Seasonal Changes

The days are getting shorter. There is a chill in the air and Canadian film festival line-ups are being released. So that can mean only one thing -- Fall must be lurking around the corner.

The complete Vancouver Film festival line-up is about two weeks away but yesterday's preview gives a teasing look at a few titles to grace one of the best film festivals in the World.

Three Monkeys
Il Divo
Hunger
A Christmas Tale
Ballast
Revanche
Happy-Go-Lucky

The Dragons and Tigers category is back which means there will be some mouth watering new Asian films as Tony Rayns does an amazing job in picking out new cinematic talent.

The Spotlight on France is also back along with a new Environmental based series called The Ark : Elements and Animals.

TIFF 2008 Lineup

The full TIFF 2008 lineup is now out.

As usual, plenty to see!!! On a quick scan, I picked the following titles that I would love to see, leaving out the big Hollywood films (such as Che and Burn After Reading) which I know would get released shortly after the festival.

Return to Hansala (Chus Gutiérrez)
Three Monkeys (Nuri Bilge Ceylan)
24 City (Jia Zhang-ke)
Birdsong (Albert Serra)
Liverpool (Lisandro Alonso)
Serbis (Brillante Mendoza)
PA-RA-DA (Marco Pontecorvo)
Gomorra (Matteo Garrone)
Waltz with Bashir (Ari Folman)
Slumdog Millionaire (Danny Boyle)
Revanche (Götz Spielmann)

Hopefully I will be catching the films in tiny dosages over the next year or so, as the films trickle down to a wider distribution.

Actor + Director = Seeking Repeat Success

In last weekend's Globe and Mail, Rick Groen raised an interesting point about the powerful collaborations between actors and directors.

But what of the relationship between directors and their favourite, frequently employed actors? This is pivotal, this has yielded some of the great pictures in cinema's history, but it tends to be examined only in passing, only within the separate contexts of individual careers. And that misses the obvious point. After all, if good directors are the sculptors of film, then good actors are their clay. Okay, maybe their granite (John Ford with John Wayne), or their wood (George Lucas with Harrison Ford). At any rate, the crucial raw material.

He mentions that if the combination works quite well, then the result is two-fold: (1) a worthy film and (2) a wish to repeat the experience and be worthy again. .

Although this collaboration does depend on how a director approaches his or her film. Rick Groen differentiates the two different styles used by Martin Scorsese & Hitchcock.

Consider, for instance, Martin Scorsese, whose finest movies are character-driven and who, by his own admission, gets “bored” directing plot. Well, if your goal is to delve deeply into character, then a great actor, flexible and nuanced, is an essential tool. Luckily for him, and us, Robert De Niro may be the greatest of his generation. In Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, especially Raging Bull, Scorsese's camera gives the work its wings, but it's De Niro's brilliance that finds, and illuminates, the riven heart of the film. This director relies absolutely on the symbiosis with his star – one is unthinkable without the other. And when the actor, his implement, gets too old for the protagonist's job, the director is obliged to find another. Which explains why, in The Aviator and Gangs of New York and The Departed, Scorsese has a new best friend in Leonardo DiCaprio.

By contrast, Alfred Hitchcock had scant interest in character and an abiding love for plot, along with the suspense that plot can generate. Consequently, he cultivated a reputation for regarding performers as little more than human props, set-dressing for his carefully planned story-boards – here insert Actress X in shower, there put Actor Y in cornfield. But shrewd ol' Hitch also had a keen eye for solid human props with commercial appeal, employing James Stewart in four of his classics (including Rear Window and Vertigo) and Cary Grant in another four (among them Suspicion and North by Northwest). These two stars are completely different actors, with different styles and mannerisms, and yet Hitchcock used them to equally strong effect. Still, while their performances enhance these pictures, they're not, like De Niro's, the essence of them. Hitchcock never really made actors' films.

The article is centered around Hollywood combinations with a line dropped in for Ingmar Bergman. So I decided to come up with a separate list of non-Hollywood films where an actor worked with the same director on multiple occasions.

Lee Kang-sheng & Tsai Ming-liang

Lee Kang-sheng has acted in all of Tsai Ming-liang's feature films, playing the same character in all the films, except in Goodbye, Dragon Inn where Lee Kang-sheng had a minor role. The two first worked together in Tsai Ming-liang's 1991 short film Youngsters after which they both ventured into their first feature in 1992's Rebels of the Neon God. Tsai Ming-liang's films contain a loose framework where the real beauty and charm lies in observing the character of Lee Kang-sheng growing up from a teenager to a young man, drifting from job to job and even indulging in few affairs. So naturally it makes sense for Tsai Ming-liang to continue to use Lee Kang-sheng repeatedly as he can count on his favourite actor to ease into any situation or location the screenplay requires. And the result is evident as their films have a consistent feel and have created their own universe set in Taiwan where all the films were shot except 2006's I Don't Want to Sleep Alone which was set in Kuala Lumpur.

In fact, I cannot imagine how the two will ever work without each other. Last year Tsai Ming-liang produced Lee Kang-sheng's directorial effort Help me Eros. The film was supposed to be a standalone effort, separate from the Tsai Ming-Liang films, yet Lee Kang-sheng plays a slight variation of the same character he normally plays in Tsai Ming-liang's films. And since Lee Kang-sheng has worked so closely with one director, it is not a surprize to see that his own directorial effort contains shades of Tsai Ming-liang.

Films and Shorts worked together:
I Don't Want to Sleep Alone (2006)
The Wayward Cloud (2005)
Good Bye, Dragon Inn (2003)
The Skywalk Is Gone (short film, 2002)
What Time Is It Over There? (2001)
The Hole (1998)
The River (1997)
Vive L'Amour (1994)
Rebels of the Neon God (1992)

Note: Of all the films, only Good Bye, Dragon Inn did not have Lee Kang-sheng in a starring role.

Jean-Pierre Léaud & François Truffaut

François Truffaut announced his arrival in an outstanding manner with 400 Blows, his directorial feature film debut in which a young 14 year old Jean-Pierre Léaud stole the show with his raw portrayal of Antoine Doinel. And almost a decade after the two first worked together, Truffaut revived the character of Antoine Doinel by using Jean-Pierre Léaud in Stolen Kisses, followed by two more films. It was a fascinating cinematic series where one could see the continuing adventures of a single character through his teenage years to adulthood.

Films worked together:
Love on the Run (1979)
Bed and Board (1970)
Stolen Kisses (1968)
The 400 Blows (1959)

The practice of using the same character in multiple films inspired Tsai Ming-liang who gives a hint of this in What Time Is It There? when Lee Kang-sheng's character is shown watching The 400 Blows. Also, near the end of What Time Is It There?, Jean-Pierre Léaud makes an appearance, tying a gigantic cinematic loop between France and Taiwan.

Interestingly, Tsai Ming-liang's next feature Visages stars both Lee Kang-sheng & Jean-Pierre Léaud.

Amitabh Bachchan with multiple directors

From the mid 1970's to late 1980's Amitabh Bachchan was the undisputed leading Indian actor who could easily mould himself to any director's need. He could play the street smart Jai for Ramesh Sippy's legendary Sholay, be the icy cold fearless coal miner for Yash Chopra's Kaala Patthar or shift gears and portray sensitive characters such as in Yash Chopra's Silsila or act in hilarious slapstick comedic roles such as in Prakash Mehra's Namak Halaal. There were multiple directors with whom Amitabh regularly worked and there were roles specifically written for Amitabh, especially to harness his portrayal of the "angry man". One director who forged a real partnership with Amitabh was Manmohan Desai. After working with Amitabh for Parvarish in 1977, Desai always found a place for his leading man in all his films until his last directorial feature Gangaa Jamunaa Saraswathi in 1988.

