Maureen's TIFF 13 Schedule

Barring moments of weakness when I purchase individual tickets for other screenings (for way too much money...) Here are my picks for this year's TIFF:

Only Lovers Left Alive	Tom Hiddleston,Tilda Swinton, Jim Jarmusch dir (North American premiere) Tom Hiddleston (aka Loki) plays a David Bowie-style rock star. And Jim Jarmusch films are usually very cool -- never mind anything Tilda Swinton is in Stars should be there.
Hateship Loveship	Kristen Wiig, Guy Pearce, Hailee Stanfield, Jennifer Jason Leigh (Based on Alice Munro story) (World Premiere) Stars should be there.
Horns	Daniel Radcliffe, Juno Temple (World premiere) Looks very strange to say the least. Notes say it's "uncomfortable" especially for people with an aversion to snakes. Yikes. Stars should be there.
Prisoners	Jake Gyllenhaal, Hugh Jackman (World premiere – but I’m at 2nd screening) Looks awesome. I've already seen the trailer for this one in theatres, so it's likely coming out soon.  Stars unlikely to be there. But one never knows...
The Double	Jesse Eisenberg, Mia Wasikowska (World premiere) Looks really interesting. Filmed in Toronto. Stars should be there. Plus they are adorable and a couple.
Mandela	Idris Elba (World premiere – 2nd screening) Idris Elba. Nelson Mandela. Enough said. Stars unlikely to be there.
The Grand Seduction	Taylor Kitsch (World Premiere) English Canadian remake of an awesome French Canadian film.  Stars should be there
Child of God	Directed by James Franco (North American premiere) Looks very "challenging"...  Franco will likely be there.
The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby: Him and Her	Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy.. (work in progress) I didn't realize this was a WIP when I picked it. No wonder it's so long... About 3 hours. Who the heck knows whether the stars will be here, as the film's not finished yet...
Under the Skin	Scarlett Johansson (North American Premiere) Stars should be there.
Third Person	Liam Neeson, James Franco, Mila Kunis, Adrien Brody – Paul Haggis dir (World premiere – 2nd screening) Stars unlikely to be there.
Tracks	Mia Wasikowska, Adam Driver (North American premiere) Stars should be there. This film got great buzz in Venice and sold to the Weinsteins for distribution.
Felony	Tom Wilkinson, Joel Edgerton (World Premiere) Stars should be there.
How I Live Now	Saoirse Ronan (World premiere – 2nd screening) Stars unlikely to be there.
The Husband	Bruce McDonald (dir) (World premiere) Stars likely to be there. But I don't recognize any of the names... Edgy Canadian director.
The Railway Man	Colin Firth, Nicole Kidman (World premiere – 2nd screening) Stars unlikely to be there. :(
Words and Pictures	Clive Owen, Juliette Binoche (World premiere – 2nd screening) Stars unlikely to be there. :(
Palo Alto	James Franco, Emma Roberts, Gia Coppola (dir) (North American premiere, 2nd screening) Stars unlikely to be there. :(
Story of my Death	Spanish film about Casanova and Count Dracula (North American premiere, 3rd screening) This one just sounded very cool... And I figured it was unlikely to show in theatres, so this would be my only chance.

I'll try really, really hard to blog about some of the movies this year during the festival.

Ides of March

Dang, I am a bad blogger. I promised I'd get around to talking about some of the other TIFF films I saw last weekend. My how time flies.

While I haven't found time to blog in the past 10 days, I did manage to see three movies ;) . All films that were at TIFF, but I didn't pick to see there (mostly because I knew they were coming out right after the festival.) I think all three of the fest movies I saw post-fest were great: Drive, 50/50 and Moneyball. If I had to pick a favorite, I'd have to go with 50/50, (because it's the easiest to "like"), but if I had to pick the one I thought was "best" I'd go with Drive.

But back to The Ides of March.

This is a political film starring George Clooney and Ryan Gosling (sounds great, right?) and co-starring Paul Giamatti and Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood (sounds even better, right?). I mean stellar cast, stellar performances, interesting topic... It should have been a home run (to use a metaphor more suited to Moneyball).

But it wasn't home run for me. Don't get me wrong, it was very good. But I wanted to be blown away and I wasn't. I keep trying to put my finger on why.... I think it's because there's really nothing new or groundbreaking about this story. Call me cynical but it's not news to me that otherwise good people with strong values and ideals can do unethical and immoral things in pursuit of power. And in this case in order to get the democratic nomination for the US Presidency.

I feel as if Primary Colors already covered that ground and while this movie is more serious and dare-I-say smarter than Primary Colors, I'm not sure it was as entertaining.

I'm not saying don't go see it -- especially if you're a fan of either Clooney or Gosling -- but don't get your hopes up as high as mine were, because super-high expectations are hard to live up to. :)

Drive and 50/50, on the other hand, both lived up to my expectations. But I'll talk about those soon. :) I promise this time.

And it Begins

The 36th annual Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) opened yesterday, so my life for the next 10 days is gone. I have some time today and a bit later in the week where I gave myself a break, (theoretically to write. Ha!), but I'm seeing at least 33 films at this point.

Yesterday, the TIFF was all about U2, with the premiere of the documentary From the Sky Down, but alas, not for me.

That was a "premium" screening, so I couldn't select it with my 30 film pass and frankly I think that film is likely one of the main reasons it was next to impossible to get through on the web or the phone to get single tickets when they went on sale last Saturday.

But, I did have a good first night.

My first film was also a documentary, Into the Abyss by Werner Herzog. He got a (very long) standing ovation when he came on stage just to introduce the film, which shows how well he's respected. Interestingly, there was no standing ovation at the end. I did like the film -- actually, like might not be the right word. It's a hard film to "like". If you want to see an "easier" Herzog film that's playing around still I think, go see Cave of Forgotten Dreams. Mesmerizing.

The subject of Into the Abyss is a very young man who was executed in Texas last year for murders he committed when he was only 18. It's hard to like anyone in this film, and Herzog to his credit does not try to manipulate the audience opinions. Clearly Herzog himself is anti-death penalty, but he doesn't ask leading questions or try to tug at heart strings and gives the daughter and sister of two of the victims a lot of time on screen. And while I didn't like her, either... she's one of the most sympathetic people he interviews. Herzog also dedicated the film to her and all victims of violent crime.

