Click here to read my review of opening night film NOT QUITE HOLLYWOOD
Click here to read LATAURO @ MIFF #1: THE SAGA BEGINS...
Click here to read LATAURO @ MIFF #2: IT AIN'T ALL WINE AND ROSES
Click here to read LATAURO @ MIFF #3: EVERYONE'S A CRITIC? REALLY?
Click here to read LATAURO @ MIFF #4: THE LESSER UNION
LATAURO @ MIFF 08 #5: THE ROAD WARRIOR RETURNS
The guide for the Melbourne International Film Festival was released on July 11 as part of The Age newspaper. It is, of course, free to pick up at all the festival venues, cafes, etc around the place, but if you're going to be at all sentimental about the MIFF experience -- as I clearly am -- you will eschew these free replacements. There's something loyal about my MIFF guide, the one I got way back in mid-July. Sure, it's tattered from constant flicking as I go from the calendar pages to the index page to the description page, but it's my tattered MIFF guide. It may be fraying around the edges and the staples may be only just holding on for dear life, but the damn thing's gonna last me until festival's end this coming Sunday. It's all part of the experience.< /H2>
MAD MAX 2
I can't believe I'm about to admit this, but here goes: I'd never seen MAD MAX 2. I know, right? It's insane. The reason I'd never gone out and corrected this egregious error was that, well, I always just assumed I had. It's a weird thing to try to explain, but MAD MAX 2 is such a huge part of our cultural heritage, I'd been walking around with the assumption that I'd seen it a long time ago and it just hadn't made an impact on me. A few days ago, looking at the upcoming screening in my diary got me thinking, and I realised I'd never actually seen the film. And I'm glad I hadn't. I'm glad my first experience with the film was in a packed theatre and with a 35mm print. A lot of people talk about how great this film is, but with all these things, you usually have to adjust those statements for (a) "It was good for its time", (b) "It was good given the materials they had to work with", and (c) "Nostalgia tints those glasses a pretty rosary". Well, I watched the film without any of those things potentially clouding my judgment, and you know what? It really is brilliant. I mean astonishingly brilliant. And I know all of you know this, because you've all seen the film already, but I'm saying it holds up on first viewing even today, and I have zero regrets about waiting to see it in this context. I'm so glad I did. Incidentally, the film was programmed and introduced by new MIFF ambassador Eric Bana, whose intro revealed him to be a genuinely massive fan of the film. It was cool listening to him talk about the fifty-to-a-hundred times he'd watched this on video, and after the film he mentioned that seeing it in 35mm revealed a ton of details he'd never noticed before. Nic e bookend to it. But yes, here I am writing about Australian film on AICN for over five years, and I've only now seen MAD MAX 2. Call me born again.
SURVEILLANCE
I had to do the walk of shame out of the post-Bana Q&A during its last question. It was entertaining, but I was running late for SURVEILLANCE, and I hate missing the start of films. Wouldn't have been a problem, though, given the line stretched so far out of the Kino, I'm surprised I wasn't able to join it from my MM2 seat in the Forum. SURVEILLANCE is the work of Jennifer Lynch, daughter of David, director of BOXING HELENA (which I've not seen). It's basically about two FBI agents (Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond) who are investigating the latest work of serial killers in small town America. I won't spoil the twist ending for you, because I think Lynch does a pretty good job of that herself. The surprise is telegraphed way too early, and most of the film is just a plodding attempt to get there. There are some good moments, but by and large, the film just isn't that good. We spend a lot of time with two corrupt cops (Kent Harper and French Stewart), who I think are supposed to be comic relief, but they're so horrible, you really just feel disgusted watching them. The film is based around a series of flashbacks that aren't really worth telling in the end, although it is cool to see Pullman and Ormond on screen, and the young girl (Ryan Simpkins, from GARDENS OF NIGHT) is really good. It's not really a bad movie, just more of... well, no, it actually is a bad movie. I wouldn't bother.&l t;/H2>
PLANET B-BOY
I had this thing on Wednesday that was supposed to take all day, but finished at 1pm. Stranded in the city with nothing until my screening at 7pm, I decided to do that glorious MIFF thing of walking in to a session of something without knowing anything about it. PLANET B-BOY turned out to be a documentary about breakdancing, how the artform began, how it evolved, and how people all over the planet compete in a yearly competition in Germany. What a find. This is an utterly brilliant doco, truly amazing. Director Benson Lee has such a masterful control over style and form and pacing, that the film is never less than entertaining. We begin with the originators of breakdancing. The best part about this is how these guys with their gold chain t-shirts and backwards baseball caps eschew all stereotypes and turn out to be incredibly articulate. They succinctly describe the history of breakdancing, and talk about the styles of the dancers from different countries. Koreans are apparently the most inventive, the Japanese are the most technically flawless, the French have the most beautifully musical movements, etc. It's a great way of setting up the personalities of the countries, and soon we're following the groups as they train for the final in Germany. The dancing looks superb (and is shot as grandly as it deserves), the personalities of all the subjects are fascinating, and the whole thing hangs together brilliantly. A terrific film that's worth seeking out, even if -- like me -- you had zero knowledge or interest about breakdancing beforehand. This will naturally change when you see the film; five minutes in, I felt I was a big fan of an artform that the world just did n't understand. Another must-see.