Just some of the major collaborations between Amitabh and his directors from the 1970's-80's.

with Manmohan Desai:
Gangaa Jamunaa Saraswathi (1988)
Mard (1985)
Coolie (1983)
Desh Premee (1982)
Naseeb (1981)
Suhaag (1979)
Amar Akbar Anthony (1977)
Parvarish (1977)

with Yash Chopra:
Silsila (1981)
Kaala Patthar (1979)
Trishul (1978)
Kabhi Kabhie (1976)
Deewaar (1975)

with Prakash Mehra:
Jaadugar (1989)
Sharaabi (1984)
Namak Halaal (1982)
Laawaris (1981)
Muqaddar Ka Sikandar (1978)

Klaus Kinski with Werner Herzog

Even though I have only seen two of the five features that Kinski worked with Herzog on, both these features left such an impression that I cannot imagine that any other director would have allowed Kinski to freedom to act out his demons so brilliantly like in Aguirre, the Wrath of God & Cobra Verde. There is a priceless scene near the end of Aguirre where Kinski is left on a raft with a few hundred monkeys; Kinski grabs a monkey in his hand, examines it and then throws away the animal in disgust. A simple scene but very effective. Herzog revealed that he did not instruct Kinski to toss the money away but was simply present on the raft with his cinematographer filming Kinski silently. So whatever unfolded on the raft was Kinski's improvisation. In a way, Herzog provided the intelligent spells of silence where Kinski would dive deep into his character and unleash raw emotions.

Films worked together:
Cobra Verde (1987)
Fitzcarraldo (1982)
Woyzeck (1979)
Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)
Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972)

Shah Rukh Khan with Aziz Mirza, Aditya Chopra and Karan Johar

Long before he became the famous international superstar that he is today, Shah Rukh Khan started his career by working in tv serials such as Circus and Fauji. One of the directors of Circus was Aziz Mirza. When Mirza decided to direct his first feature film (Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman), he naturally turned to Shah Rukh, one of the tv serial's impressive actors. Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman was a sweet charming film about an everyday working class hero and did well enough to allow both actor and director to get a foothold in the industry. Shah Rukh Khan moved onto a variety of projects both from small budget works such as Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa and Maya (Ketan Mehta's loose adaptation of Madame Bovary) to big budget films such as Subhash Ghai's Trimurti. Shah Rukh also played an assorted set of characters from an action hero to even negative roles such as in Daar (an Indian version of Cape Fear) & Anjaam. However, all that changed when Shah Rukh Khan starred in Aditya Chopra's debut film Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge released in 1995.

Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge marked the arrival of Yash Chopra's son, Aditya, and its immense box office success established Shah Rukh Khan as a bankable leading man. But the most important consequence of that film's success was that Shah Rukh Khan would become the poster boy for romantic roles in Yash Raj films (production company of Yash and Aditya Chopra), starring in endless love stories and love triangles. Since 1995 Shah Rukh has hardly ventured into any serious acting roles. Even in a historic period film such as Asoka, Shah Rukh Khan's character is busy chasing a girl around trees and waterfalls. Shah Rukh has starred not only in Aditya's films such as the mammoth Mohabbatein, a 4 hour long sugary film which featured 4 love stories, but also played the romantic lead in films which Aditya penned for his father Yash to direct (Dil To Pagal Hai and Veer-Zaara ). On top of that, Shah Rukh Khan has become a critical component of Karan Johar's love sagas, featuring in all of Karan's movies. It is not a surprize to learn that Shah Rukh Khan will star in both Karan and Aditya's next ventures.

Aziz Mirza only used Shah Rukh Khan as his leading man for his first four features. This year's Kismat Konnection was supposed to be the first time that Aziz took on a new leading man in Shahid Kapoor. However, the presence of Shah Rukh is evident as he is the film's narrator and Shahid's character is just an extension of the role that Shah Rukh played in Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman. On top of that Shahid copies Shah Rukh's antics in quite a few scenes. So even though Aziz has not taken Shah Rukh in his new movie, he cannot help break free his association with his main leading man.

Films with Aziz Mirza:
Chalte Chalte (2003)
Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani (2000)
Yes Boss (1997)
Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman (1992)

with Aditya Chopra:
Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi (2008), to be released later this year
Mohabbatein (2000)
Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995)

with Karan Johar:
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna (2006)
Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham (2001)
Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998)

Govinda with David Dhawan

David Dhawan is known in Bollywood for his crude and vulgar comedies filled with double meaning dialogues laced with sexual innuendo and raunchy songs. Ofcourse, the success of David Dhawan would not have been possible without Govinda's presence. Govinda was the only actor who could have effortlessly carried out the rapid fire dialogues required by Dhawan and could wear the most bizarre wardrobe (including brightly coloured tight t-shirts despite Govinda having a round figure) while dancing some of the silliest moves to ever grace the Bollywood screen.

It was Aankhen in 1993 that set both Govinda & David Dhawan on the crude comedy path and it also marked the first time Dhawan's movie would feature two leading men chasing two women. This pattern was repeated by Dhawan in other Govinda films such as Partner, Jodi No.1, Ek Aur Ek Gyarah and Haseena Maan Jaayegi. A slight variation of this theme was where Dhawan's films (both with Govinda and without him) would have two men chasing one woman (Deewana Mastana, Mujse Shaadi Karogi) or would have one man courting two women (Saajan Chale Sasural, Gharwali Baharwali).

Govinda's films with Dhawan:
Partner (2007)
Ek Aur Ek Gyarah (2003)
Kyo Kii... Main Jhuth Nahin Bolta (2001)
Jodi No.1 (2001)
Kunwara (2000)
Haseena Maan Jaayegi (1999)
Bade Miyan Chote Miyan (1998)
Deewana Mastana (1997)
Hero No. 1 (1997)
Banarasi Babu (1997)
Saajan Chale Sasural (1996)
Coolie No. 1 (1995)
Raja Babu (1994)
Aankhen (1993)
Shola Aur Shabnam (1992)
Swarg (1990)

Not leading men but still vital collaborations

Paresh Rawal with Priyadarshan

Priyadarshan's Hera Pheri showed that it is possible to make an entertaining commercial Bollywood film with an intelligent script. In a way, Hera Pheri marked a distinct change in Priyadarshan's commercial film direction. After the success of that comedy, he favoured making light hearted entertaining films, unlike some of his earlier serious efforts such as the brilliant Virasat. Hera Pheri also shone the light brightly on Paresh Rawal, who stole the film with his excellent comedic timing. Rawal was at his best in Hera Pheri and since then Priyadarshan has ensured he gets Paresh involved in all his comedic ventures, albeit in small roles. And in virtually all their joined efforts, Paresh has lit up the screen with his unique comedic take.

Rawal's efforts with Priyadarshan:
Mere Baap Pehle Aap (2008)
Bhool Bhulaiyaa (2007)
Bhagam Bhag (2006)
Malamaal Weekly (2006)
Garam Masala (2005)
Hulchul (2004)
Hungama (2003)
Yeh Teraa Ghar Yeh Meraa Ghar (2001)
Hera Pheri (2000)

Suet Lam with Johnny To

Johnny To has used quite a few familiar faces in his films (such as Simon Yam) but Suet Lam occupies a special place in Johnny To's trademark gangster films. Sometimes Suet Lam has a key role, such as in P.T.U where his character's misplaced gun kick-starts an entire night of events in the film, while in other films he provides a short cameo. In 2007's Triangle, three directors directed a single film with no clear marking where one director's work ends. However, one can identify when Johnny To's portion started as soon as Suet Lam's character arrived on the screen. Indeed shortly after the arrival of Suet Lam, Triangle moves into a climatic gun shoot sequence, which is beautifully filmed Johnny To style.