The part of this film that will stay for me for a long time is the realization that this laughing, goofy, immature, uneducated, probably lower-than-average IQ kid we saw interviewed is now dead. Killed by lethal injection 8 days after the interview. And there's no question he was guilty of the crimes. But he was a human being and I suppose more than anything the film showed that he was human, not a monster. Herzog said that after: his crimes were monstrous. He wasn't.

It's probably clear by now that I'm against the death penalty, too and I try to keep this blog away from political or controversial issues, so I'll shut up now and talk about the next film. :)

I also saw the new Gus Van Sant film Restless last night. I'm slightly on the fence about this one, too. It's a more commercial film than a lot of his movies about teens, but I almost found it too commercial or too pat. I might have been influenced by a negative review I read in NOW magazine right before the movie started, but I think my beefs were slightly different than the reviewer's.

The film stars the fabulous Mia Wasikowska which is why I picked it. She really is such a fabulous young actress and she's very good in this. The male lead is the screen debut of Henry Hopper, who happens to be Dennis Hopper's son and for me, he was slightly less than fabulous. I don't know. I had trouble believing a few things he did/said. But generally the performances are very good and it had a very natural, voyeuristic feel. 

My issue was the screenplay which I thought was a tad unsubtle. I don't know. As I try to describe it, it all sounds kind of clever and tight... And this is (slightly) spoilerish... A boy trying to get over the deaths of his parents imagines that he's friends with a dead WWII kamikazi pilot and falls in love with a terminally ill girl. 


The non-cliche, best part of the story is that it's a really sweet romance. It's clear these two kids are made for each other in a way you rarely see in films. You rarely see two characters who so completely get each other and it's tragic watching them fall in love when you know it will end so soon.  I don't know. Maybe I liked it more on reflection. :)


I did wonder as I was watching, "How did the screenwriter get this made? It doesn't seem all that special. And how did he possibly get Gus Van Sant to direct?" Then it all became clear in the Q&A. The screenwriter is a long-time friend of Bryce Dallas Howard... Who produced the film, with the help of her father (Ron Howard) and father's best friend (Brian Grazer). Hmmm.. That's an idea if I want a screenplay made. I need to make friends with the kids of huge Hollywood producers. Must get on that. :) 


But to the writer's credit... I did really believe the relationship between these kids and that can't have been just the actors and the director. 

Here are some snaps taken last night.  The dude in the green pants is the writer and just look how pregnant Bryce Dallas Howard is! I had no idea

Married Life

One of my WIP's that's more of a WFIP (formerly in progress) is/was a series of interconnected stories about single people. And I was planning to have the audacity to to suggest that some of my characters were very happy about their marital/relationship status. I have nothing against marriage or other forms of domestic partnerships and I'm sure many people are extremely happy in their marriages. But what irks me is the assumption that many/most married people have that people who are not married are defacto unhappy or missing something in their lives. That they'd be happier if only they were married. This assumption really offends me and that's the theme I was hoping to bring out in my book. That happiness comes in all kinds of packages. It's not one-size-fits-all kind of thing. And without turning this in to a way-too-personal post when it was supposed to be a movie review... I'm not anti relationship. If the right man came along. Sure. But I so love the freedom I have now to do whatever I want whenever I want.

Now, my book never got off the ground for a variety of reasons... I may still write it some day... but watching the film Married Life made me think about it again, because it made me a little bit happier about my single status.

The Globe and Mail reviewer, Kamal Al-Solaylee suggested in his review that the film Married Life poses two questions. One: can you build your happiness on the unhappiness of others; and two: can attempted murder spice up a marriage.

All I can say to that second question is, "HUH?" Did we see the same film? Just shows how different two people's perceptions of the same film can be. I'm really curious to know if Mr. Al-Solaylee is married and my guess would be yes. And that his marriage needs some serious spicing up. For me, the second very obvious question asked in the film was: Can you ever really know what's going on in the heart and mind of the person sleeping next to you.

In fact, that question was not just implied, it was specifically asked. And to me, that's what the film was about. It was a pretty depressing take on marriage if you ask me. Now, not to get too biased the other way, at the end of the film all the characters seemed outwardly happy. Like I said before, happiness comes in all kinds of packages. But by the end of the film there were a lot of secrets never shared between all the couples. Big secrets (including an attempted murder) brushed under the rug, never to be discussed in order to save relationships.
d
Hmmm... Now that I think of it, perhaps it wasn't meant to be an entirely negative look at marriage, merely a realistic one but brought to an extreme to make a point.

Interesting film, anyway. Not amazing. Didn't entirely work for me, I think mostly because of the Chris Cooper character. I normally love him in just about anything... but I found his character's motivations too much of a stretch to be believable in this story. But obviously the film got me thinking.

I'd recommend it as a rental, unless if you suspect (or know) there's a big secret between you and your significant other. Warning. Watching this film together might bring secrets to the surface, and this film certainly suggests that some things are best left buried.

The French Films

Okay, so I really fell down on blogging about the films I saw last week and there are still so many amazing ones I haven't mentioned. In all, I saw 40 films (I think). I had 44 tickets and think I passed on going to 4. (My pass was good for up to 50, but I think that's physically impossible. Not if you want more than 3 hours of sleep a night, anyway.)

So, the French ones...

Persepolis, Les Chansons D'Amour, Chrysalis, La Fille Coupee en Deux, and Le Scaphandre et Le Papillon.

I didn't realize I'd picked so many French films, but they were all worth seeing and three out of the five I'd highly recommend.

First is Persepolis, which I think will be released in North America in English, not French, so you won't even have to deal with subtitles.
As you can see from the photo, it's animated (and mostly hand drawn from what I understand) and I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's based on the autobiographical graphic novels of Marjane Satrapi, formerly of Iran, who now lives in Paris. The TIFF guide referred to this film as a, "...darkly humorous take on her experiences as a spirited young Muslim woman coming of age in Tehran – during the rule of the Shah, the Islamic Revolution and the gruelling Iran-Iraq War..."

