wonderful J Arthur Rank films, the world fell in love with London films. Today London and film still go together--only it is at the London Film Festival. Jonathan Peake of the Festival Office told me when I asked about press conferences: "As the London Film Festival is a public festival there are no official press conference." Everything done here is done in full view of the public.
In only her second year as artistic director Sandra Hebron is closing in on making LFF the UK's number one festival. For decades Edinburgh has held that title and now there is a rival. The 2004 two-week LFF opened with Mike Leigh's Vera Drake, the powerful Oscar tipped film that scooped Venice's top prizes, and closes with David O. Russell's exuberant existential comedy, I Heart Huckabees. In between there are hundreds of feature films, documentaries and shorts.
There is an exceptionally strong batch of nine Galas, with four of them from the US (Vanity Fair, We Don't Live Here Anymore, Tarnation--a surprising film made for $218.32, and The Incredibles). The only UK gala is Roger Michell's Enduring Love.
China is well represented here with six films, two of them galas, House of Flying Daggers and 2046. A decade ago their film industry was in disarray as the newly privatized industry only made a handful of films. Today China's independent filmmakers are at the top of World Cinema. Hero was the first Chinese film to top the US market and has so far raked in around $35 million.
As a rule I don't see US films at festivals as many of these have opened in the states. This has been an excellent year for American film makers as they had 51 movies here, a large percentage when you consider there were 182 feature films. Zach Braffi's Garden State and Jared Hess's Napoleon Dynamite blew away both critics and audiences. In all there are 280 films from 60 countries.
London Film Festival provides the cinema addict with top feature films from 37 countries. Included are art house and blockbusters, from the latest by the world's best known directors to daring new hopefuls. Shorts, documentaries and experimental are all here in abundance. Even the archives are trawled to bring top films of yesterday to new audiences. The US was represented by Anthony Man;s 1955 classic, The Man From Laramie. Another 1955 film was Richard Quine's endearing My Sister Eileen. Roy del Ruth's 1930 scandal plagued The Second Floor Mystery. The scandal? After filming was completed the 26 year old lead, Grant Withers, ran off with 17 year old Loretta Young. The marriage was quickly annulled and the pair starred again in the aptly named Too Young to Marry.
With the London festival lasting two weeks and films screened all over the city, you have to have stamina and a deep pockets to last through it all. I could only be here for the last week but during that run I saw marvelous films and, sadly, a couple of stinkers. You may want to consider my recommendations as some may appear at next year's DC Film Festival. I know that other festivals have picked up a few.
Recommendations
Must See Films: Head-On (Fatih Akin, Germany, 2004), House of Flying Daggers (Zfhang Yimou, China, 2004) and King's Game (Nikola Arcel, Denmark, 2004). Close behind these three is Carlos Saura's The 7th Day (Spain, 2004).
Very Good:2046 (Hong Kong-China, 2004), 5 x 2 (Francois Ozon, France, 2004), Chemins de Traverse (Manuel Poirier, France-Spain-Italy, 2004), The Holy Girl (La Nina Santa, Lucrecia Martel, Argentina-Spain-Italy, 2004), Love in Thought (Achim van Borris, Germany, 2004), Turtles Can Fly (Iran-Iraq, 2004), Whisky (Juan Pablo Rebella and Pablo Stoll, Uruguay-Argentina, 2004).
Good:Wild Side (Sebastien Lifshitz, France-UK, 2004).
Films I did not like were the two experimental found footage films: Oh, Man (Yervant Gianikian and Angela Ricci Lucci; Italy; 2004) and Throw Your Watch to the Water (Eugeni Bonet, Spain, 2004). The first, Oh, Man, uses recently discovered footage from the end of World War I. It wants to show the effect of violence on people but all of the footage is thrown together without rhyme or reason. No explanation as to who these people are or when the film was shot; no context. Throw Your Watch has been assembled from the works of avant-garde filmmaker Jose Val del Oman (1904-1982). It takes unrelated fragments of his short films but results in one that is abstract without being compelling.