Films worked together:
Cultured Bird (2008)
Flying Butterfly (2008)
Mad Detective (2007)
Triangle (2007)
Exiled (2006)
Election 2 (2006)
Election (2005)
Breaking News (2004)
Turn Left, Turn Right (2003)
PTU (2003)
Love for All Seasons (2003)

A matter of taste

Every summer it seems that North American film critics have to respond to why they did not like a certain Hollywood blockbuster film. Two years ago, A.O Scott tackled this issue when discussing the newest Pirates sequel:

But the discrepancy between what critics think and how the public behaves is of perennial interest because it throws into relief some basic questions about taste, economics and the nature of popular entertainment, as well as the more vexing issue of what, exactly, critics are for.

Are we out of touch with the audience? Why do we go sniffing after art where everyone else is looking for fun, and spoiling everybody's fun when it doesn't live up to our notion or art?

I have often read comments along the lines of why some critics cannot "lighten-up" or "loosen up" when it comes to reviewing certain commercial titles. But why is it assumed that a commercial film should be liked by everyone? And that too, why must all critics conform? For example, this summer The Dark Knight is already considered to be "the greatest film ever made" and any critic who dared to think otherwise was abused (ranging from mild words about their small brain to "you are a #$#%#$"). I often find it amusing that some people can get quite abusive when others offer a differing view on a film. Seriously, how can everyone like the same movie? For the most part, films are always perceived with a subjective lens, no matter how much a person tries to approach it in objective terms. Ofcourse that does not stop some people from trying to stamp an objective verdict on a film by calling it "the greatest film ever made" or "best film of the century", etc. If all the film going public around the world were to vote on the best film ever made, you will never get one unanimous answer. Yes, there are numerous annual "best of.. lists" and each get votes from film critics, industry personnel or film buffs. Sometimes the same titles pop up in these lists but I find it more useful to read why certain people chose a particular film – there is a possibility that they saw noticed a quality in a film where others had failed to.

Over time, if people continue to read a certain critic’s reviews, they can develop a sense of the films a reviewer likes or not. And even if someone normally agrees with a critic’s views, there will always be cases when a difference will arise. The difference should be an opportunity to exchange viewpoints and not merely a chance to slam the door with words like "if you don’t like the movie, you are an idiot".

Differing treatment of film critics in Hollywood vs Bollywood

Hollywood still has a need for movie critics even if quite a few of them are losing their jobs. Evidence can be found in how the industry still continues to hold advance press screenings of their movies. And if a critic likes a movie, then their blurbs are plastered all over the movie poster. When a film does not have an advance screening, it is immediately assumed that the movie is awful and the producers/distributors are hoping to recoup as much weekend box office money before the negative reviews hit the headlines. Now admittedly, quite a few reviews do not go into in-depth critical analysis of a film but merely present the synopsis with a movie rating. That raises another contentious topic of how many people actually read a movie review and what are they looking to get out of it. Do most people just care for a number rating? Or are they just interested in going to see a film just because of the actors or genre? The answers to these questions circles back to the start of A.O Scott's article regarding the need for a critic and of people's tastes.

On the other hand, Bollywood as an industry does not respect a film critic and as a rule ignore their verdict. There are hardly any advance film screenings and even before a movie is released, the film producers/directors/actors go out of their way to ensure their movie is critic proof. Most interviews with the film-makers involve the following chosen words about their newest Bollywood movie:

It is a juicy "masala" movie

Meaning: A typical Bollywood film with action, songs, dance, romance, emotion, etc.

"Entertaining movie", fun for the whole family

Meaning: comedy movie with good songs

"Fresh love story"

Meaning: The movie is unlike the countless other stale love stories that get released every year. Also, means a film with new actors.

People should go enjoy the movie and "leave their brain at the door"

Meaning: The film has no plot, so one should not question anything. Just laugh.

When a Bollywood film does well at the box office but gets negative reviews, the film-makers say the movie is "for the masses". When a film does poorly at the box office, then the film-makers say the movie is "for the classes", referring to the middle class and elite sections of Indian society who can apparently appreciate the mature themes shown. And when both the classes and masses reject a movie, then the film-makers say that the movie is too sophisticated for the Indian audiences and is made for the foreign crowd (Indian diaspora, film festivals, etc). When everyone rejects their movie, then the film-makers say that the world is not ready to understand their unique genius. Honestly, how can a critic be ever expected to fight against Bollywood's built in critic-proof ego?

Note: India has to be the only country in the world where people line up in millions to see a movie which they know nothing about. This is because the trailers are only clips of the film songs, sometimes spliced with few movie scenes. In most cases, even the story is never really revealed in advance. Critics only get to see a movie on the Friday afternoon opening shows along with the rest of the audience and their reviews are not available until later on Friday evening and in the weekend publications.

I left my brain at the door. So should you.

Only in India could such a film review get published. In reviewing the newest Bollywood film Singh Is Kinng Taran Adarsh begins his review thus:

Just a word of caution before you watch this film: Singh Is Kinng is not for the intellectuals or those pretending to be one. It's not for the hard-nosed critics either.

He even explains what is wrong with the audience if they do not enjoy this movie.

You know the rules when you watch a hardcore entertainer: Just don't look for logic. If you do, too bad for you, for you would never enjoy a film of this genre and more specifically, Singh Is Kinng.

And Taran goes onto praise the limited talents of the film-maker.

Anees Bazmee's films are very high on entertainment. The plotline may be paper-thin, perhaps ludicrous and farcical, but when did Bazmee ever promise a SCHINDLER'S LIST [sic] or a SAVING PRIVATE RYAN? [sic] Singh Is Kinng works because it delivers what it promises: Full on entertainment!

Hilarious. Here is a critic actually admitting a film-maker’s flaws but yet endorsing the movie because it is “Full on entertainment”. That’s right. None of this half-on or quarter-on, it FULL ON baby. He might have added India’s favourite words right now "Mind blowing".

Oh but to give credit to Taran, he does say that the film is not perfect.

But, wait, Singh Is Kinng isn't a foolproof product. It has its share of flaws, the turn of events aren't captivating at times, but Singh Is Kinng moves so fast and packs in so much, there's no time to think or analyze.

You mean the movie is “shock and awe”? Genius!

And here’s the final verdict:

The final word? Singh Is Kinng is a delicious and scrumptious pav-bhaji served in the finest cutlery. Your taste buds are sure to relish it... and ask for more!
.........
On the whole, Singh Is Kinng lives up to the hype and hoopla. Want a joyride without taxing your brains? Board the Singh Is Kinng wagon. At the box-office, the film will fetch a hurricane-like start. The paid previews, the opening weekend, the first week business, everything will be record-shattering. Notwithstanding the new oppositions in the weeks to come, Singh Is Kinng will rule the hearts of the aam junta [whose verdict matters the most] as also the box-office, proving a record holder in the final tally. Blockbuster Hit!


Come on, who does not like pav-bhaji? Actually, since I had pav-bhaji 2 nights ago, I think I might hold off getting me some cinematic version of this Mumbai dish.

But Taran is not all fun and games. He does get serious sometimes. For example, he was troubled by last year’s No Smoking

After having watched NO SMOKING, the first thing you want to do is ask Anurag Kashyap, the director of this misadventure: Now what was that? Cinema is all about three Es -- enlighten, educate and entertain. But NO SMOKING neither educates, nor enlightens. As for entertainment, forget it!

You try so hard to understand what NO SMOKING tries to say, but the film is like one big puzzle that refuses to get solved.

What ails NO SMOKING, did you ask. Simple, it’s the most complicated cinematic experience of 2007.

Errr. It was not that complicated really. Heck, I loved it. But Taran does not share my views:

NO SMOKING leaves you exasperated and disgusted. Exasperated, because till the end credits roll, you just don’t know what happened in those 2 hours.

Were we watching the same movie? I was not disgusted but rather left with a giddy sense of excitement because watching No Smoking reminded me of films like David Fincher’s The Game & Fight Club, Alejandro Amenábar's Open Your Eyes (remade as Vanilla Sky), The Devil's Advocate and one scene even reminded of David Lynch's Inland Empire.