Sure, there are some very dark elements. Sure, there are elements of "history lesson" in this film, but what an amazing way to present history, through the point of view of a young girl growing up and experiencing the history first hand. For me, one of the most important aspects of this film is how it breaks down stereotypes of Iranians and Muslims and shows how, in many ways, kids are kids no matter where they are. Okay, so I don't remember having one-up arguments with friends over whose relatives had been tortured the longest... but all kids have arguments like that using whatever amunition (parent's job or talents) is relevant to them. The bullying scenes were pretty scary, too -- kids chasing other kids with nails poking out between the fingers of a fist. But again, in context, it showed how kids are affected by what's happening around them and act out their stress via games.
And the film wasn't all bleak. Not by a long shot. There were some truly laugh out loud moments... For example, I'm remembering two perpectives of a past boyfriend -- one told when she was in love and one after their break up. So clever. So funny. And also the scenes of her coming out of a depression made me laugh out loud. I admire any writer/artist who can pull on the audience's emotions like that, making us feel empathy for her depression and then to pull us out of that sadness with a hilarious take I don't want to spoil, but it involved the theme from Rocky. Anyway, imdb.com lists some American actors, (including Sean Penn and Iggy Pop!), in the "English version" so I assume when it's released over here, Persepolis won't be a French film and because of the animation, I don't think it'll matter one bit. (I hate dubbed films normally, but I mean, all animated films are dubbed, so what's the difference? Especially this kind of animation. I guess it would matter for some of the Pixar stuff where the characters' mouths actually move well to the words ... but not in this one.)

And the best French film I saw this year... Probably one of my top 5 or so films of this year's festival full stop, was Le Scaphandre et Le Papillon.
Translated, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. A truly amazing film. It's based on a book written by a man with "locked in syndrome". He suffered a stroke which left everything paralyzed except one eyelid, but his brain, in terms of thinking etc was completely in tact. The filmmaker did an amazing job of putting the audience in this man's shoes, which was at once heartbreaking and uplifting. A speech pathologist devised a way to communicate with him --basically she read out letters (in the order shown in the photo) and he'd blink when she hit the right letter, and then she'd start again. Believe it or not, that's how he wrote the book. You have to see it to believe it. And I don't want to give you the impression this is a tear-jerker smaltzy kind of movie. Not at all. HIGHLY recommend this film if it comes to your city. It wasn't one of my original picks but I swapped it for something else and was glad for it. One small detail... the subtitles got very confusing for anyone who knows any French, when he was learning to "speak", because, for example, when he was trying to spell mourir, which means "to die", he'd blink on M and she'd ask "M?" and the subtitle would read D. Until I trained myself to listen instead of reading the subtitles in those bits, it was very distracting. But go see this film if you get the chance.

The other French film I really enjoyed was Les Chansons D'Amour.
I did talk about this one a bit the day I saw it. Basically, it was interesting and quirky fun. A musical about some very unconventional characters and their love lives.





Chrysalis was a French sci fi film I liked well enough, but don't think it was amazing enough to recommend that highly. The same with La fille coupee en deux, which I blogged about when I saw it. Interestingly, it starred the same actress as Les Chansons, and while La Fille is certainly considered the "bigger" film of the two... based on the filmmaker etc. I really enjoyed Les Chansons, better...

So, that's it for the French films. Tomorrow... The ones about child abuse including Alan Ball's new film Nothing is Private and Nicole Kidman's new film Margot at the Wedding. Brace yourselves.

Viggo's penis wins People's Choice Award

Too tired to blog again... Will talk about more movies next week...

But Eastern Promises won the People's Choice Award at the festival. To understand what the title of this post means (and yes, to see his penis)... go see the film. Ironically, it didn't win the best Canadian film prize (which is a juried prize) which went to Guy Maddin's My Winnipeg. Now, I'm all for avante guard films and must say I (mostly) enjoyed Maddin's very strange film The Saddest Music in the World in which Isabella Rosellini's character has a glass leg full of beer... But I saw Maddin's film in last year's festival, called Brand Upon the Brain and in spite of some cool gimics like having not only a live orchestra, but also live sound effects artists you could watch to the side of the screen (it was a silent movie...) I found it tedious and left before the end. So, needless to say, I did not pick My Winnipeg as one of my movies this year.


Eastern Promises was a good film. Definitely worth seeing. It's film noir but with Cronenberg's horror film stamp on parts of it. Examples are the way he shows things like throats being cut or even a baby being born... But for me Eastern Promises wasn't as good as A History of Violence that I thought had so many more layers... Speaking of film noir... I saw Eastern Promises last Sunday morning at 9:30 am. Cronenberg introduced the film, and seemed truly perplexed that 1200 or so people would show to see such a dark film so early in the morning. He called it, "the world premiere screening of the film in the morning." LOL

Runner up for the People's Choice award (I heard from someone in a line) was Juno, a really great little film that I blogged about the day I saw it... Not sure when this film is opening, but I really hope it does well. I thought it was so genuine and unique and true. (Not to mention laugh out loud funny. I want to see it again to hear the lines the audience laughed over.)

The festival is over for 2007... I skipped my first and last films today, but still managed to see four. My last film actually doesn't start for another four minutes... But I was too tired to stay to see it.

Will post more thoughts on the films and the fest all next week.

tomorrow

I just don't think I can blog tonight... But I'll bring my laptop with me tomorrow and try to post some time during the day.

Good day, today... Don't want to post about the films without thinking a little and being half-way coherent.

Okay day

Am I getting tired or was today just OK?

I ended up sleeping through Bill my 9:00 am screening. Oh, well. I hope it gets released into theatres. I started the day with what was supposed to be my second film of the day, the new Woody Allen film, Cassandra's Dream starring Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell. It was good. Not like the most amazing film I've ever seen--not even the most amazing Woody Allen movie, but better than many of his more recent films, for me anyway.


With Matchpoint and this film, it seems Woody Allen's back to exploring ethical and moral dilemmas like he did in great movies like Crimes and Misdemeanors. (Makes me wonder what kind of ethical lines Allen has crossed in his life -- other than sleeping with his adopted daughter, that is.) Ewan and Colin play brothers in the film and it was interesting to see Farrell in the "beta" brother role. I think this film comes out around Christmas and it's worth seeing. (I mean, is any movie with Ewan McGregor not worth seeing???)

