Cinequest 2010
STARRING MAJA (PRINSESSA) is a lovely Swedish film about an overweight, unattractive and clumsy young woman who wants to be an actress. Most of the movie is spent watching her deal with harassment and being used as an object by others for their own purposes, but there is a quite satisfying ending that I found delightful. I loved the film.
Initially I was not sure I wanted to see this film as friends of mine had said it was difficult to watch. Indeed it is difficult to see the emotions Maja cannot help but reveal as she realizes the bit part in a TV show she was offered is actually for “fat, grotesque, ugly girl”. The audience also feels the betrayal that Maja feels as she realizes her only friend was using her as almost everyone else in her life has done.
The film revolves not just around Maja, but also Erika, a failed documentarian turned wedding photographer. She meets Maja at a wedding and decides to make a documentary about her. Beautiful Erika believes she sees something of herself in Maja because she has also not been able to achieve her dreams and is deeply in debt. However there is something somewhat disingenuous about such a gorgeous woman telling fat, unattractive Maja that she is truly beautiful and can be anything she wants to be.
Maja also has a school friend, a boy who has recently realized he is gay but has not come out to anyone but Maja. These two forge the only true friendship that Maja has, and they end up a great (platonic) couple.
The ending is tied up happily and not too falsely. Maja does not turn into a beautiful princess at the end, neither does she win the captain of the football team or become a movie starlet. But she discovers who she is and along with her friend Alex they make it clear that they are going to take on the world on their own terms. It is a hilarious, delightful ending that I just adored.
The film is sadly only available on non-USA DVD format. But keep a look out for it, I thought it was outstanding.
Cinequest 2010
THE EXPLODING GIRL is a quiet, sweet film about a young girl trying to deal with a waning love-life and her own epilepsy. However the slowness and lack of anything really happening left most of the audience cold.
Young Ivy is home on summer break and a few times we see her dealing with the idea of her epilepsy, but we rarely see her actuallyphysically dealing with it. She also has a boyfriend who we only encounter through phone conversations such as this:
“Hey, sorry I haven’t called in awhile.”
“Oh, it’s okay.”
“So I was just checking in.”
“Okay.”
“Okay. Well, see ya.”
Meanwhile childhood friend Al has come to crash at her house for a bit, and their friendship slowly and sweetly begins to turn into something else. But nothing substantial really happens with this relationship and the film ends just as something might be starting. The 79 minutes of film time could have been condensed into 15 and then continued with an actual story. When the credits finally did roll, this audience couldn’t get out of the theater fast enough.
Now available on Netflix and DVD.
Cinequest 2010
BURIED PRAYERS is an emotional documentary about the search for buried items from holocaust victims who had been sent to the gas chambers. In 1943 one of the worst death camps was Maidanek in Warsaw, where before the victims were sent into the camp they were held in these big fields right outside. After interviewing many survivors of the camp the filmmakers started hearing multiple stories of some of the Jews having buried their jewelry and valuables right in the field. They were well aware they would never exit Maidanek alive, but in a final act of defiance they refused to let the Germans get hold of their possessions so they buried them in the field. The film is about Maidanek itself, the stories of many witnesses from Maidanek, and finally the search for the items.
The pluses of this documentary are the witness accounts and the information about Maidanek itself. There are heartbreaking stories from the survivors who were mostly teenagers in 1943 and lost their entire families – their parents, siblings, everyone. Most had never spoken of what had happened in Maidanek until this documentary, and they were extremely touching and tales that needed to be told.
The minus is the amount of time spent on discussions about searching for the items, as opposed to the time spent actually looking and showing us what was found. It feels a bit dragged out as we are told over and over what a good idea it is to search these fields. The actual archaeological dig is not shown until the final minutes of the film.
The documentary is not as depressing as I expected it to be, so don’t let the idea of a dark, depressing tale push you away from this film (as I almost did). It IS a very emotional documentary, but there was something uplifting about the fact that the items hidden were actually found all this time later, that the stories of the people who died there were going to be told. The documentary is a rough cut and not completely edited yet, and of course there will be much more to be told later as they complete the dig (2 days work uncovered 80 items but left 99% of the field still to be searched).
It is an imperfect documentary, but a story that needs to be told. Don’t be afraid to see it, you will definitely learn something and see an incredible strength of human spirit.