IN SEARCH OF A MIDNIGHT KISS
If you're a film fan and all of your friends are film fans and you never get to see them, just buy a festival passport. Eventually, you'll see most of them at a screening. Such was the case when I walked into my second random film of the day and heard my name called out. We sat and chatted and talked about the film we were about to see: IN SEARCH OF A MIDNIGHT KISS, a film I'd studiously avoided because of its description. "A streetwise black and white film pitched somewhere between MANHATTAN and CLERKS..." Sorry, but namechecking my favourite films feels far too cynical. Like how I nearly avoided both MALCOLM IN THE MIDDLE and SCRUBS because local networks described them as "Live action Simpsons!". I know comparing a new thing to a successful thing seems like a good idea at the outset, but if the new thing is just going to be a shadow of perfect things that I loved, then why would I bother? I decided to go anyway, given the Woody/Kevin comparison might be unfair on the filmmakers, and they may have something new to give. I gotta say, I think "A streetwise film pitched somewhere between MANHATTAN and CLERKS" is what writer/director Alex Holdridge had pinned above his desk as he wrote this. This feels a lot like a cynical attempt to be the next big indie film, aping a lot of what's come before. That's not to say it's a bad film; in fact, parts of it are touching, and there are a few good jokes here and there, but mostly I just found it ineffectual. It's okay. It's there. It's trying a bit too hard, and it does the indie film thing I really hate: the whole thing feels like a relationship commercial for its director. May be I'm taking the cynicism a bit too far. Look, it's a decent film, but it's not CLERKS and it's not MANHATTAN.
SUKIYAKI WESTERN DJANGO
And here we are! Possibly my most anticipated film of the festival (after that brilliant trailer they played at the MIFF media launch). I'm a big fan of Takeshi Miike, and a highly-stylised Western just sounded brilliant. On the other hand, I thought KUNG FU HUSTLE and SHAOLIN SOCCER sounded brilliant, too. I know Stephen Chow has a lot of fans, and I do kind-of like him, but HUSTLE in particular looked great and left me cold. There was no soul to that film, and nothing really made sense. It was just a couple of cool moments in a film that's way too long. DJANGO does the same thing. I think it probably makes a bit more sense, but here's the thing: the film was played on a DVD player. If the cinematography was great, I'd have no way of knowing, as the resolution was stretched to capacity. I could barely make out half the dialogue, mumbled as most of it was, so the plot was near-impossible to follow. Oh, and I had a woman sitting behind me who had the loudest, most irritating laugh I've ever heard in my life. Constant and in my ear, like a knife. I could have been watching TOUCH OF EVIL and that laugh would have taken me out of it. So, I'm willing to concede that the combination of her laugh, the crappiness of the projecting, and the old people beside us letting off all sorts of undiscovered gasses throughout the course of the film, all these things may have impacted my enjoyment of a film I might otherwise have enjoyed. Maybe I'll give it another go in the future and try to re-assess it, but for now I'm going to have to go with: empty , but with moments of fun.
Phew. Okay, that's round five done. I'm gonna see if I can make a dent in the next AICN-D, and then head off for another few films tonight... it's a tough life.