After that, instead of trekking 10 blocks to another theatre, I passed on Weirdsville which I'm a little bummed about, because it looks fun, (but I assume it will be released in theatres in Canada, anyway) and picked up a ticket for Atonement. I'm glad I did. I guess the Woody Allen movie got me thinking about ethics and morals and since I'd read Atonement I was kind of in the mood for more of that kind of thing.

Anyway... As afraid as I was about being disappointed, I actually think this movie worked for the most part. The book is so amazing... If you haven't read it, you should. But it's a challenging book to adapt for the screen in that it goes over the same time period and events more than once from different points of view, and in that all is not what it seems for most of the story. I wasn't sure how the filmmaker would pull this off... But he did use a few tricks to give the viewer clues, including some interesting foreshadowing devices that you'd probably only notice if you know the book... but added to the enjoyment for me. The coolest example of this was using a typewriter as a percussion instrument throughout bits of the musical score. If you've read the book, you may get why this was an interesting choice.

Atonement was made by the same filmmaker who did the most recent Pride and Prejudice, which I loved. He really is an expert in show don't tell... He shows so much in all these tiny little moments.. Like having James McAvoy touch the surface of the water Keira Knightly has recently been in... That kind of detail reminded me of his P&P which also had many nice little moments like that.

After that, I saw La Fille coupee en deux, which Barrie asked me to review. Dang. Sorry Barrie. I dozed off a couple of times. I don't think it's a boring film... I was just tired -- maybe too tired for subtitles. I kept jerking awake when the audience laughed. It's pretty out there... A very implausible story in my mind, but I don't necessarily think it was supposed to be plausible. But the filmmaker is some famous french director who was part of the new wave thing and he's in his eighties now and I can't help but think that it's a story only a man that age would tell. I probably need to let it percolate a bit... and maybe see it again to see just how often my eyes were closed... But I'm not sure that I like what this film says about women. The main actress Ludivine Sagnier was in another absolutely charming French film I saw this week, called Les Chansons d'Amour. I'm planning an "about the musicals" post at some point, and so I'll wait on talking about Chansons until then... But some of you may have also seen Ludivine in Swimming Pool. She was the young girl in that film.

I ended the day with an Australian film called Romulus, My Father, starring Eric Bana and Franka Potente. Eric was there (jealous much, Sinead?) A very nice little film. Not amazing, but very nice. I found one plot element a bit off, but then learned during the Q&A that the film is based on a memoir... so just goes to prove that sometimes real life isn't very believable.

Three more days, but things already feel like things are winding down... I still have 14 or so movies to see... But at this point I can't even remember if there's anything I'm really excited about. Oh, I don't have a ticket, but I'm going to try to switch one of my picks tomorrow to see Le Scaphandre et le papillon. (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.) At least two people have called it their favourite film when I've asked. It's showing again tomorrow afternoon when I now have a ticket for a film called The Take, that looks okay... but the French film sounds better. It's actually been a good year for French films for me... Maybe I'll do an "about the French films" post later, too...

Living up to the hype

Okay, so yesterday I theorized that whichever film I was most looking forward to in any particular day would be sure to disappoint... Not today.

I saw Across the Universe this morning and as excited as I was to see it, the film exceeded my expectations in just about every way.

It's kind of hard to explain this movie. To call it a musical trivializes it, but clearly it is a musical. The director Julie Taymor did a Q&A after the screening and according to her there's only 30 minutes of dialogue in this 2 hour movie and that sounds about right. It was mostly music. But the music is so compelling and fun (or heart wrenching) and the visuals so original it didn't feel long.

And surprisingly, in spite of featuring such well known songs, the music felt original, too. I was blown away. Sure, it was 33 Beatles songs all strung together to make a story... But all of the arrangements are different and the performances outstanding and the lyrics felt totally organic to the story being told. I'm telling you, the guy who plays Jude, Jim Sturgess, was truly amazing. Not only is he adorable, he has an incredible singing voice and, like all the performers in this movie, has the acting talent to make it seem like Lennon & McCartney's lyrics were about him and that he was singing them for the first time. According to Julie Taymor, about 90% of the musical performances that ended up in the movie were from live performances on the set (not prerecorded and lip synced). Sounds like they did prerecord everything, but had the actors sing on set, too (with the music playing in little ear buds in their ears) and those were the performances she went with most of the time. Evan Rachel Woods was amazing, too. I knew she was a talented young actress, but who knew she could sing, too?

LOVED this movie. (Can you tell?) I feel like it's one I'll enjoy watching over and over again. It opens in select cities including Toronto this Friday (everywhere on Sept 21) but I'm glad I saw it first and saw it in the beautiful Elgin theatre and got to hear Julie Taymor answer audience questions at the end. FANTASTIC.

Heard something else interesting today. Not sure if it's accurate, but heard it from someone who has a short film in the festival, who heard it at one of the industry events. Anyway... the gossip was that the cut of the Brad Pitt film (Jesse James) I saw the other night is not the one that will be shown in theatres starting in ten days. The rumor was that Brad Pitt did his own cut of the movie, but both the director and the studio thought it was too long and slow-paced. Supposedly, I saw the Brad cut and the one being released into theatres is the shorter one the studio liked... This is probably a good thing. It was very long 2 hours and 40 minutes and felt it...

I know I didn't talk about The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford the day I saw it... It's been percolating. Overall, I liked it, but certainly didn't love it. If you're interested in films and creative storytelling then you might enjoy it. Visually, it was pretty spectacular. Some art worthy shots to be sure. Also, the director did a few interesting stylistic things. For example, during the voice-over narration, he made the screen look like an old daguerreotype or something.... That is, a circle in the centre of the screen was in focus, but the edges were blurred... Like it had been shot through an old fashioned lens. Things like that did make it kind of interesting... And the shots of characters posing... certainly the movie was from the POV of looking back at a legend from today, not watching it unfold in real time. I think that's what made the pacing drag, but also was kind of creative, I guess. But the film did drag at times and a few story elements weren't clear to me... But this may just be because I'd let my mind wander.