Although I see the real source of Taran’s disappointment: There’re hardly any songs in the narrative but the one filmed on Jesse Randhawa [‘Jab Bhi Cigarette Peeta Hoon’] is imaginatively filmed. Surprisingly, the popular Bipasha Basu track, which has also been publicized extensively, is placed after the end titles.

A Bollywood movie has to have atleast 6 songs. Come on. That is the golden rule.

Taran wants people to take an Anees Bazmee film on face value and not question anything but then shouldn’t one take Anurag's film in the same manner? If an absurd film like Bazmee’s No Entry has no logic and people are asked to ignore its shortcomings, then why is there the need to understand No Smoking? Ah. But as per Taran, No Smoking does not entertain. I do not share his opinion regarding No Smoking which I thought was an extremely intelligent film packed with plenty of ideas. But thankfully I do not read Taran’s film reviews but I am sure there are plenty out there who read and listen (via his tv show) to what he has to say (scary thought that).

A matter of taste

Film fan #1: I only like comedies and stay away from action flicks.
Film fan #2: I only like action movies and cannot stand chick-flicks.
Film fan #3: Sci-fi does it for me.
Film fan #4: I only like foreign films.
Film fan #5: I like everything but foreign films.
Film fan #6: I like all kinds of movie.
Film fan #7: I like all kinds of movie, provided they are made well.

Restaurant patron #1: I only like steak.
Restaurant patron #2: I am vegetarian, which eliminates 90% of the menu items for me.
Restaurant patron #3: I only like sushi.
Restaurant patron #4: I only like spicy food.
Restaurant patron #5: French food is the best cuisine. Everything else is substandard.
Restaurant patron #6: I like all kinds of food, provided it is presented well.
Restaurant patron #7: I like all kinds of food, provided it is cooked well.
Restaurant patron #8: I like all kinds of food, provided it tastes good.
Restaurant patron #9: I like all kinds of food, provided it is presented nicely and cooked well.
Restaurant patron #10: I like all kinds of food, provided it is presented nicely, cooked well and the tastes are nice.

Patron #X shares his dining experience from the Sing-Song Multiplex Restaurant.

The entire dish was so beautifully presented that I was beside myself. I have to say, the meal was “FULL ON” value for my money because a beautiful waitress brought it to me in the most gorgeous plate I have ever seen, with the finest cutlery. I cannot criticize the meal because everything was so beautiful that I quickly swallowed the meal without having time to chew or think about the tastes. The restaurant delivered solid entertainment. What a gorgeous waitress. I would gladly eat any dish that she serves.

Owner of the Sing-Song Multiplex Restaurant:

We found out that most people coming to our establishment do not care for the food. So in order to save costs, we serve stale meat, our sauces are either too salty or too spicy depending on which ingredients are still left, and most often our vegetables are rotten. For desserts, the cherries we place on top of the cakes are always moldy. For the most part, no one complains. They keep coming back because we have the most beautiful women working in the place and we have a very vibrant atmosphere. Occasionally, a snobby food critic comes to our place and demands healthy & tasty food. But no one really cares to what he/she has to say. We keep making money. That is all that matters.

Carlos Reygadas Films

Snapshots of Three Films by Mexican director Carlos Reygadas

Japón

"Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus

Japón follows the main character’s quest to end his life. A painter heads to the Mexican landscape to put an end to his suffering. But along the way, he finds meaning to his life. Simple things can change a person’s view of the world and sometimes the boundless beauty of nature can go a long way towards curing a tormented soul. Unfortunately, the ironic nature of life does surface in the film. When the painter has no reason to live, he cannot kill himself. But when he finally finds hope and reason in life, that reason is taken away in a swift instance. Although after making such a long journey, we can be sure that he will continue to live after the film ends because he has found an inner desire to continue, an inner desire not motivated by external triggers.

Battle in Heaven

Marcos leads a simple life filled with routines. Some of these routines revolve around him and his wife selling clocks and some food by an underground walkway. Tick tock. But in order to improve their daily lives, the two of them kidnap a child for ransom. However, something goes wrong and the child dies. Tick tock.

Marcos’s second job is as a driver and he is assigned to drive around a general’s young daughter Ana. Despite being rich, Ana derives pleasure by working in an upscale brothel. She sends one of her colleagues to service Marcos. But Marcos only wants Ana and fantasizes about her. Ana makes it clear that she wants nothing to do with Marcos sexually.

Tick tock. Confession. Sin. Repentance. Inner Struggle.

Silent Light

A quiet German Mennonite community in Mexico. A perfect family. Well, almost perfect. Johan, the father and husband, is having an affair with Marianne that is tearing him apart. Everyone knows about it. Even the mechanic to whom Johan takes his car cautions him about Marianne. Johan tried to leave Marianne but cannot help going back. Johan even goes to his father for advice. Johan’s wife Esther believed that Johan had finally left Marianne but when she learns that he has started visiting Marianne again, she cannot take it anymore.

Johan has to make a decision but then nature helps him out.

Lasting Images:

The lasting images from Japón revolve around the 360 degree camera sequence at the film’s end. The camera freely spins around the surroundings allowing only a tiny fraction of the events to come into view before finally focusing on the tragedy in front of us. Even if the film ends in tragedy, it arrives at that fateful realization by following a beautiful path that evaporates any meaning of loss.

There is also a 360 degree camera sequence in Battle in Heaven as well but it does not have the poetic or emotional impact as the one from Japón. However, one memorable take arrives immediately following the 360 degree camera sequence in Reygadas’s second feature. Prior to the sequence, Ana is on top of Marcos, thrusting back and forth. The camera starts off in Ana’s dreadlocked hair but gradually moves sideways, looking at the sexual act from outside the window. Just before the camera starts moving to the left, Ana looks towards the camera (note: I am not sure if that is a mistake or an intended gesture on Reygadas’s behalf? Ana face the audience!). The camera then leaves the room and slowly moves around the neighbouring buildings before returning back to the room where Ana has finished her bouncy gyrations. As the camera moves towards them, it looks at the naked bodies of Marcos and Ana first from above, then from the floor showing their feet before slowly moving upwards towards the ceiling. There is something picturesque about this long take, watching the big round body of Marcos lying next to tiny Ana. Marcos is taking up most of the bed space and holding hands tenderly with Ana. The background music starts just as the camera makes its movement towards the ceiling and the music has echoes of a triumphant victory, a final salute of sorts. Has Marcos achieved greatness by sleeping with the beautiful Ana? Is the sequence real or another of Marcos’ fantasies? The 360 degree camera spin makes me think that this sexual act is real. And that image of Marcos looking at the ceiling with Ana sprawled on the bed besides him with closed eyes is just vintage stuff.

The best cinematic sequences in Silent Light open and close the film. The film starts off in darkness, looking at the boundless starry night sky. Slowly, night gives way to dawn and the sun rays paint the Mexican landscape with a radiant beauty. The film ends with this sequence in reverse, where the sun sets to usher in darkness.

Awkward but real:

Both Japón & Battle of Heaven contain sex scenes which will not feature in any American or European film because of the physical attributes of the mating couple. In Japón, the painter engages in sex with a much older woman. He proposes his intentions to her and then what follows is quite a realistic and a very un-sexual sexual scene – there is no enticement but a mechanical nature to the whole act.

The realistic sex scene in Battle of Heaven features Marcos thrusting his wife from behind. Now, both Marcos and his wife are big people and one never sees a sexual act between large people on cinema.

However, we are not shown any nudity during the sex scene between Johan and Marianne in Silent Light. Since the couple constitutes the normal cinematic portrayal of sexual acts, Reygadas is not interested in showing their naked flesh. Although the sex scene between Ana and Marcos in Battle in Heaven is shown in stark detail as well, a bit too much detail. But then again, the fornication between the two does not constitute a cinematic norm either.

