June 4, 2004

Harry Potter is here, so get out your broomsticks… it's gonna be a sweep.

So while the next massive movie lands, it actually turns out to be a rather good time for documentaries. You're going to have to wait at least another week to get a look at Rick McKay's Broadway: The Golden Years, which is one of the best docs ever for theater lovers. The film opens next week in a very limited number of theaters.

Right now in just five theaters in the U.S. is John Dullaghan's very laid back homage to one of America's greatest dark poetic spirits, Bukowski: Born Into This. Dullaghan is one of those guys who is all about his subject. His film shows no ego at all… except, of course, for the oddball ego of Charles Bukowski. An ad guy who got inspired to find some way of expressing his excitement at discovering Bukowski after Bukowski's death, he's been on a seven-year odyssey to make this film, ultimately getting a lot of help from Bukowski's widow, Linda, who helped him find the materials that allow us to see Bukowski at his best and his worst.

Bukowski: Born Into This is a great fun way to spend a cloudy afternoon in the dark, but the real can't-miss will be the eventual DVD release which will allow you to linger with Bukowski over and over and over again, so he can sink into your mind like a good whisky.

Coming up in just under two weeks is the IFP Los Angeles Film Festival, which promises to have one of the best documentary competitions you will find at any festival in the world this year. I have seen six of the eleven competing films, two of which were at Sundance and one that won the Slamdance film festival.

Crazy Legs Conti: Zen & The Art Of Competitive Eating is a fun time at the movies. Conti is a guy who started attending the annual hot dog eating contest at Nathan's in Coney Island, NY and got hooked on the idea of being a competitive eater. The film never manages to get a narrative drive any more intense that its subject matter, but it certainly makes a perfect counterpoint to Morgan Spurlock's Super Size Me, which is doing great business around the country in limited release.

Monster Road is the Slamdance winner from last year. It is a look at the life and work of Bruce Bickford, a master of claymation. Bickford is an oddball and the movie goes there with him. It's a good film, but again, it is limited by the depth of interest that many audiences won't have in its subject.

A Hard Straight is a kind of classic social studies doc. The story of three parolees in the three-strikes state (California), the film follows them in and out of trouble. It's a very tough movie to watch because people so often have a hard time getting out of their own way and, as an audience member, you really want them to do well.

Imelda played at Sundance, where it was well received, but didn't quite rise above the crowd. I think that the Sundance crowd lost the power of this forest for the trees. With all the anticipation out there for Michael Moore's bombastic 9/11 (which should not be read as a judgment, but an inevitability), Imelda stands as one of the most amazing looks at the nature of blind power ever put on film. Forget the shoes. Imelda Marcos is every inch the Evita of The Phillipines. You like her. You really, really like her. But she is the master of her own history, which she forces elegantly through a prism of self-delusion that is far more distorted than Mr. Magoo's thickest glasses. If you want to understand how powerful, intelligent people can make idiotic decisions, this movie is an absolute must see.

Another Road Home may be the best doc about Palestinian/Israeli relations that I have seen. In great part, this is because it isn't a film about Palestinian/Israeli relations. This very personal film by Danae Elon is a search for a childhood caretaker. As it turns out, she and her parents were living in Israel and her caretaker is a Palestinian. She starts he journey by looking for his family members who ended up in America and even at this very early stage of the documentary, there is the tension of a woman with a camera wandering around an Arab-American neighborhood in post 9/11 New Jersey. As we make each discovery, Elon never overplays her hand or becomes dogmatic, even as her father describes the elephant in the room that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is. As a result, we get to experience the real experiences of real people who are not raging and anxious to annihilate their opposite numbers. There is politics and humanity. There is real fear and real loss. And even good intentions weigh heavy on the hearts of the people whose lives are so engaged with a conflict that is thousands of miles away. A wonderful, wonderful little movie.

Jonathan Caouette's Tarnation may not be remembered as the documentary of the year in this year of Michael Moore. But the film, which I wrote about a few months ago when it played at the Roger Ebert Overlooked Film Festival, is truly remarkable. It is unlike anything else you have seen or are likely to ever see again. Yet, it is as familiar as the home movies that make up virtually every frame of the film.