Given the tepid applause at the end of the film (even with the ridiculously star-sprinkled audience) I wasn't the only one who was luke-warm on Jesse James. I'll be interested to see how it does in release. (Remind me some time to talk more about that night. Really surreal.)

I'm still trying to decide what I thought of In the Valley of Elah, that I saw yesterday, too... During the film, I was really disappointed. It felt preachy and heavy handed in it's message and derivative of TV cop shows in it's delivery... But by the end I liked it more, and now that it's percolated for a day, I realize there were some really strong moments... Mostly at the end... And I've also decided that in many ways Haggis did deliver his overall message (that war turns boys into monsters) in a fairly creative way... At least not in the most predictable way. But this movie didn't 100% work for me. At least it didn't live up to my very high expectations.

Another 5 film day tomorrow. I have a ticket to the new Woody Allen film... but may take a pass. Right now, my day goes like this:

9:00 am Bill at Scotiabank Theatres
11:00 am Cassandra's Dream (Woody Allen one) at The Elgin
3:00 pm Weirdsville at Scotiabank
6:00 pm La Fille coupee en deux at The Elgin
9:00 pm Romulus, My Father at The Elgin

So, if I can get a ticket for something at Scotia that ends no later than 2:00.... I might do that instead. (or I might sleep in and skip Bill... but it doesn't have a release date listed anywhere, so this might be the only chance to see it and it sounds pretty interesting...)

Over and out...

All about the comedies

You think I'd have realized by now that whatever I expect to be my "big great experience" on any particular day will not ending up being so.

I thought today was going to be all about Paul Haggis's new film In the Valley of Elah, and it was good... (more on it at another time) But for me today was about two comedies I saw. Maybe I just really, really needed a comedy. There are a lot of very heavy films in the festival this year.

The first comedy was Juno an amazing movie by Jason Reitman of Thank-you for Smoking fame -- which also had it's world premiere at the TIFF a few years ago.

Anyway... Juno. It was the most original and unique take on the teenager gets pregnant story I've seen. Unique mostly because of the writing and the main character played by Ellen Page, who I've only seen in really dark films prior to this, like Hard Candy. (If you ever want to see a film that will make you feel really uncomfortable, rent Hard Candy. Deep exploration of revenge and moral choices and perhaps karma -- not to mention castration...) Her character in Juno was so quirky and different and totally unique -- as were her parents played by J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney. Michael Cera (Arrested Development, Superbad) has a small part and he's adorable as usual.

The other great comedy was Lars and the Real Girl with Ryan Gosling. Another totally unique and different film with great performances. Yes, it's about a man who falls in love with a sex doll... But it's actually very sweet and says a lot about the positive side of human nature. Some people will find this movie over the top, but I think that's kind of the point. You can't take it 100% literally.

Anyway... Two good films to check out when they hit theatres. I know they both have distribution deals in both Canada and the US. Juno probably sooner. Oh, I'm wrong. According to IMDB I have that backwards. Looks like Lars will be out some time in Oct and Juno in December in a limited release. Perhaps after the amazing reaction Juno got at TIFF they'll release it more widely.

Sorry this post isn't more interesting or coherent. I need sleep!

All about Sean Penn

Okay, so I just had my first truly transcendent festival experience of 2007. I don't think I've felt that way in a movie theatre since the World Premiere of Paul Haggis' Crash a few festivals ago.

I thought today was going to be all about Cronenberg for me, and I did like his film... But WOWOWOWOWOW...

Into the Wild, the new Sean Penn movie staring Emile Hirsch and with music by Eddie Vedder. Can't express how moving and riveting this film was. And I was really tired going in. I actually considered going home after my 6:00 pm film, but I'm so glad I didn't. Worth staying up for.

For me, the truly amazing films at the festival are the ones where there's no buzz, were there's been no reviews, because no one has freakin' seen it yet. That's the way it was with Crash in 2004 and Into the Wild this year. Those of us lucky enough to be in the room are the first people to ever see it on a big screen. And when a film like that is good... well it's amazing.

Into the Wild is so beautiful visually, the music's incredible, the performances are real, the characters fascinating, the story gripping in spite of what many people would consider a slow pace, and then Jon Krakauer's truly beautiful and deeply meaningful prose as read by Jenna Malone. WOW.

I have three Oscar predictions, no four. Best Actor, Emile Hirsch, Best Score, Eddie Vedder, Best Director, Sean Penn, Best Movie, Into the Wild. That is, assuming this movie hits theatres before the end of the year. I have no idea what they're planning. [Update: According to IMDB.com, it's out this month. Go see it.] With Crash, they waited almost a year after I saw it to release the film to theatres... But that was because Haggis was getting all that buzz over Million Dollar Baby. (I assume--and digress.) There are also a few possible supporting actor noms including Hal Holbrook and Catherine Keener who were stand outs for me in a cast where every performance felt so real.

If you don't know anything about this book, then I suggest not reading it or listening to any reviews before seeing the movie. If you have read the book, I expect you won't be disappointed. I may be wrong about my Oscar predictions, but if this film doesn't solidify Sean Penn's reputation as a stellar filmmaker, I don't know what it would take. Truly fabulous. Okay, I'm gushing. But the film really blew me away, and if the standing ovation was any judge, it blew everyone else away, too.

And the festival audiences don't do that for every film just to kiss up to the stars in the room. Last night, there was short polite applause after The Assassination of Jesse James, in spite of half of Hollywood royalty being in the room. (Okay, just the boys. Half the cast of Ocean's Eleven, Twelve, etc. were there to watch Brad in his arty western.) Which I enjoyed, by the way, I know I didn't blog about it last night... But I did find it beautiful both visually, and in terms of the words. (Like this film tonight, Jesse James has a voice over narration at times, and it was like poetry. Beautiful.) But in spite of Pitt winning best actor at the Venice Festival, I really don't think that film's going to do very well. (Nor did I think he was all that great in it.) It was about the same length and overall pace as Into the Wild, but felt about 2 hours longer... And I talked to several people today who genuinely hated it...