Symmetry:

Even though Battle in Heaven starts and ends with a similar sequence of Ana giving oral pleasure to Marcos, there is a subtle difference in between the opening and closing sequences. Marcos is not wearing his glasses in the final sequence which hints that the sequence is not taking place within the realms of the film’s realistic boundaries and might actually be happening in heaven. Maybe there is peace in heaven after all for Marcos!

Silent Light opens with a transition from night to day, and ends in reverse order, light to dark. Fade to Black indeed.

Fascinating titles:

Why should a Mexican film shot entirely in the Mexican countryside be called Japón? A clue is provided halfway through the film when the painter shows his collection of paintings to the older woman. Also, his need to commit suicide might be a nod towards the ritualistic Japanese suicide hara-kiri.

Battle in Heaven: Don’t most cultures mention that there will be peace in heaven? Hmm. Apparently, they have not met Marcos.

Silent Light: At the quantum level, a light particle is anything but silent. But we do not analyze elementary particles consciously everytime we admire beauty. And the film shows the beauty of light, which can quietly envelop a surrounding or quietly remove the ability to see things. Let there be light! Let there be darkness!

Mexico standing in for the world:

All three Carlos Reygadas films are firmly rooted in Mexico as they feature characters who live and breathe within Mexico. Yet, the character’s suffering is universal.

Japón -- the painter is tired of the chaotic city life and seeks peace.
Battle in Heaven -- Marcos is torn by guilt and lust.
Silent Light -- Johan longs for another woman and realizes that he has never truly loved his wife. But he has to suffer because he cannot just pick up and leave.

Universal themes distilled via Mexican landscapes.

I certainly cannot wait to see what else Reygadas serves up in the future.

---

Ratings out of 10:

Silent Light: 10

Battle in Heaven: 8.5

Japón: 8

2008 Venice Film Festival Line-up

The Competition line-up includes new works from Darren Aronofsky, Guillermo Arriaga, Jonathan Demme, Takeshi Kitano, Hayao Miyazaki & Barbet Schroeder to name a few.

Playing out of Competition are new films from The Coen Brothers, Claire Denis, Jia Zhangke (short film), Abbas Kiarostami, Manoel de Oliveira, Agnés Varda and a previously unreleased version of Pier Paolo Pasolini's La rabbia.

Bouncing in between two spotlights

Mid Year-Bollywood Spotlight

It has become an annual ritual of sorts that I spend a good two months every summer catching up on the previous 6 months of Bollywood releases. I am currently in the middle of such a run but so far it appears to be a dismal year, even by Bollywood's already average quality standards. The best Bollywood film (even Indian) this year appears to be Mithya, loosely inspired by Kurosawa's Kagemusha but uniquely Indian with a pinch of underworld and a whole dosage of dark roasted goodness.

The ratings (out of 10) so far with the unrated films in line for viewing in upcoming days:

Bhootnath (2008, India, Vivek Sharma): 5

Krazzy 4 (2008, India, Jaideep Sen): 4

Mr. Black Mr. White (2008, India, Deepak S. Shivdasani): 0

Anamika (2008, India, Anant Mahadevan): 4.5

Sirf (2008, India, Rajatesh Nayyar): 6

Race (2008, India, Abbas-Mastan): 3

Jannat (2008, India, Kunal Deshmukh): 6.5

Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na (2008, India, Abbas Tyrewala): 7.5

Aamir (2008, India, Raj Kumar Gupta):

Kismat Konnection (2008, India, Aziz Mirza):

De Taali (2008, India, E.Nivas):

Jodhaa Akbar (2008, India, Ashutosh Gowariker):

Contract (2008, India, Ram Gopal Varma):

Sarkar Raj (2008, India, Ram Gopal Varma):

Mission Istaanbul (2008, India, Apoorva Lakhia):

Mere Baap Pehle Aap (2008, India, Priyadarshan):

---

South American Spotlight

Last year, I enjoyed my look at South American cinema via the Copa America film festival and Spotlight on Brazil. As part of the Copa America film fest, I only picked one film from each South American country and the Brazilian spotlight netted 15 titles from the land of Pele, Garrincha, Vava, Socrates, Zico & Ronaldinho. This time I decided to throw the net out a bit wider in the hopes of getting more films from South America as a whole, not trying to go by country alone. No preplanned themes so I am hoping some interesting threads pop up through a diverse range of films.

Unfortunately, I never got a title from Paraguay last year, something that I have not managed to rectify this year either. Still, I hope that Paraguayan Hammock will be released soon on DVD.

The ratings so far and other films to be viewed in upcoming days/weeks:

The Method (2005, Argentina co-production, Marcelo Piñeyro): 8.5

Bolivia (2001, Argentina, Adrián Caetano):

Los Muertos (2004, Argentina, Lisandro Alonso):

Pizza, birra, faso (1998, Argentina, Adrián Caetano/Bruno Stagnaro):

City of Men (2007, Brazil, Paulo Morelli):

The Year My Parents Went on Vacation (2006, Brazil, Cao Hamburger):

Machuca (2004, Chile, Andrés Wood): 9

Oedipus Mayor (1996, Colombia, Jorge Alí Triana):

Un titán en el rincón (2002, Ecuador, Viviana Cordero):

El destino no tiene favoritos (2003, Peru, Alvaro Velarde):

Don't Tell Anyone (1998, Peru, Francisco J. Lombardi): 7

El Nominado (2003, Peru, Nacho Argiro/Gabriel Lopez):

25 Watts (2001, Uruguay, Juan Pablo Rebella/Pablo Stoll):

Adios Momo (2006, Uruguay, Leonardo Ricagni):

La Espera (2002, Uruguay, Aldo Garay):

1888 el extraordinario viaje de Jules Verne (2005, Venezuela, Alfredo Anzola):

Lists...Numbers...Subjective vs Objective, Movies vs Films

I was surprized to learn from the Guardian blogs last week that The Dark Knight was now #1 in the imdb Top 250 film list.

I guess I had stayed hidden away from the world for just a week and whoooshhh a movie that had just opened was now top dog (or bat). I had expected the film to have a record opening weekend, which it did, but I did not count on it reaching the summit in the imdb list. I have no idea why I had that notion because there is no qualitative control on the list criteria as it is governed by user ratings & votes. And since more people are seeing summer Hollywood films and not enough classic films, more of them are going to cast their votes for their personal favourite. So in a way, eventually this imdb list might end up having a direct relationship with box office tally, which currently is driven by quantity of tickets sold and not quality of the film. Although sometimes quality films do rake in a nice ticket quantity.

I do remember one case where someone at imdb regulated the list. At the end of December 2007, Aamir Khan's touching film Taare Zameen Par made the list, coming in mid-way through the 250 titles as the film got a solid rating of over 8 from a few thousand users. But a day later, even though the rating of the film stayed the same, it was no longer in the list. This is when I noticed the words for the list criteria as:
"for the Top 250, only votes from regular voters are considered."

Hmmm. I guess someone figured out that many Bollywood film fans were giving high ratings for a movie that most of North America had not heard of, so that had to be corrected. Since then the film's rating has fallen to the current average of 7.9. Even though I loved Taare Zameen Par (it made my top list for 2007 films), I am not sure if it should be in the list but then again, I have the same feelings for some of the other titles present like American Gangster and Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (it was a fun movie though). Thankfully 300 is not on the list but it is not far from making the list as it currently has a user rating of 7.9/10 from 178,634 votes.

Anyway, since I have not seen The Dark Knight yet so I cannot comment. Why have I not seen the movie? Its not that I have against bats. In fact, I adored Batman Begins and own quite a few of the comic books/graphic novels, including Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. However, this summer I have stayed away from all the studio films which means I have equally ignored men of iron, hellish creatures, lonely robots, drunk ego-heroes, bullet bending groups or even alien chasing believers. So ignoring a bat and a joker is being consistent.

ps: In a way, imdb's list might start reflecting a tally of what people are watching more while Metacritic's list will continue to reflect the critical film evaluations. But then again, that list is not perect as it only requires a minimum of 4 reviews to determine a score. Also, not all critics assign a number rating or grade to their review but Metacritic assigns one for them. Although they do give the option for the critic to contact them and correct the rating as per this scoring chart guide:

Now, if you are indeed the critic who wrote the review, and disagree with one of our scores, please let us know and we'll change it.