[Edited: It also may be a different film than I saw in 2010, since I saw a rough cut, there were some problems and issues, and I discussed those with the director. I’d love to see the finished product.]
I cannot find any way to view this film yet, I would keep an eye on the website if you have an interest.
Cinequest 2010
PARABLE is an incredible film which obviously had a great deal of thought put into it and in return gives the viewer a lot to think about. Should you go see it? Well.
Directed by Jon Jost, whose films are referred to as “tone poems”, PARABLE is a symbolic commentary on the Bush administration and was made before GWB left office. There is not much dialog and it can be very confusing if you are not taking it for what it is – a symbolic commentary. There are scenes with a man in a chair silently trying to unjumble a knotted rope. Scenes with a man in a red shirt who is tied by a rope to a woman in a blue dress. And there are some very violent scenes strewn throughout. The first five minutes of the film are so slow I think they are just meant to weed out any non-serious partakers. This film forces the viewer to pay attention and to think, so much so that it will be difficult for the average festivalgoer to sit still for it.
In fact, there were over 100 people in the audience when it started. At the 45 minute mark half the audience had left. By the time the Q&A began there were 17 people left to ask questions, but ask they did. Those 17 left were thrilled that they had stayed through the whole film and felt rewarded for having done so. The Q&A with actor Stephen Taylor was one of the best I have attended as everyone left was so excited about what they had just seen. In return, Taylor knew the director well (Jost was out of the country with another film) and was able to explain and talk about a great deal more than he had anticipated.
The truth is, this is an amazing film, but it is for a much smaller segment of the film festival audience. You must be prepared to think hard and to decipher the symbolism if you are going to watch this film, but go into the theater with that mindset you will be greatly rewarded.
I have found Jon Jost’s other films on Amazon, but this one can only be purchased from his website (that I could find). If you’re feeling adventurous, or take filmmaking very seriously, I do recommend this film for a specific movie goer.
Cinequest 2010
For some reason, 1981 was not really on my radar at Cinequest. I had seen it in the program but nothing really sparked my interest, so when I was assigned to be presenter for this film my reaction was: Meh.
I was won over within a minute of the film starting, and I believe the entire audience was. This is a film that belongs on your Must-See list if you were ever 11 years old and made it to adulthood. Think Neil Simon directs GOONIES or STAND BY ME without the adventure (No, really, go with me on this). Narrated from an adult point of view, it’s a look back at being a regular 11 year old kid and the trials and tribulations that we must go through to grow up.
Ricardo Trogi is not an outsider, not a loser, not a nerd or a dork. Neither is he the popular kid. He’s just your plain old average 11 year old boy. He has plenty of friends (who he found with the promise of some non-existent Playboys – as it is done in the world) and he has a loving, average family, which means that no one in it is either perfect or dysfunctional.
The film takes Ricardo on your typical journey through age 11: trying to get money without working for it, living up to your family’s expectations, trying to apologize to your family when you realize you’ve hurt them, trying to fit in with classmates who seem to have it all, and most of all… convincing the beautiful and mysterious Anne Tremblay to be your girlfriend.
There is another minor co-star of this movie, and that is the year 1981. This film is amazingly detailed regarding costume, hair, and set design. From the lunch boxes to the cars to the much sought after calculator watch and the prized Sony walkman, this film takes you on a crazy ride back in time – for about five minutes, and then all of that 1981 perfection settles into the background and we are focused on the characters, as it should be.
The four young actors in the film are absolutely delightful all the way to the big confession scene near the end. The mother and father in this film are also amazing, playing your average imperfect parents who love their child and want the best for their family. It is narrated in perfection by an unknown male – possibly the real Ricardo Trogi who wrote and directed this film based on his own experiences.
So, does Ricardo get the girl in the end? Let’s just say that 11 year old girls are wily creatures, and I’d bet money that Anne Tremblay was a Scorpio.
Now available on DVD and Amazon Instant Video.
Cinequest 2010
THE ESCAPE is easily going to be one of the best films at Cinequest. Just as in HURT LOCKER, we have another female director dealing with the troubles in the Middle East, and doing a masterful job. This film revolves around the Afghan occupation by European countries and the US. It is filled with suspense and a hundred twists and turns. In fact, I am not clear to which escape the title is referring: this film had easily 25 different escapes, at least, both literal and metaphorical.