Anyway... Another big day tomorrow, starting out with a very interesting sounding movie, In Bloom, starring Uma Thurman, (which sounds controversial enough that it may not hit theatres in spite of Ms. Thurman), and ending with Paul Haggis's new film, In the Valley of Elah, in the evening... But Haggis's new film has already been seen by the press and in Venice, so not nearly as exciting. BTW. Haggis was in the theatre tonight to watch Sean Penn's movie.

Over and out....

Reese Witherspoon made me cry...

True confessions, Reese made me cry. And early in the morning. (Maybe I was crying because it was so early in the morning?)

But seriously. Rendition was amazing. I really liked it. Not only did I find it gripping and emotional and important, but it was my first film this year that made me think about storytelling techniques.

I don't want to give away spoilers for a film I think everyone should see... but there are multiple storylines and an interesting twist in how the writer/director uses those storylines. Just something I'd never seen before and I thought it really worked to heighten tension, build to a climax, etc. etc.

Another very cool festival experience was the world premiere of Stuart Townsend's new film Battle in Seattle about the WTO riots in 1999. The audience gave a five minute standing ovation... I'm not sure I thought it was five-minute-standing-ovation good... but clearly others did and Stuart and Charlize were too cute for words. During the Q&A someone asked how each of the actors got involved in the project and they all gave these long-winded answers about how great the script and subject matter were and how badly they wanted to be involved... And then the mike went to Charlize and she said, "I just wanted to sleep with the director." Seriously, they were too cute.

All-in-all a great day but I'm a little too tired to blog much and need to get up in less than 6 hours if I want to make my screening of Eastern Promises, and I want to pay the films I saw today justice when I talk about them.

I'm just going to say one more thing. In person, Brad Pitt is the most beautiful human being on the planet. Oh, My, God. (Says Maureen from the third row, realizing she's not over him like she thought she was when he left his wife for that slut.

Worth the mad dash across Queen St?

Okay, so I'm through my first full day, but it's 12:44 am and my first film tomorrow (today?) is at 9:00 am... So this blog will be short. My morning film tomorrow is Rendition, and I do want to see it, but it opens Oct. 19, and the premiere was tonight (at the same time as I was seeing an Ang Lee film) so the stars are highly unlikely to be there... so when my alarm rings at 7:30 am I may well decide to give it a pass.

Today was pretty good. First film Pink. A very strange but interesting film. It's a Greek film and I'm trying to think of how to describe it... All elements were odd/offbeat. The characters, the story, the filming style, everything. But all in all I'm glad I saw it.

Next was California Dreamin' (Endless). A Romanian film that did end up being well named -- endless. I was loving the film for about the first 90 minutes... Then I got restless and realized I had a time problem because I had a 6:00 pm screening at another venue. I'd figured that would be lots of time, since California Dreamin' (Endless) was at 3:00, so I figured I'd be out by 5:00... But no... I knew there was supposed to be a big explosive ending... so I kept waiting it out, but ended up leaving at about 5:40 (I'm not sure what I missed) and literally ran and then took a cab for 3 or so blocks and ran some more (once the traffic around Yonge and Queen got so bad running was quicker than the cab). But I made it. They only officially hold seats until 15 minutes before the screening, but they were still letting the main line in (hadn't even started dealing with the Rush folks) when I got there. Phew.

That film was worth the run, I think... But I was in the second row which was kind of difficult. It was called Then She Found Me and the filmmaker/star was Helen Hunt. This is a real "women's fiction" type story and although the Ang Lee movie is in my head right now... I think I really liked Then She Found Me. Hey, Colin Firth was in it. What's not to like. (He didn't show up for the screening, though.) It's about a woman dealing with her marriage ending, wanting to have a baby, meeting her birth mother, etc. etc. There were a few interesting/unexpected twists and Hunt was really good. Bette Midler plays her birth mom and one bizarre thing I hate to comment on, was that Hunt looked older than Midler. I admire Helen Hunt for not botoxing or eye lifting herself... but it was a bit strange that Midler looked younger. I guess it kind of fit their characters, though. Okay, I officially feel badly about noticing/mentioning this. I'm such a hypocrite.

The Ang Lee film Lust, Caution was pretty amazing. But I'm a big fan of his. During the intros, one of the producers made a joke about Ang Less going from a gay shepherd movie to a 2 1/2 hour Chinese porno... LOL. Lust, Caution is a spy-type story set in Shanghai in the 1940's and yes, there are some very graphic (and violent) sex scenes. It'll be interesting to see if this movie gets released in the US. Probably will with a NC17 rating. Can't imagine how they could cut it to avoid that rating. But then the ratings given by the MPAA are so arbitrary and bizarre, who knows... They showed some clips from 40's era movies during the film, including Casablanca, and I have a feeling these clips were chosen purposefully, but I'm going to have to think about that a bit more... One character does make a big/difficult/impulsive/tragic choice that's kind of motivated by love... but it's not like Casablanca in my mind... Will have to think about it once my head clears a bit. Maybe it was just showing the romantic nature of the protagonist? Hmmmm...

Anyway... I'd better try to wind down and get to bed! (Tomorrow's Brad Pitt day, not to mention the new Coen brothers movie!)

Good first day

Okay, so it was a good if uneventful opening day. Most exciting, for the first time in years they actually had a pretty funny ad before the film. It involved producer Robert Lantos being pitched a film idea by Gordon, one of those stupid beaver characters from the Bell commercials, but in spite of that, it actually got laughs. I imagine it'll get pretty old by the end of the festival, no, by tomorrow. But at least it got a laugh on the first run. That's opposed to the very strange promo piece for the Harold Greenberg Foundation which involved someone (Ian Greenberg?) in a coffin at a funeral, with Atom Egoyan and another filmmaker, I should recognize but didn't, talking about what an inspiration the dead guy was, then he sits up in his coffin and talks. If it was supposed to be funny, I didn't get it.

Fugitive Pieces was emotionally draining, but good. Well worth seeing in my opinion. I wish I thought it was going to be a huge hit... I love when Canadian films do well, but ultimately I think the story is too sad to be a box office hit and I just don't know if the performances were strong enough for it to be a contender for Oscars or anything. Except the little kid who played Jakob as a boy. WOW. He was amazing.