This does happen from time to time, and many of the critics included on this site (such as Ms. Dargis) do indeed check their reviews (as well as those of their colleagues) on metacritic.com.

There was a good article in the Sunday NY times about the disappearance of hutongs, or the narrow alley-ways, in Beijing.

In tracing the history of the city, Nicolai Ouroussoff notes:

The current wave of demolitions was under way by the early 1990s as free-market changes gained momentum, and real estate speculators saw potential profit in redevelopment. It accelerated after Beijing’s bid to play host to the Olympics was accepted in 2001 and the city began a substantial slum-clearance program to prepare for foreign visitors.

But I love the following words which ring true not only for Beijing but any urban city around Asia, Africa or even parts of North America (yup, even Canada, which is considered a new country).

The sad truth, as any architectural historian knows, is that poverty is often good for preservation; poor people lack the resources to tear down and rebuild houses every generation. Once an affluent homeowner moves into a faded landmark, the first thing he or she does is bring in an army of restorers — or bulldozers. Preservationists, who tend to have limited economic clout, strike a Faustian bargain: better to save the basic architecture and let others worry about what goes on inside. Breaking the pattern without aggressive government intervention seems almost impossible.

Having never been to China, I am only familiar with these hutongs through memorable films such as Beijing Bicycle or Electric Shadows. The narrow alleys shown were a meeting place for a chance encounter or formed a background for a cycle race -- a young kid racing his bike through the alley only to stumble near the end.

Four Middle-Eastern Weddings

Marriages are a pretty complicated affair. The decision to spend one's life with another person can be quite a soul searching experience. After one crosses that hurdle, in some cultures the families form the next barrier. Although in some cases, the family issues override the relationship between two people. Still these two challenges form the crux of what a majority of wedding related Indian and American films deal with. But two recent Middle Eastern films, The Syrian Bride & Rana's Wedding, show that familial & relationship issues in marriages are much easier compared to physical check points and borders erected by political situations.

Political Boundaries

In The Syrian Bride, the border crossing causes quite a problem. The bride Mona (Clara Khoury), who is from Golan heights, is stuck along with her family in a no-man's land while her husband waits with his family on the other side. The border complications arise due to the ownership of Golan Heights. Israel occupied the area after the 1967 war and considers it part of their nation, while Syria still believes it is theirs. In the film, a few Israeli politicians come up with a new scheme to legalize their occupation. They decide to start stamping an Israeli exit visa for people crossing Golan Heights into Syria and use Mona as a guinea pig by stamping her passport. If the Syrian side accepts the stamped passport, then the practice will become a standard and deemed as official Syrian recognition of Golan Heights as Israeli territory. In order to help with Mona's passport clearance, a U.N observer moves across the border with Mona's passport. But Mona's passport is rejected on the Syrian side because the Syrian guard says that since Golan Heights is part of Syria, no visa is required to move within one country. So the neutral U.N observer tries to get the Israeli side to remove the visa. But since it is already late on Thursday evening, the ministers and politicians in both Israel and Syria have left for home. Finally, after a lot of debate, the U.N observer manages to get the Israeli side to use white-out to cover up the visa. When she goes to the Syrian side, the guard has left and is replaced by another man on shift. But the new guard is bothered by the big white-out mark in the passport and refuses to let Mona through. During this visa tangle, both families are getting stressed and frustrated, because so much hinges on the wedding as the groom is a high profile actor in Syria. While Mona's family are anxious by the waiting, the extra time they have with Mona are precious as well because once Mona crosses the border into Syria, she will never be able to return to see her family as they stay in the Israeli occupied Golan Heights.

Clara Khoury also plays the lead role in Rana's Wedding, a film where Israeli check points in occupied Palestine territory play a troublesome role in her wedding decisions. Rana gets a call from her father who wants her to get married from a chosen list or leave the country with him by 4 pm the same day. However, her father does not know about Rana's boyfriend. So Rana rushes to find her love who is on the other side of various checkpoints and wants him to marry her. But as she is rushing across checkpoints, she is wondering if she truly loves her boyfriend. She only has a few hours to map out her entire life and her task is not made easy because of the various hurdles in reaching her boyfriend. The camera gives us a glimpse of life in the ancient city of Jerusalem and how even the simplistic tasks become complicated under occupation. Rana's Wedding does justice to the beauty of Jerusalem and shows it in all its splendour.

To marry or not to marry

Just like as in Rana's Wedding, the lead character (Tariq played by Nabil Saber) in A New Day in Old Sana’a is unsure whether he should go ahead with his marriage. His indecision arises when early one morning he believes he sees his bride-to-be dancing in the wedding dress he gifted her. But as it turns out, the woman in the dress was someone else. So Tariq is troubled because he prefers to be with a free spirited woman like the one he saw in the wedding dress but he cannot ignore tradition in rejecting his chosen bride. Beautifully shot in the Yemeni city of Sana’a, the film is a light hearted look at love and myths that haunt the ancient city.

Beauty takes a stroll

There are 5 women debating their love and relationships in the sweet and sexy Lebanese co-production Caramel. Four of the women work in a beauty salon and their day is packed with gossip about their relationships and life in Beirut. The women also support each other and share a nice bond which comes in handy for situations when things get difficult. For example, Nisrine (Yasmine Elmasri) has a secret that may derail her wedding. Her fiancee is not aware that she is not a virgin, so she is afraid what will happen when he finds out but luckily her friends come to her aid. The best moments of the film surround the character of Layale played by the film director Nadine Labaki. Layale is having an affair with a married man and she struggles by constantly debating whether her lover will leave his wife or not. On the other hand a young police officer, who goes around the neighbourhood issuing traffic tickets, is smitten with Layale. It is a real treat to watch Layale wander the city or go about her daily routines because her beauty makes her such a charming character to observe.

---

Ratings out of 10:

The Syrian Bride (2004, co-production, Eran Riklis): 9

Rana's Wedding (2002, co-production, Hany Abu-Assad): 9

Caramel (2007, Lebanon co-production, Nadine Labaki): 8.5

A New Day in Old Sana’a (2005, UK/Yemen, Bader Ben Hirsi): 7.5

Culture, Politics and Soccer

When Simon Kuper's excellent book Football against the Enemy hit bookstores more than a decade ago, there wasn't any market for books analyzing a country or a culture from a soccer perspective. But the success of Kuper's book opened the market for books trying to understand the complicated political and social situation of a country via the beautiful game. Here are some of the more well known books in no particular order:

Le Foot Edited by Christov Ruhn: This collection of writings looking at French football is quite impressive with the pieces on Zidane (by Mounsi), Anelka and Wenger being personal favourites.

Morbo: The Story of Spanish Football by Phil Ball: Ball's beautiful writings on Spanish soccer can be found weekly on Soccernet.com. Morbo is a pleasure to read.

Brilliant Orange by David Winner: A hilarious and insightful account into the Dutch psyche and football.

Tor! The Story of German Football by Ulrich Hesse-Lichtenberger

Futebol: Soccer the Brazilian Way by Alex Bellos: Bellos does an excellent job of capturing the beauty and chaos that haunts Brazilian football.

The Italian Job by Gianluca Vialli, Gabriele Marcotti: A very insightful book that looks at the tactical and cultural differences between English and Italian soccer.

Baghdad FC: Iraq's football story by Simon Freeman: Despite the number of books out there on Iraq, this provides an intelligent look at Iraqi life and culture via soccer. And since most of the books on Iraq are looking at things from an American perspective, it is refreshing to see things with a combination of British and Iraqi voice.