Peace out,
Latauro
AICNDownunder@hotmail.com
GARDENS OF NIGHT) is really good. It's not really a bad movie, just more of... well, no, it actually is a bad movie. I wouldn't bother.&l t;/H2>
PLANET B-BOY
I had this thing on Wednesday that was supposed to take all day, but finished at 1pm. Stranded in the city with nothing until my screening at 7pm, I decided to do that glorious MIFF thing of walking in to a session of something without knowing anything about it. PLANET B-BOY turned out to be a documentary about breakdancing, how the artform began, how it evolved, and how people all over the planet compete in a yearly competition in Germany. What a find. This is an utterly brilliant doco, truly amazing. Director Benson Lee has such a masterful control over style and form and pacing, that the film is never less than entertaining. We begin with the originators of breakdancing. The best part about this is how these guys with their gold chain t-shirts and backwards baseball caps eschew all stereotypes and turn out to be incredibly articulate. They succinctly describe the history of breakdancing, and talk about the styles of the dancers from different countries. Koreans are apparently the most inventive, the Japanese are the most technically flawless, the French have the most beautifully musical movements, etc. It's a great way of setting up the personalities of the countries, and soon we're following the groups as they train for the final in Germany. The dancing looks superb (and is shot as grandly as it deserves), the personalities of all the subjects are fascinating, and the whole thing hangs together brilliantly. A terrific film that's worth seeking out, even if -- like me -- you had zero knowledge or interest about breakdancing beforehand. This will naturally change when you see the film; five minutes in, I felt I was a big fan of an artform that the world just did n't understand. Another must-see.
IN SEARCH OF A MIDNIGHT KISS
If you're a film fan and all of your friends are film fans and you never get to see them, just buy a festival passport. Eventually, you'll see most of them at a screening. Such was the case when I walked into my second random film of the day and heard my name called out. We sat and chatted and talked about the film we were about to see: IN SEARCH OF A MIDNIGHT KISS, a film I'd studiously avoided because of its description. "A streetwise black and white film pitched somewhere between MANHATTAN and CLERKS..." Sorry, but namechecking my favourite films feels far too cynical. Like how I nearly avoided both MALCOLM IN THE MIDDLE and SCRUBS because local networks described them as "Live action Simpsons!". I know comparing a new thing to a successful thing seems like a good idea at the outset, but if the new thing is just going to be a shadow of perfect things that I loved, then why would I bother? I decided to go anyway, given the Woody/Kevin comparison might be unfair on the filmmakers, and they may have something new to give. I gotta say, I think "A streetwise film pitched somewhere between MANHATTAN and CLERKS" is what writer/director Alex Holdridge had pinned above his desk as he wrote this. This feels a lot like a cynical attempt to be the next big indie film, aping a lot of what's come before. That's not to say it's a bad film; in fact, parts of it are touching, and there are a few good jokes here and there, but mostly I just found it ineffectual. It's okay. It's there. It's trying a bit too hard, and it does the indie film thing I really hate: the whole thing feels like a relationship commercial for its director. May be I'm taking the cynicism a bit too far. Look, it's a decent film, but it's not CLERKS and it's not MANHATTAN.
SUKIYAKI WESTERN DJANGO
And here we are! Possibly my most anticipated film of the festival (after that brilliant trailer they played at the MIFF media launch). I'm a big fan of Takeshi Miike, and a highly-stylised Western just sounded brilliant. On the other hand, I thought KUNG FU HUSTLE and SHAOLIN SOCCER sounded brilliant, too. I know Stephen Chow has a lot of fans, and I do kind-of like him, but HUSTLE in particular looked great and left me cold. There was no soul to that film, and nothing really made sense. It was just a couple of cool moments in a film that's way too long. DJANGO does the same thing. I think it probably makes a bit more sense, but here's the thing: the film was played on a DVD player. If the cinematography was great, I'd have no way of knowing, as the resolution was stretched to capacity. I could barely make out half the dialogue, mumbled as most of it was, so the plot was near-impossible to follow. Oh, and I had a woman sitting behind me who had the loudest, most irritating laugh I've ever heard in my life. Constant and in my ear, like a knife. I could have been watching TOUCH OF EVIL and that laugh would have taken me out of it. So, I'm willing to concede that the combination of her laugh, the crappiness of the projecting, and the old people beside us letting off all sorts of undiscovered gasses throughout the course of the film, all these things may have impacted my enjoyment of a film I might otherwise have enjoyed. Maybe I'll give it another go in the future and try to re-assess it, but for now I'm going to have to go with: empty , but with moments of fun.
Phew. Okay, that's round five done. I'm gonna see if I can make a dent in the next AICN-D, and then head off for another few films tonight... it's a tough life.
Peace out,
Latauro
AICNDownunder@hotmail.com
AICNDownunder@hotmail.com
