I have feelings more than ideas. I am tired, but very happy. My 11th annual film festival has just wrapped at the Virginia Theater in my home town, and what I can say is, it worked. There is no such thing as the best year or the worst year. But there is such a thing as a festival where every single film seemed to connect strongly with the audience. Sitting in the back row, seeing these films another time, sensing the audience response, I thought: Yes, these films are more than good, and this audience is a gathering of people who feel that.
Let me tell you about the last afternoon, the screening of a newly restored 70mm print of "Baraka." The 1,600 seats of the main floor and balcony were very nearly filled. The movie exists of about 96 minutes of images, music and sound. Nothing else. No narration. No subtitles. No plot, no characters. Just the awesome beauty of this planet and the people who live on it. The opening scene of a monkey, standing chest-deep in a warm pool in the snow, looking. Looking in a very long and patient shot, which invites us to see through his eyes. Then the stars in the sky above. "Baraka" is a meditation on what it means to be awake to the world.
Nobody stirred. People were as quiet as during a religious ceremony. There was deep attention in a way rarely seen in the cinema. It was then I realized that it had been that way for the whole five days, starting with the four-hour version of "Woodstock," each film winning attention in its own way. These films were so different. Their subjects were so widely varied. They all shared one quality: The fervent passion of their makers, and their need to get these movies on a screen.
So many movies are extruded like sausages. Grind up everything that's usable, stuff it into the casing of a marketing campaign, package them six to the weekend, pull them off sale after they begin to spoil. These films were not disposable.
From "The Fall." Real, not computer-generated (Click to enlarge all art)
Any festival brings together audiences and those who create films. Again this year, that spirit of togetherness was radiated by my wife Chaz, the cheerful emcee. This year, the most urgent filming was performed by Kimberly Rivers Roberts and her husband Scott. They had a new video camera, and because they lacked a way to get out of town, they stayed during Hurricane Katrina and filmed the tragedy from the inside out. You do not really know about Katrina if you know only the mainstream news version. One audience member observed that Fox News showed footage of a young black man described as a looter. He was holding a single loaf of bread. The federal and local government disappeared for the first five days of the hurricane. About 100,000 stranded victims had no supplies of food, water or medical care, and no electricity. Fox News looked at them and saw looters.
I got to know the Roberts family, who stayed to see all the movies with their sweet baby Skyy. They represent the hope of the future. Having lost everything, they returned to New Orleans, started over, and Kimberley was so encouraged by the audience reaction to a rap song she wrote and performed onscreen that she is now Black Kold Madina, a rap artist. Her music is positive, encouraging, but with a righteous social message.
Talk about your coincidences. Catinca Untaru, the heroine of "The Fall," stopped off in New York to visit family. In the Levi's store, who did she run into? Isamar Gonzales, the heroine of "Chop Shop."
The post-film discussion included Kimberley and Scott, and the directors of the film, Carl Deal, a home-town boy from Champaign, and Tia Lessin. Kimberley and Scott were not very politically savvy during the hurricane, we observe in the film. They have learned a lot in the years since. During the discussion, their analysis of the on-the-ground political realities was so intelligent and insightful, and so clearly stated, that they brought Katrina into an entirely new focus. I told Kimberly she should run for office, and it wasn't merely a compliment. In a debate she would blow Bobby Jindal out of the water. He wouldn't be able to crawl back onstage for a second debate. She doesn't depend on ideological theory, but on observation and common sense. Her live performance after the Q&A brought the audience to its feet.
We met another family, Catinca Untaru from Romania and her mother and stepfather. They were the kind of people you like at first sight. Catinca is the star of Tarsem's "The Fall," which of course awed the audience. She is now 12, is not simply a beauty but an alive and merry one, poised, friendly, genuine, completely articulate in English, and wants to be an actress. She is also funny. I warned her against attending the bleakly realistic vampire movie "Let the Right One in," saying it was about 12-year-olds but not for 12-year-olds. "We have lots of vampires in Romania," she said.
I was trying to figure out the budget for Nina Paley's "Sita Sings the Blues," the animated musical by a home town Urbana girl that took the festival by storm. She wrote, produced, directed, animated, designed and edited it herself. Here's what I came up with: (1) Computer. (2) Software. (3) Electric bill.