At the very bottom of the heap is Hotel and Izo, wretched pieces of work. Hotel (Jessica Hausner, Austria-Germany, 2004) wants to explore fear. It might have been possible if she had actors who could act. The setting of the film is an Austrian forrest. Well chosen as you have never seen more wooden creatures in your life. Puppets have more range. Izo (Takashi Mike, Japan, 2004) wants to be a splatter film with depth. The director says, "You might say it is complicated. I know it is complicated. It is really hard to understand. But I don't care." Sorry, Miike, it isn't complicated. It is just pretentious rubbish on cheap sets with buckets of red paint and gallons of gore. How this dreadful mess was chosen for Toronto and London is beyond me.
Synopsis of Top Films
Head-On. "If you want to end your life, end it. But you don't have to kill yourself to end it," the doctor tells Cahit whose suicide attempt has brought him to a psychiatric hospital. He knows the doctor means he can start a new life. Sibel is young and pretty and she has faked suicide to get away from her conservative family. Instead she has brought shame upon them and now can only escape by marrying. She begs Cahil to marry her and reluctantly he does. They share an apartment but little else. Each has flings with other lovers until Cahil begins to fall in love with Sibel. His jealousy ends in violence. He goes to jail and she goes to Turkey. The idea for this harrowing love story began several years ago when director Akin was asked to enter into a sham marriage. He orginally wanted the film to be a Frank Capra style comedy. Birol Unel, the lead actor, was talented and his strength turned the story to darker areas. This is actress Sibel Kekilli's first film. It was difficult casting a Turkish speaking woman ready to to undress in front of a camera. Akin shot the film in chronological order which helped new comer Kekilli develop her character. What was supposed to be a 35 day shooting schedule stretched over 3 months, from March to May 2003. Kekilli suffered acute appendicitis and was hospitalized. At the same time Unel fell ill. Just when shooting began in Turkey war broke out in Iraq. Akin was afraid martial law would be declared and he would loose his shooting permit. Another major problem was that the lead actor had never done his military service in Turkey, required of all males, and would be arrested at the airport. Just as they arrived the law was changed and Birol was able to work in Istanbul.
House of Flying Daggers: How do you follow up a mega hit like Hero? If you are director Zhang Yimov, you make a wuxia (a sword play and chivalry film) as you are hooked on action. "This time around, I am braver and more accustomed to the genre," says Zhang. "I don't want to make an ordinary martial arts film. I want to talk about passion, interesting characters ... my own style of wuxia film. This is a story about passion and love ... it may be a wuxia film but it is also an evocative and romantic love story."
By 859 AD the once mighty Tang Dynasty is falling apart. The Emperor is incompetent and the government is corrupt. The people have begun revolting and many rebel armies are formed in protest. The largest of these is called the House of Flying Daggers. They operate is Robin Hood style, stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Under a New Leader they grow even stronger. Two local captains, Leo (Andy Lau Tak Wah) and Jin (Takeshi Kaneshiro) have ten days to capture the new leader. A blind dancer has arrived at the local Peony Pavilion who just happens to be the daughter of the old leader. Together the captains hatch a plan where they rescue the dancer, Mei, from prison and follow her. The plan works but on their journey Jin and Mei fall for each other. Does happiness lie ahead for these star-crossed lovers? House of Flying Daggers is a thrilling love story wrapped inside an action film. For the director, "Love is a triumph of the human spirit."
If Scarlett Johansson was last year's darling of film festivals then this year it is Ziyi Zhang's turn. Reaching stardom with Ang Lee's Academy Award winning Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Zhang's epic Hero, she follows up with Flying Daggers and Wong Kar Wai's 2046 and Hou Yong's Jasmine. She is currently in Los Angeles filming Memoirs of a Geisha. While Flying Draggers does not have the achingly beautiful cinema photography of Chris Doyle's Hero it does have Zhao Xiading and wonderful shorts of the required bamboo forrest fights and snow falling on the Ukraine.