I was extremely impressed with how seamlessly the writer/director moved between locals and time periods. The actors, too. The lead had to play his character over quite a long time period, and not in chronological order in the film, but it was always easy by this demeanor etc to determine what stage of the story we were in. The story moves back and forth in time, but it was never confusing. I'd have to see it again to study how he did it.

Persepolis I'd definitely recommend. I noticed on IMDB.com that they list actors for the English version (including Sean Penn, Iggy Pop, and Gena Rowlands) so I assume it'll be released in North America (and in English instead of French with subtitles.)

The animation is unique and striking and well suited to the subject and while the overall story is kind of heavy, the filmmaker adds a lot of levity. There were a few laugh out loud moments for me, and that's a lot to say about a film documenting the rise of the Islamic regime in Iran and the Iran-Iraq war.
Persepolis. My first no caveats recommendation from this year's Festival.

I don't have a film until noon tomorrow, so I can sleep in! The film is called Pink and sounds interesting. It's a Greek film but is described as having the style of Richard Linklater or Paul Thomas Anderson. Hmmm....

And So it Begins...

Today is the opening day of the festival and so far I'm still feeling pretty happy about my picks. Sure, there are movies I'd love to see that I sacrificed for others... But all in all, I'm pretty excited.

Bracing too, for 10 days of little sleep, eating badly, and running between movie theatres. It's also ragweed season and I have terrible allergies which always seem to get aggravated by the no-sleep-bad-food-spending-too-much-time-in-movie-theatres thing. I have tickets for 45 films this year again. And while that sounds like 4.5 per day... I only have 2 screenings today and so there are a few days when I have 6 films. ACK. Time will tell whether I get to them all. As excited as I am about seeing each of the films I've picked, there comes a point each year where sleep, or getting a real meal, starts to take precedence.

On deck for today:

Fugitive Pieces. A Canadian film based on a novel by Anne Michaels, about a young Holocaust survivor who comes to Canada via Greece after the war. I remember liking this book when I read it (at least 10 years ago) but only a few strong images have remained in my mind. And often it's tricky to translate literary fiction to the movie screen... but it's directed by Jeremy Podeswa who directed many episodes of Six Feet Under and some other interesting TV stuff. And it got a 3 star review in the Globe today... So I'm hopeful. It's also the first time I've gotten a ticket for the opening film. I was so lucky in the lottery this year.

Next is Persepolis, an animated film that's a coming of age story of a girl in Tehran during the rule of the Shah, the Islamic Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War. Not your average Saturday morning cartoon from the sounds of it.

I'm going to try to blog about at least one of the films each day. I'm not sure what the camera situation is going to be this year, but if I can take some snaps I'll post those too... Last year in some screenings they had big thugs trying to prevent people from taking snaps...
Not sure what the situation will be this year. But depending on how it seems, I'll bring my camera to the opening of Jesse James on Thursday night. How could I not take a picture of Brad Pitt????

Maureen is happy...

What is making Maureen happy? Her TIFF pick envelope ended up in box 70 of 75 and the number drawn out of the hat (well, box) was 66. That means she has a better than fighting chance of getting all her first choice movies. Yippee! Let's hope she didn't make too many mistakes on her selection form at 4:00 am this morning...

Festival Time

So, it's festival time again and I'm up late trying to make my picks which are due by 1:00 PM tomorrow. Not that I'm guaranteed to get my first choice picks, but I've been incredibly lucky the past few years, which, of course, makes me think this is the year that my second choice picks will be more important or even relevant...

I blogged last year a bit about the festival and I'm always faced with the what-kind-of-festival-do-I-want-to-have question when trying to make my selections from the 350 plus films they're showing.

Do I go for the avante guard? Foreign films? Base it on trying to stick to one theatre for a few films in a row, rather than dashing around Toronto? Do I try to maximize the number of celebrities I see? I mean, is seeing The Assassination of Jesse James only a week or so before it's released, but seeing Brad Pitt in the flesh during the introductions, worth passing up on Alan Ball's new movie Nothing is Private? How does one decide these things?

And to get more absurd, do I choose to see Michael Clayton, which opens Oct 5 (in NY, LA and Toronto) but have a possible Clooney sighting -- he is going to be in town, but will he show for the second screening? -- or see My Kid Could Paint That, a documentary about a six year old girl whose paintings sell for big bucks. I'll see Michael Clayton regardless of the festival, which makes me think I should go for the documentary... And what about the new Elizabeth film which looks amazing... Is it worth missing Jason Reitman's (Thank you for not Smoking) new film Juno that starts Michael Cera who's in Superbad right now??? And the only other screening of Juno is the same time as the new Coen brothers' film No Country for Old Men.

A few films in the festival, I want to see regardless of the fact they're opening in theatres soon. First is Across the Universe, mostly because it just looks so cool and if it gets reviewed badly I don't want the reviews to spoil my possible amazing movie-going experience. Of course, seeing a trippy film like that at 9:00 in the morning may not be so trippy... The other is Eastern Promises, David Cronenberg's new film. It's the film that Toronto's NOW Magazine picked as "THE FILM" of this year's festival, plus the reviewer seemed to think that it'll get slashed to pieces once the US censors see it... And I'd rather see it uncut.

So, back to my picking... Must get this done... I know. Tough life.

Intelligent choices...

I went to see The Lookout last night. And while I can't say it was the best movie I've seen this year or anything quite that strong... it did strike me once again what interesting and intelligent choices Joseph Gordon-Levitt has made in his career.

I mean, here's a kid who got famous very young and presumably made a lot of money for acting in a very silly sitcom. How easy would it have been to move from that into either another silly sitcom or into teen-exploitation movies. He's cute and looks even younger than he is, easily passing for a teenager even now. I'm sure he must have been offered tons of hollywood teen movies.
Instead? He's been doing really interesting smaller films.

(Okay, he was in 10 Things I Hate About You. But I'd argue that was, as teen movies go, a pretty smart one. I mean, doing a modern remake of Taming of the Shrew is a pretty bold idea. And that director was smart enough to cast an almost unknown at the time Heath Ledger, too.)

