September 6, 2002

First day, five movies…

The festival started a little earlier than expected for me this morning, as I was unexpectedly up and around in time for the earliest screenings.   I wasn’t really jumping to get to them, as none were on my “must see” list.  But I’m thrilled that I went because I got one of those great movie surprises that I like to write about so often.

I chose to walk into Marie-Jo Et Ses Deux Amours because it was that or what sounded like a depressing German film.  I hadn’t even worked out the title in my half-ass, unschooled, romance language begging French.  I walked into the 9:45 a.m. screening to find, to my surprise, a pretty full room. 

The female lead, Marie-Jo (played by Ariane Ascaride) is very, very happily married to Daniel (Jean-Pierre Darroussin).  The have a daughter of about 18.  But as happy as she is, Marie-Jo, who works driving infirm people around, has a love of the sea.  And who comes into her life, but a ship’s pilot (Gerard Meylan), with whom she starts a torrid affair. 

Is any of this sounding familiar?

Well, if you saw Unfaithful last May it should.  It’s a very similar story set-up, albeit these characters are a decade older than the Gere/Lane couple.  But, because of that, it seems they are far better at expressing their feelings.  Unlike Unfaithful, where the filmmakers seemed  thrilled to leave so many motivations unspoken, in this film, they express their feelings by… well, expressing their feelings.  And it’s not like sitting through a morals lecture.  Their actions and insights are never lass than realistic and always challenging to the audience’s thoughts about morality and fidelity and the oddity of love.

Included in this is their college age daughter and her live-in boyfriend, who bring a wonderful level of reality to their roles as bystanders to this ménage-a-pain.

As far as I can tell, this film does not yet have a U.S. distribution deal.  It should.  It’s  a better film than Unfaithful (even if I’d rather watch Diane Lane have wild sex rather than Ms. Ascaride… who is in wonderful shape, actually) and it’s every bit as good as any of the Rohmer films.  The only heaviness of hand seems to come at the very end… not in action, but it style.  Otherwise, a wonderful, smart film. 

A LUCKY DAY is Sandra Gugliotta’s Argentinian/Italian co-production about a girl from Buenes Aires who dreams of following her love, a one-night stand, back to his home in Italy to get away from the world around her.  That girl is named Elsa and she is played by Valentina Bassi, one of those actresses who looks awkward to the point of almost being ugly one moment and like a knockout movie star in the next. 

The movie tries to take on the current state of Argentina, as government-determined blackouts and other forms of inflicted poverty send mobs to the street.  But that really is the background.  This is a movie about Elsa’s dreams and little else. 

For the most part, the film is much ado about very little… until the end, when Elsa starts getting closer to her dreams and for her effort, finds her stronger, more natural self.

ARARAT is Atom Egoyan’s new one… about the Armenian genocide in Turkey in 1915.  The film is very well meaning.  And I would rather go on a death march myself than watch it again.  (Okay, so I’m exaggerating a little…. I’d rather watch Scooby Doo again than this a second time.)

The story telling is as convoluted and complex as any Egoyan film.  But this time out, he takes all his emotional  moodiness and trumps it with reams and reams of expositional dialogue, telling us over and over how terrible it was and how it really happened even though the Turkish government still denies a genocide and there is little written proof that what is claimed to have happened actually happened.

That said, I am willing to believe that it happened and that it happened just as Egoyan’s characters claim.  What I’m not willing to do is to endure a movie-within-a-movie that is supposedly made by one of the all-time great directors, but looks like a cheap TV movie.  What I’m not willing to do is to suffer through Chris Plummer’s bizarre dialogue and actions as a Customs Agent… even if Plummer does his usual exception job with the thankless role.  What I’m not willing to do is to see the most passionate, interesting character in the piece reduced to a public nuisance and a hot bed partner in one scene. 

(Here’s a question… why can’t anyone ever have decent sex in an Atom Egoyen movie?   He hires the most beautiful people and writes the worst sex lives for them.  Here, the young couple – David Alpay and Marie-Josee Croze – seem to be just pre-orgasm when neither one of them gets off and they disengage genitals just seconds before engaging in a cold, harsh discussion that seems to come from left field… at least something came somewhere!)

What we get in Ararat is a movie about the genocide that stars an American, played by Canadian Bruce Greenwood.  We have a woman who has written a book on the subject and gives more lectures in a couple of weeks than anyone who wrote such a book would be likely to give in a year.  And we have the son, who ends up carrying four mystery film cans into the country after a spur-of-the-moment trip to Turkey.