It begins when Rikke, a Danish journalist in Afghanistan, is kidnapped by the Taliban. They want the Danish troops (and others) out of their country, and if it doesn’t happen they threaten to kill Rikke. But their deadline runs out and they realize that Rikke is “just another journalist” to the media and Europe, so they devise a new plan: ten days, ten fingers. Be warned, there are some violent scenes in this film.
Without revealing too many details, I will just say that she is given help to escape but must tell a lie to keep her savior safe. She gets back to Denmark and writes a book about her experience, but must weave the lie into her story. This all comes back to haunt her when her friend shows up in Denmark asking for help in return.
The movie is fast paced and very suspenseful, and also very complex and complicated. I have three pages of notes that I took while viewing it (many just stating “Escape AGAIN??”). Every one of these characters has their own escapes they must make, and Rikke alone must escape not only the Taliban but her own lies, the truth, the media spin on the whole event, the prejudice against her in her career due to being a beautiful woman in a man’s world, and her own personal demons.
I absolutely recommend this film. Iben Hjejle is beautiful and a wonderful actress who should be in more films available in the US. The supporting cast was also fantastic, especially Lars Mikkelsen who gives a little comic relief in his expressions when his mistress shows up on his doorstep. Kathrine Windfeld did an outstanding job in directing this film, and the film should definitely be on your must-see lists.
Sadly only available in non-USA format DVD. Do not purchase unless you live in Denmark.
Cinequest 2010
KILL THE HABIT is an enjoyable little film that gives the impression it wants to be an all-female Tarantino-like story. It fails, but it is a fun ride. Listed under the “Laugh Mavericks” category, it is humorous but cheats a lot in trying to make up for its lack of originality. It is a comedic, fun ride, but it is flawed in some big ways.
The very first problem I had (well, tied with some very amateurish acting) was what I think is an idiotic premise that is used all too often to set up a plot. A man is murdered, but it was by accident and in a clean-cut case of provable self-defense. In real life, it would be much easier to call the police and turn one’s self in, especially since there are clear strangulation marks visible on the killer’s neck through the entire film. But no, it’s much easier to decide to cart that body all over town looking for a place to hide it in order to have a reason for the film’s existence.
I simply don’t buy this premise, and it irritates me when it is used in a film that could have been very funny. But as I said, the premise ties with the acting for the biggest problem. The three women involved are gorgeous, and if you enjoy looking at beautiful women in revealing clothes then you might be able to look past the acting. To be honest, I was mesmerized by these actresses and would have watched another hour or two of them if given a chance. But does that make a great film? No.
It was enjoyable, and it was funny, and it was easy on the eyes. It would make a great comedic break in between some heavy films at the festival. But there are too many problems for me to recommend this on a must-see list.
Now available on Amazon Instant Video.
Cinequest 2010
For the first time since viewing CANARY I find myself in the middle of a film review conundrum, wondering how to explain how absolutely awesome is COOKING HISTORY, even though I turned it off around the halfway point and have no intention of ever returning.
It all depends on your horror threshold. I would guess this documentarian secretly wants to direct some hilarious horror films, because that is almost what you have here. It certainly is a moving documentary, filled with interviews with the people who were called upon to cook for troops in six different wars, and they are quite incredible. These heart wrenching stories of poisoning loaves of bread for the enemy or leaving out the last meal for the dead soldiers are overlaid with the recipes: “Bread to poison 300 soldiers”, “Pancakes to feed 1 million dead”. Humorous and heart breaking at the same time. It is drop dead serious but also told with a twisted sense of humor.
There are some very difficult scenes you should be warned about. At one point a cow is graphically slaughtered and it takes a very long time for the cow to die. A very. Long. Time. There is a similar scene with a pig. I have a pretty high threshold for horror, but I couldn’t take this. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear there are walkouts during this movie if people aren’t prepared… so go in prepared.
It really is a fantastic documentary. The war stories are horrific, but they need to be told and they need to be heard. The director cuts from an interview with a soldier explaining how a tank would have crushed him “to mincemeat” in a field to a close-up shot of a former cook pushing meat through a grinder. Actually there are many shots of the grinder, at any opportune moment it seemed.
