Showing posts with label The Dardenne Brothers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Dardenne Brothers. Show all posts

Monday, May 23, 2011

2011 Cannes Film Festival - Awards

Every year, the Cannes Film Festival opens my eyes.

While I do my best to keep up with the wide world of cinema, it’s a frontier that’s continuously expanding. For me, Cannes’ official selection serves as a barometer to point out the artists and films I ought to be paying attention to. It’s easy enough to keep track of the 5-10 American films that will receive a ton of marketing money from major studios in their turn as eventual (though painfully obvious) Oscar bait.

Were it not for Cannes, it’s possible I might still not have found my way into the work of Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne, Pedro Almodovar, Michael Haneke, Wong Kar-Wai, Abbas Kiarostami, Mike Leigh, Ken Loach, Olivier Assayas, Cristian Mungiu, or Lars von Trier. That’s a long list of some of contemporary cinema’s most influential artists, and they don’t receive exposure on most mainstream media channels. Even with some websites and publications expressly devoted to film, there’s a tendency toward Anglo-centrism and films funded by major American studios. Sure, sometimes they’ll go highbrow and talk about period pieces featuring characters speaking with British accents (even if they’re supposed to be ancient Romans or something), but I don’t really think that counts.

For my money, the films that need to be sought out are often the ones that matter in the grand scheme of things. As recently as last year, my pick for the best film of 2010, Certified Copy, was one that I was initially exposed to through Cannes.

Unfortunately, I (for whom the Festival circuit is, in some regard, my business) have never had the opportunity to go to Cannes in person. However, a colleague of mine made the trip only days after we attended an 8-day U.S. Festival, and I’m hoping to bring you some of his thoughts on what he saw in the near future.

So, in what seemed to be a particularly strong year for the films In Competition, here are the films/artists rewarded by Robert De Niro’s jury at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival.

FEATURE FILMS

· Palme d'Or
(Easily one of if not THE most anticipated film(s) of the Festival. I truly believe that if any filmmaker remains who’s capable of making a single film that attempts to encompass things like life, love, death, innocence, spirituality, and mankind’s place in the universe, it’s Terrence Malick. While I don’t yet know if his film is successful to that end, the fact that he’s got a chance at all is not to be underestimated. It opens in New York and Los Angeles this week, and I hope to have a review up within the next 10 days.)

· Grand Prix Ex-aequo (tie)
(My experience with Ceylan is somewhat limited. Climates is gorgeous from a visual standpoint, but is sadly inert dramatically. However, Once Upon A Time In Anatolia picked up some strong late buzz at the Festival.)

(Ah, the Dardennes’ streak continues! Having twice won the Palme d’Or, a third would have been unprecedented. By all indications, The Kid With A Bike generated strong support as an archetypical Dardenne film that departs from their usual aesthetic in a few key areas. Along with The Tree of Life, this is the film I’m most looking forward to out of Cannes.)

· Award for Best Director
(I've heard mixed things about Drive, and to see it win this award was a bit of a surprise. I'd thought that either Malick or Almodovar were the real contenders for this one.)

· Award for Best Screenplay
(This one didn't pop up on the radar screen either way as far as buzz goes, but on the list it goes.)

· Award for Best Actress
(For some reason, Dunst is often disparaged as actress, which I don’t really understand. I’m pleased for this win on that level. Maybe now her detractors will take the opportunity to reexamine her work. I’m also grateful that the jury didn’t allow von Trier’s rocky press conference to dissuade them from keeping Melancholia in consideration.)

· Award for Best Actor
(By all intents and purposes, The Artist is probably the 2011 Festival’s most beloved film. It’ll be interesting to see if/how a silent film breaks into the popular consciousness, but, if I know Harvey Weinstein, it’ll do just fine.)

· Jury Prize
POLISSE (POLISS) directed by MAÏWENN
(I’ve heard mixed things about this one. Apparently, there were some catcalls in the press room when the film won. It's a reminder that the winners are determined by a group of people largely set apart from the rest of the viewing audience. At 35, Maiwenn’s the youngest director with a film in competition. If anything, it’ll definitely be worth a look.)

SHORT FILMS

· Palme d'Or - Short Film

· Jury Prize - Short Film

----

An aside: traditionally, I only get to see the award ceremony after the fact. This genius got to thinking: "It's 2011. There has to be some way to stream this thing, even for a square like me." Thanks to a couple of Tweeters to whom I shall remain forever indebted, I found my way to a site streaming the show live. One problem. When watching the show the next day on Cannes' official site, the linguistics are adjusted per the language you selected upon entering. Hence, when they're speaking in English, there's no translation, but when it switches, the translator comes in to keep things smooth. This stream had no such preconception. It was French to the bone. So, imagine my fun as I tried to sift through Kirsten Dunst's speech (in English) as it was being overdubbed with a French translation. I really need to learn French. 10 words isn't nearly enough.

A second aside: Mélanie Laurent was a beautiful host for the opening and closing ceremonies, and she kept things running smoothly. Seems that graceful efficiency is the name of the game. The Academy should take notice. If you'd like to see it, the entire closing ceremony can now be streamed from their site (with the proper translation!).

Monday, January 10, 2011

Somewhere: "News flash! Money doesn't buy happiness!"

As a filmmaker, Sofia Coppola has always been most interested in the concept of alienation. I’ve always found her work to be a compelling portrait of what happens to a person when he/she is disconnected from what’s considered the norm and placed, for varying reasons, on the same shelf as the “famous” or “different.” Unfortunately, Somewhere is the least effective, and (by definition) worst film she’s ever made.