King's Game: The dependency of journalists upon spin doctors is the basis for this Danish political thriller. To make this film director Nikolaj Arcel talked to "politicians, journalists and spin doctors. Many of them had stories to tell that could topple governments. That was the biggest surprise. That they would tell us, but not the people. A hot story is only hot, apparently, if it doesn't do too much damage to your own career." "Spin doctors," he continued, " are a disease in politics. But they would be insignificant if journalists didn't rely on them to the extent that they do. There are still journalists and politicians out there fighting the good fight. They are the real heroes, because they operate in a highly cynical world. My protagonist, Ulrik Torp (Anders W. Berthelsen) is a true hero. The story is inspired by events in all of Europe, not just Denmark."
Awards
The Sutherland Trophy Winner was Tarnation directed by Jonathan Caouette. The Sutherland Trophy is awarded to the director of the most original and imaginative first film screened at The Times bfi London Film Festival. "Tarnation is visionary film-making which genuinely pushes the boundaries of how we understand cinema. Jonathan Caroette has created a richly textured intimate portrait of his life which is in turn heartbreaking, brutal, poignant and uplifting. This is a truly original and imaginative first feature and a deserving winner of the Sutherland Trophy," said Artistic Director Sandra Habron.
The 7th FIPRESCI International Critics Award Winner was Aaltra directed by Gustave Karvern and Benoit Delepine. FIPRESCI is the international organization of film critics throughout the world and has been in existence for over 70 years. It is best known publicly through the participation of its juries at all the major and many specialists international film festivals. FIPRESCI's sole purpose is to advance the art of cinema and reward talent. "Today is the right day to give a prize to a politically incorrect film with great visual sensibility and full of Belgian surrealist humor," said FIPRESCI President Michel Ciment.
The UK Film Talent Award Winner went to Amma Asante for A Way of Life. The inaugural UK Film Talent Award, created to celebrate and support new and emerging British talent. "Recognizing and celebrating new British film-makers and their achievements is essential if the UK film industry is to continue to generate great cinema. Amma Asante is exactly the kind of film-maker we need to encourage and we're thrilled to give her this award." said bfi Chairman Anthony Minghella.
The 9th Annual Satyajit Ray Award Winner was The Woodsman directed by Nicole Kassell. The Satyajit Ray Foundation gives an annual award to a first feature, premiered in the UK at The Times bfi London Film Festival, which reflects the artistry, compassion and humanity of Ray's own work. "The Ray Award Jury appreciated the high standard of the first features in this year's Festival, and particularly admired Joshua Marston's Maria Full of Grace and Gaston Biranen's Captive, but are unanimous in giving their 9th Annual award to The Woodsman, an extremely well-crafted film debuted by Nicole Kassell, which treats the controversial theme of pedophilia with great insight and sensitivity, thanks not least to Kevin Bacon's fine performance in the leading role," said Jury President Clyde Jeavons.
Comments of Carlos Saura at the screening of The Seventh Day
They say that God made the Earth in six days and on the seventh he rested. The most horrible things happen on Sunday, as God sleeps.
"The Seventh Day is my latest film. It is based on real events that took place in a village in Spain in 1990. I do want to tell you that the film is a return to the soil--to the Spanish earth. You will see how it is possible to arrive at serious violence through crossed feelings, through feuds. "Small villages always remember. Cities forget the old is replaced by the new. But here everything stays the same."
"I was making imaginative films. I was making musicals like Tango. I have made seven musicals. The last was Salome. I needed to go back to the soil , to those real characters. I have made 37 films and I have made films that deal with reality in my home country. I was offered this film and was concerned and wanted to read the screenplay and see what it is. I usually write my own films, sometimes in cooperation with someone else. This time the screenplay was so good I was jealous that I had not written it myself. The story is based on real events that happened in a small village in Spain. The film is like it was. I did not want to make a documentary, did not want to make it exactly the way it was as some of the people are still alive. I wanted to have my say, to make the story my way. What I wanted to do in this film is to show how you can arrive at this level of violence, of death."
"I thought it would be interesting to look at this as a mini-civil war--war in a small town. We see around us violence everywhere. Political, military, economic. This story can be seen as a metaphor for violence. "I put the photographs at the beginning of the film myself. I have become lazy. This story was to be told far from my home in Madrid. I went around with my camera and found this village between Madrid and Seville. I am a compulsive photographer and have to take three or four pictures every day."