There is a definite twisted, dark humor in the telling of these tales, and there is horror that is almost impossible to look at. But it brings to life the shocking details of these war stories that are so easy to feel are just stories. It is much easier to listen to battlefield tales without seeing a pig get his throat cut. Hearing how a tank would have crushed the soldier to mincemeat really doesn’t have the same effect as watching the meat get pushed through the grinder while listening to the soldier’s own words.
I did not finish the movie. I regret that I cannot hear the rest of the stories. But my threshold is apparently not high enough to get through this. It will be good for there to be walkouts because it will mean the film had the desired effect on people – War is not pretty, it is about throat cutting and meat grinders. Some soldiers will take a very, very long time to die. War is awful. People will be talking about this documentary during the festival, and that will be a good thing.
Prepare yourself, and go see it.
Unfortunately I cannot locate the film anywhere, but the trailer is on IMDB.
Cinequest 2010
PASSENGER SIDE is the first film from Cinequest 20 that had me clapping when it was over, with a little tear in my eye.
It’s a twist on a road trip movie, as 95% of the film is spent driving in the car, but they don’t really ever leave Los Angeles (except for a quick trip through the desert). It is Michael’s birthday, but it appears that everyone has forgotten it. His estranged, (supposed) formerly drug-addicted brother asks him to drive him around on errands all day, but it is soon clear that these trips are not just to the post office and dry cleaners. Michael thinks his brother Tobey must be chasing a new drug lead, but Tobey insists they are not. Along the way they meet all sorts of on-the-fringe oddballs, and throughout the day Michael tries unsuccessfully to contact his girlfriend so they can make birthday plans.
This film is less about driving than it is about talking. The two characters keep up a running banter with each other which is quite witty, though at times tedious. Their constant quick witted joking shows that both brothers, though losers according to social norms, are actually very intelligent and have a deep bond with each other that has been tested by life’s obstacles. I was quickly fascinated by their conversation, then somewhat annoyed for a few minutes… but when it became obvious that this is what the film was about (and done very well), I settled in and enjoyed it.
I was rewarded greatly for this. The Cinequest program puts this film in the “Laugh Mavericks” category, and it does have a lot of humor, but it is also a very touching and somewhat dramatic film. Adam Scott and Joel Bissonnette, playing Michael and Tobey, are fantastic actors and have guest starring credits a mile long on IMDB.com. The script is an amazing, intelligent piece of work by Matt Bissonnette, who brought the award winning WHO LOVES THE SUN to Cinequest in 2007. There is a HOLY CRAP twist near the end of this movie that I never saw coming in a million, bazillion years, but which was totally believable and brought the film to a particularly touching end.
Audiences who view this film will be very happy they did. It has three showings at the festival and I will guess that it is going to be an audience favorite. This is definitely on my recommend list.
Passenger Side now available on Netflix and DVD.
You can watch WHO LOVES THE SUN on Amazon Instant Video.
1Q: Tell us a little about the origins of BUMMER SUMMER, from writing to financing.
My writing process spanned a couple of years, and saw the film take on various incarnations. I started writing it as a very traditional screenplay about halfway through film school in New York because I had been warned that graduating without a feature script was the worst error that an aspiring director could commit. Just before my senior year I was getting exposed to a lot of the great new no-budget work that was coming out and was inspired to try my hand at it. So the screenplay changed a lot as I started writing it realistically according to my means. But I never even finished a complete draft. The dialogue was all so long-winded and mouthpiece-y, and all of the characters just sounded like me, so I scrapped it and wrote a detailed outline instead. That was what we shot from. I recruited friend/classmate Nandan Rao to move to Olympia, WA (my hometown) with me to shoot/co-produce the film. Because we were first-timers, we gave ourselves about six months to feel everything out before shooting anything. This time was also spent fundraising, which was a dismal failure. We threw events like a roller-disco, a garden pizza party, and an art show/raucous dance party (a bad combo for fragile ceramic pieces). Altogether, we milked less than a grand out of it all. Because the film coincided with my college graduation, I was able to finance it using gift money and some excess student loan money that I sneakily neglected to return to the loan company. It was an absurdly cheap movie, but I don’t think that’s apparent at all.
2Q: Two interesting casting choices: Your lead had absolutely no acting experience, and you yourself took on a role even though you are also writer/director. What can you say about working with a first time actor, and also the experience with directing yourself?
