For example today, I was first at the ticketbox at Danaos but still managed to get the worst seating (not that I sat at any of them destined seats…); I am sure the blond there hates, for reasons that I do not know, but I am determined to find out. Furthermore, the pamphlet fooled me once again, because I managed to miss Huldufolk and Hanging Garden (which is not getting a repeat…) at Attikon, and instead got Madeinusa (the only really good film of the day really), Brick, and Swoon which was cursed (more on that later on). Of course I should not complain: I managed to squeeze in a few minutes of studying (that’s how rubbish I am), had my warm applepie again (orgasmic, simply orgasmic) and had a proper lunch at ‘Επί της Πανόρμου’ (a sympathetic little neo-taverna, a bit snobbish in it’s dishes, but still good and at a fair price).
The lunch itself was great (fantastic Politiko giaourtlou kebab), but I went to Danaos with a very, very full stomach, but after a soda, an espresso and the orgasmic applepie, I took a seat for Madeinusa, from which I did not expect anything, but got plenty. First things first, the title, which is also the name of the virgin daughter of the mayor of an outlandish isolated village of Perou, is not pronounced Made-IN-USA. Instead it is more like Maidinousa, but anyways that is the name she got. The story has it that this peculiar village, every year, from Easter Friday to
Easter Sunday have a series of festivities, and also have the belief that God is dead for those days and everything is allowed (literally everyhthing). Thankfully the movie does not go on to exhibit any Dionysos orgies or stuff like that (I don’t know what Pazolinni would have done in this case…), but instead focuses on the story of Madeinusa, who on the one hand does want to leave the village for Lima, but on the other is more than willing to become the Virgin of the festivities; the title is not cosmetic, because the Virgin is then meant to loose her virginity to her own father. Mind you that is absolutely normal at the village we are talking about. At any rate, to cut to the chase, a gringo visits the village, he takes Madeinusa’s virginity, the mayor gets his ways as well, Madeinusa eventually kills her father over some earrings (not exactly but anyways…), and leaves the village, while there are plenty of hints around the storyboard about a mother that left the house, a critical subplot, the spine of all that follows. Although, as I said I was not expecting much, the movie was surprisingly good, always unpredictable, definitely different, not only as far as script is concerned but also due to the very effective way it manages to deliver the rural setting. Mysterious, natural, yet also brutal and unexplained in many ways, but definitely alive and passionate, the rural layout in the movie, I am sure it manages to connect with the viewers and their images and impressions of the countryside (despite the fact, that we are talking about Peru, it reminded me a lot of Balkan movies, especially that ethereal approach). Photography and directing were up to the task, producing a beautiful movie which although starts very slow (imagine a late night documentary, half that speed…), it is in fact very well orchestrated and structured, and in fact never bores you. It also manages to be dark at some points, the village itself being a showcase of rural decadence, and an opposing force to the spirit of Madeinusa, who not only is a great character (her inexplicability reminding me of Odete from last year’s festival), but is also brilliantly acted out by Magaly Solier. If I wanted I could find quite a few flaws in the movie (like the extremely slow pace in the beginning, the frequent awkwardness, the ‘cliché-ing’ of many of the characters and a few others…), but … I don’t really want to. I really enjoyed it, was convinced by it, appreciated both the takes at the main character but also at the countryside (which offered some very nice stills), but mainly, I liked it because it was different. One of the main things AIFF always offers is the ‘different’; movies that either go back to the roots of cinematography or dare and offer something new, or simply enough, are from a far far away country whose cinematography style we are completing unaware. For me, a different and innovative approach is refreshing, it is like resetting my perceptions and my thinking of the movie, and I always like. Now, when the movie is also as good as this one, this is a highly appreciated bonus.Speaking of different things, and daring, and makig new approaches, my second movie for the night, was also of that sort. However, I don’t know if I can say that it is good.