As a result of her adventures with the music in her film, Paley has become an expert on copyright issues, and made a persuasive case for sharing the film for free on the web. If you have the bandwidth and time, you can even download a full 35mm file, and make a print yourself, which you will then own and be free to exhibit. She says giving the film away has boosted its fame, increased its actual DVD sales, and enhanced the value of the entire project. It has even created renewed interest in Annette Hanshaw, whose late-1920s recordings are used in the film. Even though the corporate copyright holders zealously protect their rights, Paley said, the original Hanshaw masters were trashed for scrap metal years ago.
The Show World paintings of Elise Hill
Look at the warmth generated by Karen Gehres and her documentary "Begging Naked." It is the portrait, filmed over 20 years, of a friend she made who has been a runaway, stripper, drug dealer, addict, and prostitute, and is currently living in Central Park. She is also a survivor, an involved artist and writer, and her analysis of the sex industry is clear-eyed and sane. She detoxed and stopped selling drugs "because I didn't want to hold people down." Her name is Elise Hill, and she is smart and articulate, despite mental illness. She painted other girls and their lusting audiences while she was actually onstage at Show World in the 42nd street adult district.
Her paintings were shown in the movie. They have been on display on Gehres' web site for at least six months. They were placed on sale across the street from the theater, and so well did the film present her life and art that every single one was sold. I noticed that my cousin Florence Ebert was attending the screening. Her age is her business, but she won't see 90 again. Ohmigod, I thought. A film about an addict and stripper. She told me she loved it. Of course. Florence was a nurse, a member of that noble profession. She's seen more of life than I have.
Guy Maddin, the one-of-a-kind Canadian filmmaker, returned with his "My Winnipeg," which I said, quite seriously, evoked my feelings for my home town. If you have only read about the film, you may find that incredible. I can't tell you how many Champaign-Urbana people told me they felt the same way. It's about the home town many of us create in our minds. On stage, Maddin was hilarious in discussing his work methods. His films are obviously created with meticulous care, but to hear him tell it, they happen to him--mostly by accident. He could go on tour as the Mark Twain of the cinema. (By the way, yes, it is absolutely true that Winnipeg horses fleeing a stable fire stampeded into the river and were frozen in place, their heads staring at the ice skaters all winter long. I would have bet the barn they were fiction.)
The second most macabre use of dead horses in film
Matt Dillon was here with Rod Lurie's film "Nothing But the Truth." I'll be reviewing it in a few days. What engaged me was how interested Dillon is in films, and how well-informed. He was pumping every director in sight, and the critics too, comparing notes on films, mentioning books he had read, very obviously knowing exactly what he was talking about. Lurie's film involves a newspaper reporter, and he was depressed about the prospects for newspapers. He said the canaries in the coal mine are a paper's film critics and editorial cartoonists. They provide unique local voices. I could not agree with him more. He knows the subject at first hand. He is a former film critic, and the son of the great editorial cartoonist Ranan Lurie.
The Alloy Orchestra returned again, and performed with von Sternberg's "The Last Command," from 1928, which Peter Bogdanovich describes as the greatest year in the history of the movies. The Alloy, Kristin Thompson of the University of Wisconsin and Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune traded stories about the tension between von Sternberg and his star. Emil Jannings was said to have a gigantic ego, which is provocative, because von Sternberg was not noted for his own modesty. Leave it to Thompson to know the real story of the Czarist general who became a Hollywood extra. As always, I was fascinated by the power of silent film to draw me into a reverie state so deep it is like a waking dream.
The general who became an extra
There were a few early walk-outs (or perhaps they were escapes) from the realistic vampire film, "Let the Right One In," and that's what I expected. The audience in general was so absorbed you could have heard a pin drop. I had some apprehension that the blood lust of the movie, and its unflinching detail, might be alienating, but no: The audience seemed to sense the deep emotional seriousness of the film, and its ambiguity. Is it a touching romance transcending the human/vampire/gender void, or is Eli subtly seducing her next familiar?