Somewhere is about Johnny Marco, (Stephen Dorff) an actor whose life is an endless series of parties, women, press junkets, and lonely nights. He sees his 11 year old daughter Cleo (Elle Fanning) periodically, until her mother decides she needs some “time,” leaving her with Johnny, and the two spend a few weeks together.

Now, Johnny is clearly floundering in his personal life, but his career seems to be going great, as he’s obviously in demand and apparently well-liked. He’s not even a jerk, which is unusual for a movie like this. Normally, the main character would be some kind of womanizing slouch. While he’s definitely a womanizer, he’s quiet about it, and avoids becoming the stereotypically loud, flamboyant sex machine one would expect. So, if he’s not a jerk and he’s not that bad of a guy, then what’s his problem?

He’s really, REALLY bored.

Unfortunately, much of the narrative is devoted to showing us just how bored he is, which only serves to spread his condition to the viewer. Audiences like to watch character’s lives through the window of the screen, but they don’t like to be made to feel like they’re staring. Here, we watch Johnny race his car around a desert track not once or twice, but four times. We watch some very mediocre pole dancers go through multiple routines, and do you think we’re spared from seeing the whole thing? Guess again. When Johnny takes Cleo to her ice skating lesson to practice her long program, we watch . . . wait for it . . . the whole thing. When he’s sitting on the couch with a beer and cigarette, we stay with him until he’s finished the cigarette. Naturalism isn't a bad thing. In their films, Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne spend much of their time following their characters around as they move through their daily lives to wonderful effect. The difference with them is that their work features strong narrative "engines" and striking characters, neither of which is the case in Somewhere.

There was a couple behind me who spent the entire film whispering back and forth to each other. After about 10 minutes, I found myself wondering what on earth they could be confused about, as nothing notable had happened on the screen. Later, one of them seemed to be using the light from the screen to clip fingernails.

In recent times, I find myself asking these questions more and more. “Why does this story need to be told? What compelled the filmmaker to go to the trouble to make the film?”If I can’t find a suitable answer for that question, then, chances are, it’s not a film I think much of. Frustratingly, Somewhere left me in that same lurch.

All in all, the characters don’t say much. I know that’s one of Coppola’s minimalist trademarks, but I would have loved to hear something interesting come out of their mouths for a few minutes. I wanted to see some kind of passionate response from them about something. Does Cleo find out about her dad’s womanizing habits? Yes. Is she significantly bothered by them? Not really. Why include this at all if it’s not going to be used to any purpose? Johnny gets anonymous text messages throughout the film telling him what a jerk he is, when the guy we’re watching doesn’t seem all that bad. It got old. Late in the film, Johnny delivers a pivotal line of dialogue that the person he’s speaking with clearly can’t hear. Is inaudible dialogue turning into a fetish for Sofia? In the oft-discussed ending of Lost In Translation, the audience can’t hear what Bob and Charlotte are saying, and it’s a beautiful moment that caps off a connection formed between two wonderfully realized characters. In Somewhere, it’s flipped around so that the audience can hear what the character can’t. It doesn’t make sense why Johnny wouldn’t have the courage to say what he needs to straight out in a quieter moment. It would have been much more meaningful and would have been in keeping with Johnny’s character. As it’s delivered, the words "cliché" and "cheeseball" come to mind, two words that, in a perfect world, would never be used together.

And what’s with the music??? Normally, Sofia Coppola’s choice and placement are impeccable. Most of Somewhere doesn’t have any kind of soundtrack, and, when music is actually used, it’s very quiet. I wanted something like the glorious “Girls” from the beginning of Lost In Translation or “What Ever Happened” from Marie Antoinette. SOMETHING. Instead, almost all we get are songs that we’ve already heard because we’ve seen the trailer 1500 times, and we don’t even get to properly hear them. If you’re going to play that Strokes song again, can you at least turn it up so I can hear it? It’s a good song. However, there is a big bright spot in the form of a song called "Teddy Bear." It's performed by a guy named Romulo who accompanies himself on a wonderfully out-of-tune classical guitar. It's charming, endearing, and, in a microcosm, everything Somewhere would like to be.

Perhaps the biggest problem that arises in the film is the fact that Johnny just isn’t a terribly compelling character, and Stephen Dorff’s work isn't anything to write home about. The character operates on a very narrow band of quiet resignation without much variance. As such, when he has his breakdown scene, it’s not entirely believable. Some actors can cry and make you believe it, others can’t.

It's hard to watch Somewhere without thinking about Lost In Translation. Both are about famous men who spend time with a girl/woman, finding a new sense of priority and renewed source of strength. While Bill Murray was able to take the material and craft a finely-tuned portrait of middle-aged loneliness, Stephen Dorff doesn't seem to bring anything distinctive to what he's been given. I think that, in large part, it's not entirely his fault. Coppola should have given the script another pass (or two or three), and attempted to inject some kind of life into this dull, dull story of inconsequential goings-on.

After waiting several years for the follow-up to Marie Antoinette, I’ve missed Sofia Coppola.

After Somewhere, I still do.

2 stars (out of 5)

Friday, January 8, 2010

2009 in Review

It's that time, folks. I figured that, instead of writing something up, I'd rather tell you directly, face-to-screen style. I've got 3 categories: 2009's best films, 2009's films on the backburner, and the worst film of 2009.

Best of 2009

Films on the Backburner

The Worst Film of 2009

Leave a comment. You're bound to have some thoughts on my list, one way or another. (wink)