Goalless : The Story of a Unique Footballing Nation by Boria Majumdar and Kausik Bandyopadhyay. India has the third oldest soccer tournament in the World (The Durand Cup) aside from the English and Scottish F.A Cup dating back to 1888. And in keeping with the other rules of the British occupation, in the initial days of football in India, Indians were not allowed to even kick the ball as the game was only reserved for the British soldiers and elite. But that changed when a young boy, Nagendra Prasad, kicked a ball back to the British soldiers in 1877. He is hailed as the "father of Indian football" and his story appears to have inspired a crucial scene in the film Lagaan when a young boy returns a cricket ball to the British soldiers. Nagendra Prasad's simple act seems to have raised the interest of the game in India but the big breakthrough for Indian football came in 1911 when Mohun Bagan beat a British team and that victory is attributed as being the first spark in the quest for Indian independence. I always wanted to find a book which talked about Indian football and thankfully I got my hands on this book. Even though some parts of the book are a bit dry, it sheds light on plenty of relevant topics regarding how soccer helped fuel the dreams of freedom from the British and how the game created regional and religious divisions among the people. Also, there is mention about India's absence from the 1950 World Cup. India qualified for the World Cup in Brazil but opted out. I grew up reading that it was because the Indians wanted to play bare-feet that they were refused entry. But as the book shows, the reason might also be financial as there was not enough money available to send the team to Brazil. Playing the game bare-footed sounds strange today but the more I think about it, the more I feel that there is something truly pure about playing the game without any shoes. Maybe in the early days, the first Indians to have played the game were onto something.

Forza Italia by Paddy Agnew: I was looking forward to reading this book and it does not disappoint. I remember reading Agnew's articles on Italian soccer in World Soccer for most of the 90's and for the longest time, he was my sole English source for Italian soccer. The book is a look at Paddy's life covering Italian football, including the challenges he and his wife faced adjusting to their Italian life plus the frenzy that takes place in Serie A football.

Behind the Curtain: Travels in Eastern European Football by Jonathan Wilson: This is a very interesting read which not only gives a nice historical perspective to some Eastern European nations but also shows how politics in the region influenced soccer and how soccer in turn was used to push a specific political agenda through such as the division of Yugoslavia. I enjoy reading Wilson's soccer articles in the Guardian as he covers Eastern Europe very well.

And in a few weeks, another book will be added to the above list.

When Friday Comes: Football in the War Zone by James Montague: The title of this book on Middle East soccer is a twist on the popular soccer magazine, When Saturday Comes. Before the English Premier League was formed, all top flight English soccer games kicked off on Saturday afternoon @ 1500 GMT. But now thanks to satellite tv, a good number of Premier League games take place on Sunday, with some on Monday night as well. Still, the magazine When Saturday Comes continues to thrive with insightful articles. But in the Middle East, Friday is the holiday as opposed to Sat or Sun. Hence the title. There was a recent piece by James Montague in the Guardian regarding Kurdistan's soccer team.

Spotlight on France: ratings

Final ratings of all the 17 films seen.

Ratings out of 10:

Play Time (1967, Jacques Tati): 10

Elevator to the Gallows (1958, Louis Malle): 10

The Wages of Fear (1953, Henri - Georges Clouzot): 10

Rififi (1955, Jules Dassin): 9

OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies (2006, Michel Hazanavicius): 9

Murmurs of the Heart (1971, France, Louis Malle): 8.5

Mon Uncle (1957, Jacques Tati): 8.5

Brief Crossing (2001, Catherine Breillat): 8.5

Coeurs (2006, Alain Resnais): 8

Au revoir les enfants (1987, France, Louis Malle): 8

The Valet (2006, Francis Veber): 8

La Belle et la bête (1946, Jean Cocteau): 7.5

Lacombe Lucien (1974, Louis Malle): 7.5

M.Hulot's holiday (1953, Jacques Tati): 7.5

Sheitan (2006, Kim Chapiron): 6.5

Romance (1999, Catherine Breillat): 6.5

Anatomy of Hell (2004, Catherine Breillat): 5

Fear the city when Ms. 45 takes on The Driller Killer

A dark open ended alley with a green garbage dumpster half-way through. On the streets on either side of the alley, people wander by en route to their daily lives unaware of the battle that is taking place within the alley between two tormented souls.

On one end of the alley stands Ms. 45 a.k.a Zoë Tamerlis, a shy mute girl. During her day job, Zoë works in a New York fashion office. Her life was changed when one night she was pulled into an alley way and raped. When she got home, an awaiting burglar attempted to rape her again. In self-defense, she managed to kill the burglar. But not knowing what to do with the burglar's body, she cut it up in pieces and went about New York depositing the various pieces in random locations, like in a garbage bin or a train station locker. On one occasion, when she left a body part in a brown bag near the street side, a man ran after her to return the bag. Terrified of the approaching man, Zoë accidently shot him, using the burglar's gun. At first she was horrified of the gun but gradually, she became comfortable in using the gun to dispatch the city of filthy men. She even started dressing provocatively to lure her victims before she shot them.

On the other end of the alley way is The Driller Killer a.k.a Reno Miller, an artist who only wants peace and quiet to finish his commissioned painting. But others around him let have no rest. He is already frustrated when his masterpiece is ridiculed but he truly loses control when a band keeps practicing their loud music in a neighbouring apartment at odd hours of the night. Reno's inner demon takes over and he embarks on a killing spree with a drill.

If the two characters had to face off against each other, it is clear that Zoë would win as she would easily take out Reno long before he ran towards her with his drill. On the other hand, if Zoë were to face off against One Eye (Christina Lindberg from the Swedish film Thriller: a Cruel Picture), Zoë would easily lose as One Eye could take Zoë out with her shotgun. The killing sequences at the end of Thriller:A Cruel Picture and Ms. 45 are quite similar as both women go around killing a crowd of people in slow-motion, and every scream is amplified. Since the Swedish film came out in 1974, 7 years before Ms. 45 was released, it is possible that the character One Eye had an indirect hand in the birth of Ms. 45.

Abel Ferrara made his feature directorial debut in 1979 with The Driller Killer and followed that in 1981 with Ms. 45. Even though the titular characters in both films start their killing sprees via different circumstances, they eventually start enjoying their murders. The random nature of their murders create fear in the city, so it is not a surprise that Ferrara's third feature in 1984 was titled Fear City where a man believes he is cleaning the city by targeting prostitutes as his victims. In his attempts to kill the prostitutes, the murderer in Fear City follows similar motives with the characters of Ms. 45 and The Driller Killer in that all three believe they are doing the city good by killing unwanted people. Ms. 45 starts off by only killing men, especially those that she thinks prey on women while The Driller Killer starts off by killing homeless people. Eventually both of them start killing anyone that gets in their way but at the beginning they only target a certain section of the city.

Note: In The Driller Killer Ferrara plays the title character while in Ms. 45 he is the rapist that alters Zoë's life.

---

Ratings out of 10:

The Driller Killer (1979, USA, Abel Ferrara): 4.5

Ms. 45 (1981, USA, Abel Ferrara): 5

Fear City (1984, USA, Abel Ferrara): 5

Thriller a cruel picture (1974, Sweden, Bo Arne Vibenius): 6

Hal Hartley Films

It was hard to resist.



A spy film with Parker Posey in a long black trench coat? Too good to pass up! But who was Hal Hartley and why had I never heard of him?

20 minutes into Fay Grim, I began to have doubts about my pick. The characters Fay Grim (played by Ms. Posey), her brother Simon (James Urbaniak) and the CIA agent (Jeff Goldblum) appeared to be straight out of a stage play, delivering dialogues in a quirky manner. I was not sure where this film was going.