I first saw Gordon-Levitt, post 3rd Rock, (which, for the record, I thought was hilarious when it first came out, but quickly tired of), in a film at the 2004 Toronto International Film Festival called Mysterious Skin. It's my favourite type of film to see at the festival, but a hard kind to pick just based on the programming schedule. Maybe if I knew more about directors, etc... but I usually find these ones by luck alone. By favourite type, I mean interesting, bold, smaller films -- usually with a young, new director, and often with hollywood stars or up-and-coming young actors -- but which, in spite of its impressive cast, will never be released into the theatres, or if it is released, will be hard to find because of a very short run/small number of screens.

I picked this film totally by luck. I think I was literally at the theatre, had a few hours to kill before my next screening (or was too lazy to truck over to whatever theatre my next screening was at) and there were tickets available.

What an interesting film. His performance is still with me. Now, a small warning before you go out to rent it. Here are the "Plot Keywords" listed on imdb.com for Mysterious Skin. "Gay Lead Character / Disturbing / Nose Bleed / Alien Abduction / Coming Of Age"

Interested yet? I'm re-interested and will have to see it again.

Also very interesting was Brick, made in 2005, but which I'm pretty sure I just saw last year some time. Very cool movie. The director completely transfers the film-noir genre into a high school setting. Worth it for the stylized dialogue alone.

And The Lookout, in theatres now. A slowly building suspense film with great character development and, for me anyway, tons of quiet tension.

Gordon-Levitt is either a very smart young man, or he has very smart people around him. Oh, and I just noticed on imdb that he was in A River Runs Through It when he was only 10. Huh. Must have been one of the boys as a kid? Will have to see that again. Okay. For more than just Gordon-Levitt :-)

Bella wins people's choice

An American independent film, Bella, won the people's choice award at the festival and I actually saw it.

I wouldn't have put it on my top ten at the festival list, though... Not that I didn't enjoy it... it just didn't seem like anything that special to me. I had to look at the listing to remind myself what it had been about.

Now that I'm remembering it... it was probably a good lesson in slowly revealing backstory. For you writers out there, it's probably a good one to see when it's released for that reason alone. Nice redemption story, too... But I saw the ending coming a mile away and I think it was the ending that swept so many people up and caused them to vote for it...

For those of you who don't know... Toronto doesn't have an official prize like many big festivals. Rather, the public get ballots at each screening and can rate a movie on a scale of 1-5. (Actually, this process has changed just about every year I've been to the festival, but the idea that the audience picks has always been there.)

It's a strange voting system... because you're asked to vote right after seeing a film and I don't know how you can know on the first day whether you'll like the films you just saw better than the films you're going to see. Also, some people may see only one film at the festival, others, like me, see nearly 50. But even 50 doesn't make a dent in the 350 or so films screening... I suppose it's really a contest of how many audience members the film inspires to actually fill out a ballot -- which is, in fact, a test of something.

Suspect system or not, good films tend to win this category each year, (Tsotsi, Hotel Rwanda, Rabbit Proof Fence, The Whale Rider all won in previous years. (If memory serves... I couldn't find a list online,) so I guess there's something to the system. One of the reasons film producers like to premiere their films at the Toronto festival is because the audiences are real movie goers for the most part, not just industry people and press.

Amazing Grace an amazing ending

Well. The film festival is over for another year. I feel dizzy and tired and just a little sick.

I saw so many great films, but they're all whirling around in my brain right now, so it's hard to pick a favourite. Last year and the year before it was easier... Brokeback Mountain in 2005 and Crash in 2004 were easily my favourites... This year, I haven't decided yet, but AMAZING GRACE, is in the running.

I actually had tickets for 5 films today, but only went to 3 -- skipping the first and the last of the day at 9:00 am and 9:00 pm.

I decided to make AMAZING GRACE my final film. It was the official closing film of the festival and was wonderful.

It's the story of William Wilberforce who, I admit, I'd never heard of before. He was the British member of parliament responsible for the bill which abolished slavery in Britain in 1807.

The film is being released in February 2007 to coincide with the 200th anniversary of the passing of this bill -- which Wilberforce had been fighting for for nearly 30 years largely against the sugar industry.

Make a movie date in your calendars now for February.

I was supposed to go to THE DOG PROBLEM in the morning... but decided to sleep in. I'm sorry about missing that one. I've heard good things and I don't know if it's been sold to a distributor yet so it might not make it to theatres. Scott Caan is the filmmaker and it stars Giovani Ribisi.

I also saw two documentaries today. The first was SHOT IN THE DARK and Adrien Grenier of Entourage was both filmmaker and subject. I've been a fan of Adrien Grenier since I first saw him in THE ADVENTURES OF SEBASTIAN COLE a lovely little coming of age film, nearly ruined by a horrible fake accent done by Margaret Colin playing his mother, but saved by Adrien and by Clark Gregg as his cross-dressing transgendered step-father.

Anyway, SHOT IN THE DARK is a documentary about Adrien confronting his biological father whom he hadn't seen since he was five. The film was shot in 1999-2000. I expect he couldn't get anyone to give him the money to turn it into a real film until Entourage made him a bit famous. HBO Films is the producer of SHOT IN THE DARK. No surprise. Anyway, if it shows up on HBO or the documentary channel, it's worth a watch. I also saw THE KILLER WITHIN about a man who came close to being a Columbine type mass murderer in 1955 but actually got off scott free after killing a fellow student in his college dorm. There was never a trial, for reasons that are never made 100% clear.

Anyway, this man lived 50 years with no one knowing what he'd done. He told his wife a bit, but his two daughters (one biological, one from his wife's first marriage who he'd raised since age 4) didn't know and neither did any of this friends or family or co-workers. (He became a prominent psychologist and professor -- an irony not really explored in the film.)
In his late 60's, he decides to come clean and blames it all on bullying. He tries to turn himself into a victim. The film is largely about his daughters coming to grips with finding out their father is a murderer. Chilling how this man shows absolutely no emotions about what he did. Chilling. On the other hand, he went on to lead a productive life and raised two daughters -- one of whom wouldn't even exist had he been tried and found guilty. The film asks a lot of questions about forgiveness and the ability to reform and frankly about sociopathic behaviour...

Anyway... All in all, a good day at the festival. Over the next while, I'll blog more about some of the films.

Now, sleep.