I don’t mean to sound as callous as I am about to sound, but we jews have had decades of experience making narrative movies about the jewish holocaust of WWII.  And we’ve gotten better at it.  While the old docs showing thousands of dead bodies are still valuable as a tool of fact, it rarely requires such crude footage to make a compelling case. This is the first narrative Armenian genocide movie in North America that I know of… and it’s still trying way, way, way too hard.  Sadly, the point of being laughable as often as not. 

THE GOOD THIEF was another blind spot.  I am a big Neil Jordan fan, so it was an obvious choice.  But it turned out to be a charming surprise, with Jordan continuing to find new ways of expressing himself as a director.  It seems to me that only Bob Zemeckis makes as wide a range of films as Jordan… but unlike Zemeckis, Jordan doesn’t rely on genre as a foundation.  Every Jordan film has the potential to move forward and wave to the past all at once.

And indeed, The Good Thief is a 70s style character caper movie.  You’ve got Nick Nolte in the lead, reminding us all what a damned good actor he is.  But his character is also a wonderful piece of work.  He’s a sometimes junkie/drunk/gambler/thief who is living as an expatriate in France.  Apparently, they have a seven strikes law in France, since we are reminded often that after six convictions, one more could put him away for life.

This may be sounding a little like Heist.  And it is a little like Heist.  But not a lot.  Nolte’s character is quite a bit more complex than Hackman’s.  And his motivation to make one last score is not retirement, but survival.  Mix into this a breathtaking 17-year-old Russian girl who knows her way around the streets, a gruff, loving cop who doesn’t want to have to send Nolte’s character away and a black market art dealer played with devilish charm and palpable threat by Ralph Fiennes.  And through in some great turns from directors Emir Kusterica and Mark & Michael Polish.

But even with so many icons of British crime cinema, Jordan, who also wrote the screenplay, makes much more of it than would seem fair to expect.  When people screw-up, they have really interesting reasons.  Nolte’s relationship with the girl is always male/female, but never quite what you’d expect… or what she wants. 

The only moves that Jordan uses that I didn’t love were some freeze-frames at the end of some shots.  They stank of Soderbergh and they didn’t really work.  Outside of that, the work of Jordan, cinematographer Chris Menges and editor Tony Lawson was just delightful to watch.  

And above all, Nolte… a great, great piece of work for the big guy.  And unlike so many of his better roles, it’s not about suffering, even though he suffers.  He is a man who wants to be alive and has the skills to do it.  I don’t know if this film is going to have Oscar appeal, though I imagine a Sexy Beast-like effort from Fox Searchlight.  Nonetheless, if you love Nolte, you have to see this film.  And if you like Mike Hodges, you’ll enjoy seeing a film from one of the very few people who can top him.

SECRETARY is the Maggie Gyllenhaal vehicle with James Spader riding shotgun.  Truth is, despite other actors, it is a two person movie. 

Watch Maggie masturbate.  Watch James make Maggie bend over a table.  Spank Maggie, Jimmy, spank Maggie until she comes.  Watch James masturbate.   Watch Maggie cut herself. 

This was pretty much a one-act told in three long acts.  As a 20 minute short, it might have been sensational.  The question of what the heart and body wants and whether we have any control of our carnal souls is an interesting one.  And you had two good actors to explore it. 

Ms. Gyllenhaal has a really interesting face… one that travels from childlike to sensual to sexual to idiotic and back again without the wheels ever leaving the ground.  There is no one body part that stands out as extraordinary… the pieces are lovely and work as parts of whole, but she’s no T&A girl.  But when she is emotionally present in a scene, she is sexy as hell.  Her ass, her nipples, her lips all drawing the male viewer in with some degree of surprise.  What she wants, when she wants it, is so simple that it compels with more intensity than seems to fit.  But it does.

Spader is on more traditional ground here as an uptight control freak.  And again, in a shorter film, he would have been perfect.  As it is, the film doesn’t have enough of a third act to allow him to really explore the range of his character the way I would have liked. 

Secretary is a piffle.  I didn’t hate it.  And I wouldn’t have been upset if the film had broken and the last 30 minutes were forever lost to me.  Maggie G is a charmer, but like her brother Jake, she may be hard to cast in the right roles.  I would be looking for a sitcom role if I were her… build up a career and then go after the film business.  She may be the new Parker Posey.  But that has been a bumpier road for Ms. Posey than expected. 

READER OF THE DAY:  WOO WOO writes:  Love reading your column, glad you're in Toronto catching all the films (I'm only kilometers away at U of T), but here's a hint from a local: we are not "T-Ville."

We are "t-dot" (as referenced and catalogued by plenty of rappers). Have a nice day and enjoy our clean streets! Stop by 7-West for a good cup of coffee or come to Markham for the best Chinese food of your life. I recommend something at First Markham Place at Woodbine and 7.