But I am very glad I stayed with the film because Fay Grim is one of the most refreshing films I have seen in a long while, although there are plenty of things that require getting used to. The first challenge is getting dropped into a film which is the sequel to Henry Fool made almost a decade ago and not knowing the history of the characters. But the biggest challenge was getting used to the filming style, which included the slanted camera shots. The entire film is shot in a skewed manner and while this style works to perfection in some sequences, it does not in others scenes. Still, what is remarkable about the film is how a simple story is elevated to a global tale of espionage, which involves the CIA, KGB, French Secret Service, Israeli spies, British agents, Arab informers and even some free lance terrorists.


The overall end result is watching a precise dance between Fay Grim and the international assortment of spies. The tilted camera only allows the relevant details to filter into each frame. Never before has a film filmed in Paris and Istanbul allowed so little of the street side or a foreign city in each frame. This tactic works in Fay Grim as the real interest lies in observing the characters and listening to their words as opposed to caring for which location they are in. And the characters are quite interesting indeed. The core of the story involves the "confessions" written by Henry Fool (Thomas Jay Ryan). Henry does not make an appearance until the final third of the film, but he does not need to because he already laid the foundations for Fay Grim in the 1997 film Henry Fool.

Henry Fool starts off when Henry rents a basement from Simon, who works as a garbage man. Henry encourages Simon to write in order to let his feelings out. But Simon's writings cause a stir. While some view it as soulful poetry, others call it pornographic. Shockingly, Simon's mother slits her wrists after she reads her son's work.

Simon manages to get published and raise the profile of the Grim family. On the other hand, Henry's diaries ("confessions"), are deemed worthless. Even Simon cannot see the merit in Henry's work. But the true value in Henry's writing is established in Fay Grim when it turns out the books contain espionage information which could be quite harmful if they fall into the wrong hands.

At the center of Hartley's wonderful universe are the three fascinating characters of Fay, Simon and Henry. But the trio are surrounded by an equally impressive assortment of characters. Overall, Hartley's two films stand perfectly well on their own, but when put together, they form a fascinating and unique story.

Earlier work:

There are plenty of Hal Hartley films out there. I decided to visit just one of them, his 1994 film Amateur, to see if it shared some similarities with Henry Fool.

Amateur also features a mysterious man, Thomas (Martin Donovan), who survives an attempt on his life but cannot remember his past. Thomas runs into Isabelle (Isabelle Huppert) who agrees to help him. A parallel story of Thomas's wife, Sofia, involves her trying to extract money from a porn film gangster. In one thread, we see Thomas go about his new life casually while on the other thread, we get to hear about Thomas' dark past from Sofia.

Even though there are some interesting elements in Amateur, including a cameo from Parker Posey, it is not as engaging as the adventures of Henry Fool.

Note: It was different to see Isabelle Huppert in a completely English speaking role.

---

Ratings out of 10

Fay Grim (2007): 8.5

Henry Fool (1998): 8

Amateur (1994): 6.5

A few weeks ago, the Guardian’s Paul Julian Smith took a bizarre stand with his article titled The curse of Almodovar. This is how he started his article:

The Spanish film industry churns out up to 100 features a year. Of these we in the UK get to see perhaps four or five. And as far as famous Spanish directors go - well, there's really just the one: Pedro Almodóvar, currently in Lanzarote shooting his 17th feature.

For the great majority of films that don't come trailing the seductive slogan "Un film de Almodóvar", foreign distribution is a tough sell. Ironically, it seems, one super-sized name can capsize a national film industry by monopolising international interest.

This is why the London Spanish Film Festival, which comes to an end this Friday at the Cine Lumiere, is important. Along with Manchester's longer established Viva festival, it gives a flavour of what lies beyond planet Pedro.


What a strange way to promote a Spanish film festival. Thankfully, Pedro Almodóvar responded:

It is deeply unfair, and also rather silly, to blame me for an absence of Spanish films at UK cinemas. It is unfair towards me and reality. The reality is, according to figures published by the UK Film Council (Research and Statistics Bulletin, October 2007), that 96.3% of box office earnings between January and August 2007 went to English-language films. And 1.3% was the grand total taken by films in other languages from continental Europe.

These are the hard facts, Mr Smith! A 1.3% market share for cinema from Greece, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Belgium ... Spain. The UK market leaves no room for the British public to discover films being made in other languages. Do you seriously believe I can be held accountable for that!?


While the film website editor, Catherine Shoard, acknowledged "We never intended to abuse Mr Almodóvar or to blame him for the lack of distribution of Spanish films in the UK", she still chose to defend the article:

By writing that "one supersized name can capsize a national film industry by monopolising international interest" it seems to me implicit that we're not accusing Mr Almodóvar of purposefully acting to suppress other Spanish filmmakers, simply that his name is better known in Britain than that of any other Spanish director, and that distributors have understandably chosen to exploit this fact.

The only crime I believe the article accused Mr Almodóvar of was excellence. If the piece had a target, it was intended to be UK audiences for a degree of insularity and UK distributors for a level of timidity.


I disagree with Catherine Shoard's defense. If an article is titled The curse of Almodovar and starts off the way it does in Paul Julian Smith's piece, then I can only take it as blaming Almodóvar for laziness on part of distributors and even theatre owners. On the other hand, if Paul Julian Smith truly wanted to showcase the "excellence" of Almodóvar, then the piece would have had a different title (something like Looking for the next Almodóvar) and flavour.

Yes distributors are lazy not only in the UK but elsewhere around the world in not picking up enough worthy foreign titles or showcasing new directors. But who is to blame more? A film-maker for making great movies, audiences or distributors? One can blame film-makers for making garbage movies but blaming talented film-makers is quite silly. Blaming audiences completely is also an incorrect stand. I am tired of reading excuses from distributors in North America that they are only giving what audiences want; they incorrectly state that audiences only want big blockbuster Hollywood films and do not want foreign/indie films. This is the same nonsense that has been used by Bollywood for decades to completely erode any cinematic value on Indian screens. While a certain section of audiences might only prefer commercial films, another section might be interested in seeing a different brand of films, regardless of where they are from. But since none of these foreign movies ever make it to their cinema screen, then how would they see it? Almodóvar's success does illustrate that the market can respond positively to an international film-maker. More than a decade ago, most of Almodóvar's films were restricted to film festivals. But when people saw the quality of his work, distributors jumped on board and his films started playing in art house theatres around the world. Now distributors freely pick his films up like they would with other commercial fare without thinking, because they know he can deliver. The difference is Almodóvar's films are excellent while most of the other commercial cinema is still stuck in clichéd and formula driven tales.

Almodóvar is a prime example of a film-maker that emerged from a film festival circuit into a broader arena. Shouldn't distributors be looking for the next big film-maker on their own? But as it is often repeated, film making and distribution is a business. Distributors are hesitant to change their money making business model. So how would this business model change? This is where I believe film festivals still play a big part, no matter what some film critics and magazines say every year. Film festivals can give voice to emerging film-makers from different parts of the world and can be a platform to properly highlight the range of cinematic works that exist. And films that garner enough attention at festivals are grabbed for distribution. But for the last 2-3 years, an article shows up on a website or even in a film magazine talking about the irrelevance of film festivals. Now, what these critics are attacking is the quality of films shown at some film festivals. That problem is down to the specific festival (and the programmers) decisions in picking a narrow range of films, or even some commercial titles. But trying to dismiss film festivals in general is incorrect. Yes some festivals may be headed in an incorrect direction but for a majority of film fans around the world, film festivals are still an important way (or only way in some cases) to see some foreign films. As it stands, there are only few cities around the world (like New York, London, Toronto, Vancouver) that have theaters that showcase some quality international titles. But in a majority of other cities, even if the independent or art-house cinema picks up a foreign or an indie title, it is because the film did well at a film festival or got an award elsewhere.

In the end, Paul Julian Smith should have focused on the wider problem of film distribution. But to use Pedro’s name like that is unbelievable. Unless Mr. Paul Julian Smith was looking for attention because how many people can say that Pedro Almodóvar responded to their writing?