I don't quite know how Tarnation can not win the competition at LAFF, even without yet seeing the other five films. But it is a great year for documentary in L.A. Last year was good, but the films that stood out were uniquely L.A.-centric. This group of films span the globe, both literally and figuratively. And for those of you who are not here, keep an eye out. Many of these films will make it to major markets and even more to a television near you.

Enjoy the Harry Potter weekend. The best of the trio of films, it could be subtitled Harry Potter and the Hippies of Hogarts. Very cool. And it has one of John Williams finest scores to boot. Ready, set, go.

READER OF THE DAY: THE LOST HANSEN BROTHER writes: "Okay, I just had to write to say this -- and from the tenor of your comments about Michael Moore and Miramax, I think you agree with me, so don't think I am ranting AT you... I just had to say it 'out loud,' so to speak:

It does not violate the first amendment for a company to decide not to release a controversial film!! Micheal Eisner, whatever your feelings for him or for his decision on Farenheit 9/11, is well within his right to refuse to release a film his company owns. He is not violating Michael Moore's first amendment rights. The only entity that can violate anyone's first amendment rights is the government, because the Constitution only forbids governmental influence on free expression. It doesn't provide for everyone who wants to shout their agenda from the rooftops that they will have money/tv time/etc. to do so.

So anyone who wants to rail against Bush or the war is free to do so. Just don't expect everyone to come running just because you have a damn opinion.

I am just so sick of people making accusations about someone's first amendment rights being violated. Disney put up the money, so Disney owns the film (or at least until they sold the rights to the Weinsteins). They can do what they want with it. Michael Moore can go on every tv show that will have him and make his case, but the film is owned because it was financed. It may suck, but it's a fact."

WELL DONE writes: "I don't want to kick around Disney and I get that Weinstein and Moore have their spin and their politics, but what does it say about our culture that no major would want to release the next film of a documentarian whose very last documentary was a best seller? I know the first amendment pertains to laws passed by government and this isn't a legal first amendment issue, but if our culture automatically self-censures, is it any better? Why wouldn't Disney, who don't obviously object to strong political statements on principle because they own stations that air Rush Limbaugh, want to play? If they want to be apolitical that is one thing but if they side with one side of politics but object to the other, I feel free to criticize them for that without feeling hypocritical.

I very much disliked the ideas in The Passion, thought them medieval in a bad way, but Mel or anyone else putting his ideas out there is what we should be all about. Why is this free society so afraid of ideas? That's what really bugs me the most. For the past few years I have felt shouted down for even raising questions about the war in Iraq. My America, the America of Whitman's barbaric yawps has been missing in action. Moore is a barbaric yawp for sure, maybe he's more Rush Limbaugh than I have comfort for, but his film making credentials are sound and he has box office success in his arena. Are the majors in business or politics? If they are in politics, its okay to play politics against them."

Finally, this not from G-HO: "I share your high opinion of Janusz Kaminski and to varying degrees your opinions of Chris Doyle and Rodrigo Prieto and I am delighted that you have chosen to feature cinematographers so prominently in your writings

However, I must rigorously and respectfully disagree with your ontention/question "Has there ever been a better trio of working cinematographers than Kaminski, Chris Doyle and Rodrigo Prieto"

Yes, David, there has.

In my humble yet informed opinion the best trio of shooters . . . EVER is;

GORDON WILLIS
CONRAD HALL, Sr
VILMOS ZSIGMOND

with VITTORIO STORARO in the mix as well.

Not to mention JORDAN CRONENWETH.

Granted, WILLIS is retired, HALL and CRONENWETH have passed away, and
ZSIGMOND and STORARO only work occasionally but NO group of cinematographers has EVER been more influential.

Ask any working cinematographer or director and these will be the names you get.

And further, any list of contemporary cinematographers is not complete if it does not include ROGER DEAKINS and ROBERT RICHARDSON.

I agree that Kaminski, Doyle and Prieto are influential and may well become as influential as Willis, Hall and Zsigmond . . . . but not as yet."

E ME: How's the weekend going?