The film’s casting process was really minimal. We tried to go about it the traditional way (placing ads, etc), but operating in such a small city it was fruitless and ultimately a waste of time. In the case of the lead, I was hanging out with an old friend one night and his fifteen year-old brother had a friend over named Mackinley. I must’ve talked to the kid for no more than five minutes before leaving. A couple of weeks later we were stressing out about casting a lead and I remembered him, so I tracked his number down and called him up cold. He was very confused. Aside from having no acting experience, he had no desire to act, period. For some reason or another he agreed to give it a try. To be honest, he was terrible at first. He would fumble his way through entire scenes with this stupid grin on his face. The key was the fact that we had months to work with him before shooting during which we were able to develop a bond and a mutual understanding in terms of the character. With all of the principal actors, getting on the same wavelength was key. As far as casting myself is concerned, it was a choice that I had considered since the film was first being written. Because all of the scenes were improvised, I figured that I would have more directorial control as an actor because I would be able to steer the dialogue in whichever direction I wanted on the spot. At the same time I was terrified to make my role official because I knew that if I were to give a bad performance, I wouldn’t be able to live with the fact that I’d ruined my own film. We tried briefly to find someone else, but it wasn’t working out and eventually I just bit the bullet and took on the role. It certainly wasn’t without its challenges, but I think it was the right decision and I would definitely do it again.
3Q: What was your best and/or worst experience while making BUMMER SUMMER?
Shooting the film was a very free-form thing, so a lot of times we’d be having a “best experience” that would just crumble and become terrible. I’ll cite a specific example. There’s one sequence later in the film in which the lead goes off alone and meets this strange older man and hangs out with him for the night. That was about as much detail as we had “scripted”. I had my friend Rob come out to play the role of the older guy because he’s got this wild charisma that I thought would work well. The night of the shoot, we debated all day about what exactly we would shoot. We had arranged to shoot in a bookstore, and that was all we knew. After they closed, we moved in and started setting up, still arguing back and forth and re-writing everything. It was a really scary thing betting the fate of the movie on some split-second, late-night decisions. What we eventually settled on was crazy. The bookstore scene would end on this heated shouting match, which we cast the soundman to take part in with Rob. When we rolled and called action, their performances were totally electric. It was amazing and unexpected. The continuation of the sequence got even weirder. We went out and shot a few continuous scenes that included a car chase and a dry ice bomb. When this sequence came up in the editing process, I hated it. I started to worry that the entire film was sunk just because of these rash, zany decisions we’d made. I talked it out with the editor and with friends who’d seen a cut of the movie, and I ended up just scrapping everything after the bookstore. In just about any other movie this would never fly, but thanks to the loose, disjointed style of the film it feels totally natural. I still get uncomfortable when the sequence plays, but other people seem to really like it. It’s somewhat baffling to me, but it’s a huge relief.
4Q: Festival audiences often have to make hard decisions about what to see, and the catalog descriptions sometimes run together. In your own words, why should people see your film?
One of the most important aspects of a good movie to me is tone. With Bummer Summer Nandan and I put a lot of thought and effort into developing a specific tone and maintaining consistency from start to finish. It was risky filmmaking because while the film’s events are totally traditional at their core, I think that what we did with it is a bit of an experiment. It’s a super interesting blend of one very distinct sort of content with another equally distinct, totally contrasting (yet strangely appropriate) visual style. And we were all so frighteningly inexperienced; I think it gives the film an exciting edge. We shot on the Canon 5D Mark II, which was particularly foolhardy because it had never been used to make a feature film before, but I’m so pleased with the result. I just saw Bummer Summer projected in a theater for the first time, and the movie is beautiful. I can say that without hesitation.
5Q: The current market for independent films is fractured, to put it lightly, and existing distribution models grow more ineffective with each passing moment. What are your hopes or plans for distribution?
I have no idea. The fact that the film is even going to play at Cinequest is still sort of unreal. I know next to nothing about the world of distribution and have never realistically expected it for this film. Instead, my partner Nandan and I have decided that what we’re really after for the time being is just whatever recognition/credibility we’ll need to secure financing for another one. Making money would be nice. Hell, just breaking even would be nice. But our ultimate goal is always going to be the opportunity to keep making more and more movies.
Popcorn and Vodka 