I am finding hard introducing this movie, Brick, because of it’s really bizarre nature. Ok, imagine you are a film producer, and they give you a script for a film nouar. It has everything in it; mystery, murder, drugs, women, femme fatales, innocent victims, corruption, and a really tough protagonist. Now you get a rather goodish director and you tell him to do it, and you hire a casting agency to get the actors. Now, imagine that 1 year later you see the end result and… all the actors are essentially underage, and the script has been modified accordingly. Brick is basically a film nouar for teenager, or about teenagers, or something like that. Perhaps a better way to describe is that it is a manifestation of every nerd teenagers dream: they are tough, wanted by all women, cool, and always out to protect their love of their life. All right, Brick, is not that silly, although at times you can’t help think yourself that the movie is a farse or a satire to film nouars (the intentional overacting definitely validates that). On the other hand though, if you replace the actors by adults, it is pretty good. Nice scenes, appropriate escalating plot (keeps you guessing a lot of times), generally good directing, nice fighting and chasing scenes,
interesting and many times unrevealing characters, you get the picture. A good detective movie. Still, the actors are teenagers, and the setup and story concerns teenagers, while the protagonist himself is a complete dork, but also very tough (coolly taking off his glasses before any fight, don’t mess with the nerd!). As an outcome, the movie is awkward if not bizarre, something like a chemistry experiment producing a pink solution whereas you expected something blue (I though it would have been much darker, following Donnie Darko’s steps) leaving me still wandering if I should take as a joke, or not. Still, I can’t say I didn’t enjoy it; I did, but I don’t think it makes the grade, and I don’t think I will ever have the urge to see it again. A movie soon to be forgotten. In fact it got me thinking about last night’s film nouar, Laitakaupungin Valot of Kaurismaki, and I realized I was perhaps a bit unfair; after all, I realize that it was perhaps all a film nouar should not be, possibly a joke on the way we like our films and the way we want things to evolve in movies. Still though, if you leave the theatre and you frown, chances are you did not like the movie much. As far as Brick is concerned, I did not frown, but I am sure it is much worse than Kaurismaki’ film (now that I think about it, I want to see Laitakaupungin Valot again! Damn my shallow eyes!!!) Of course, credit should be given to Brick for the cinematic experiment. I can’t say they didn’t try…Last, but not least, was Swoon. The movie, shot in 1992 in black and white, is the story of Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold, gay lovers who kidnapped and killer a little boy back in the days (the 20’s) for no particular reason. The movie follows them as they plan it out for a year, execute it, and eventually get arrested, convicted and in prison for it. As I mentioned before, the movie was cursed, or more precisely the film reels were cursed. What happened was that the 5th (the number is just my guess) and the 6th reel in the second part of the movie after the interval (the fourth reel was the last of the first part, again the number is just my guess) got mixed up, and so the second part begun with sixth instead the fifth, mangling up the scenes! Although the transfer from their hotel room hideout to the prosecutor’s office seemed rather abrupt, nobody really noticed (after all it was a natural outcome…). In fact most people were loudly complaining for the lack of the subtitles, which again was only natural, since the wrong scenes were shown! When the subtitles did show up, the movie was shortly afterwards stopped, so that they could show the scenes in order again! Basically 25 minutes were wasted making everyone a bit frustrated, annoyed, and distracted. For my part, I did not mind at all. Shit happens. The only problem was, that it was a bad miss for the movie, because it was actually pretty good.
In fact it was very good, and I can’t seem to understand why it became so unknown; after all the story has been done before in Hitchcock’s Rope, and Compulsion (haven't seenn either one). The deliberate choice of B&W adds a lot to the general aesthetic achievement, which features a lot of close-ups and also a clever use of the camera angles for different occasions (Nathan and Richard are seeing straight and level only when they commit the crime and when they sit down on the typewriter, most of the courthouse scenes are taken from a high angle referring to social ‘look-down’ and other such techniques that draw highly from the cinema of the 50’s). Both
performances from the protagonist duo are extremely good, and the movie relies heavily on the acting itself (theatre on film stuff), providing a great release and alternative for all the over-produced and styled movies I am enjoying lately (think Death of a Salesman with Hoffman in B&W, a bit more sadistic due to the characters and less tragic). Instead of focusing on the why (the motive), it instead relishes the relationship between the two heroes, regarding it higher than anything else in the movie (an impressionist scene in the courthouse shows them folding each other on a double bed in the middle of the courthouse while the trial goes on naturally), and thus easily serving up the explanation: total bond between the two, committing one to another through something as pure as the death as a child. Of course, the movie can be accused of siding too much on their side, but so have so many good movies about real or fictional criminals. After all, most people love Tony Montana, and that should mean for something, but there I go again writing completely out of context. As a final word about Swoon, is that it definitely deserves a better fate despite the taboo subject and interest in the killers and their relationship rather than anything else (justice, pain, all that…). It is a prime example of could be described as the classicism of directing, and a brilliant showcase that sometimes, all you need is a script, a few good actors and a good director.Didn’t like:
- The angry mob in the cinema when the subtitles got lost, or when they eventually realized the mess up with the reel. Spoiled brats!
- The seating I got. Again. But I am going to fix that…
- The general vibe that I have sensed in others that the festival is not as good as it could (still, I keep my fingers crossed).
Liked:
- The apple pie at the Danaos foyer. Orgasmic. Again!
- The lunch I had before coming to the festival.
- Seeing a Peruvian film, but still making the connection.
Blackberry award for the night:
The Brick, and this time I don’t think I am wrong.
Best movie of the night:
Madeinusa. Even if Swoon had gotten a descent screeing, Madeinusa has fot the edge over it because it is like an onion; it is layered.
Blackberry award for the festival so far:
Black Kiss without breaking a sweat!
Best movie of the festival so far:
I can still remember the strong feelings I got from Red Road loud and clear.
Schedule pamphlet status at the time of writing:
Quiet and rewarding, but also aerie. Just like before a storm.
No comments:
Post a Comment