And The MP CONNECTION defends Lorenzo diB:  “I just wanted to send some quick comments and observations about the whole Warner Bros. exec shakeup.

1)   Lorenzo di Bonaventura's exit from WB seems equivalent to firing a manager for failures in the front office and on the playing field.  While he should accept much of the blame for the chaos at WB, Lorenzo did not write/direct Pluto Nash, FearDotCom, Showtime, Death to Smoochy, 8 Legged Freaks, etc.  While he should be blamed for the marketing & release schedule of these pics, he did not make these pics unpalatable to the public.

2) It is hard to see that he was a failure at his job when WB studio went over $1 billion dollars over in both domestic/international revenue for 1999 and 2001 (studio record).  The WB will probably break that barrier again this year with upcoming pics as Potter, Femme Fatale, Ecks vs. Sever, Analyze That, and Two Weeks Notice.

3) While his unhip humor may have helped to down "Batman & Robin", the studio under his watch was developing relationships with talented directors such as Soderbergh, Christopher Nolan, Wachowskis, and Darren Aronofsky.  In fact, Lorenzo was the one who brought Aronofsky to WB lot in order to direct to Batman: Year One and The Fountain; Lorenzo said in a Premiere article that he thought Requiem for a Dream was one of the best movies that he had ever seen.

4) According to boxofficemojo.com and boxofficeguru.com, Scooby-Doo is at $256 million worldwide (over your $250 million limit).  According to Boxofficemojo's estimate, Scooby Doo should crest over the $300 million worldwide more than even fellow kids pic Lilo & Stitch.

5) According to Wednesday LA times article, Lorenzo was the main proponent for Batman vs. Superman but he was shut down by his superior Alan Horn for the Superman sequel.  As he said in his prepared statement, the corporate aspect of the job was wearing down on him as the above example illustrates.  (I do think that the delay in putting a WB comic hero picture could actually work to WB's benefit.  If they had put out Bat vs. Sup. in summer 2004, they would have had to compete with two juggernaut tentpoles with similar fanbases-Spiderman 2 and their own Harry Potter 3 with Curaron directing.  Let Marvel flood and oversaturate the marketplace with their pics making their characters less special.  While there is merit to striking when the iron is hot, WB can create a better atmosphere for their pics by waiting until the Marvel craze dies down a little.  The fans will come for a good quality pic like they did for Superman in 1978 and Batman in 1989.)

6) Looking back at the last five boxoffice years, only Disney and Universal (only recently in 2000 & 2001) have averaged more than two $100 million pics a fiscal year.  In fact, Universal will probably only have two this year (Red Dragon & Bourne Identity) while WB could possibly have four (Scooby Doo, Potter 2, Analyze That, & Two Weeks Notice).

7) When we look back at Lorenzo's tenure at the end of next year, we might be looking at someone who set the table for glory aka Buck Showalter did for Yankees/Joe Torre and Diamondbacks/Bob Brenly for World Series trophies.  He may go down like Mark Canton, who left Columbia/TriStar with its best year (at the time) in 1997.  If you glance at WB's 2003 schedule (Greg's Previews at Yahoo Movies), I am impressed by the depth of the releases (financial windfall potential-not necessarily artisitc).  Just looking at the big three-Matrix 2 & 3 and Terminator 3-WB could rake in as much dough as Sony did with its top six pics this year (Panic Room, Black Hawk Down, XXX, MIB2, Deeds, and Spidey).  Also, there is Tom Cruise historical pic w/possible 2004 Oscar future (Last Samurai), a Looney Tunes pic, two possible high-quality horror pics (DreamCatcher & Exorcist: Beginning), and some niche pictures (American Girl, Cradle to Grave, I'll Be There, Torque).  Also, possible is a Christmas picture by Tom Hanks and Robert Zemeckis (The Polar Express).  I would not be surprised if WB breaks the domestic gross record that Sony sets this year (which they are trying to shamelessly extend with expansIon of MIB2/Spidey double bill this weekend).

8) Somewhere Aint-It-Cool-News, Moriarty and Harry are having a party over Lorenzo's exit-even though his regime probably did more to make that site than anyone else.

So, in summary, I don't think that Lorenzo deserves the heavy load of blame that seems to being dumped on him.  I hoped that I made some sense. I will drop by some more emails commenting on topics as shows that are better than Law & Order: CI, why Andre Braugher is stuck on tv, A.I.-the neglected masterpiece, etc.  To paraphrase Harry's quote from his Oscar nods fiasco, I'm going to bed.” 

E ME:  Call `em as you see `em….