Missy Upham is willowy and beautiful, with a warm smile. So different is she in person from the desperate Mohawk woman she plays in "Frozen River" that few people recognized her. That's been a problem at awards ceremonies, said Michael Barker, co-president of Sony Pictures Classics: "I would turn up in the photo line with Missy, Melissa Leo and [writer-director] Courtney Hunt, and the photographers wouldn't even shoot her. They asked me who she was."
How did she change her physical appearance for the film? "Ate like a pig. Didn't clean my skin. Didn't work out. Ate junk food. I put on weight so quickly I underwent hormonal changes. I developed post-pregnancy syndrome, and started lactating, but without the benefit of a baby." The film has brought her fame and recognition, but check her on IMDb and you see she is classically trained and works all the time, although too much of the time, she smiled, she has to wear a feather in her hair. I think she could play most characters her age. Non-traditional casting will free her.
The real Misty Upham
Ramin Bahrani returned to the festival for the second time, with his great "Chop Shop." Having been through the film a shot at a time two weeks ago at Boulder, I now watched it all the way through in 35mm, and was struck again by what an American masterpiece it is. What struck me, too, was Bahrani's willingness to share details of his work methods and film-making philosophy. He is unusually knowledgeable about films and filmmaking, and said he settled on the 50mm lens for most of his shots after figuring out why Bresson used it so consistently. It is the nearest to the perception of the human eye.
I was proud of the high quality of audience questions. These people know their movies. Listening from the back row, I realized the audience Q&As are the heart of the festival. Many festivals have time for only a few perfunctory questions (someone is always compelled to ask, "What was your budget?" and "How long did you shoot?"--although I suspect if they heard "fifteen cents" and "five years" they'd nod wisely). We let the sessions run a little, and I recruited a room full of film critic pals to ask the questions.
There was a moment on the last afternoon, when we were still under the spell of "Baraka," when someone praised the 70mm cinematography, and asked if the filmmakers would consider high definition video if they made it today. They would not. Director Ron Fricke and producer Mark Magidson said they are currently preparing a new feature, but that they don't feel High Def is quite there yet. "Every year there's a new, improved format," Magidson said. "But when we go around the world to find these images, we want to bring them back in a form that will last forever." I had described the Blu-ray disc of "Baraka" as the best-looking video disk I had ever seen, or ever hoped to see. They said it looked so good because the film started with a 70mm print.
It looked good on the screen, too. James Bond of Chicago, one of the best projectionists in the world, brought new lenses for the twin 70mm projectors. Then he heard of even newer lenses from another company, drove back to Chicago, brought them down, and he and his colleague Steve Kraus tested them in the dead of the night. He also had new lenses for 35mm, and state-of-the-art high-def projection. Great projection requires great projectionists.
It is more difficult and costs more to shoot in 70mm, and there are heavy cameras to carry around. But Fricke and Magidson have that much respect for their work. In the case of most films made today, few people expect them to last forever. Many are happy if they run for a month. In a real sense, the "forever" feeling was in the air at the grand old Virginia theater, so beautifully restored. It was built as a cathedral for the cinema, and now it was showing its audiences transcendent films. The ticky-tacky multiplexes get the movies they deserve.
¶Catinca Untaru and Lee Pace in Tarsem's "The Fall"
¶
Kimberley Roberts (left) and a friend, two weeks after Katrina in "Trouble the Water"
¶
"Amazing," by Black Kold Madina, performed in "Trouble the Water"
¶
Janis Joplin at Woodstock
¶
The ticky-tacky multiplexes get the movies they deserve.
Hear, hear. So glad everyone had such a great time. Isn't "Sita Sings the Blues" absolutely breathtaking on the big screen?
Thanks for the overview of the festival, Roger - it sounds like a wonderful time. I just came upstairs from having seen "Wild Strawberries" commercial free on TV, and was in the perfect mood for your piece.
As for "Let the Right One In," a movie I really liked and heartily recommend, and your question of whether Eli's finding a new familiar - I tell everyone it's a film about a job interview.
Wow, I wish I'd been there. Maybe next year I'll make my way down...
But Guy Maddin and Ramin Bahrani in one festival? That's like... the two great hopes of their respective bordering countries. That would have been amazing to listen to them speak...
Reading this article has really made me wanna come out to the festival in the future. It sounds like a once in a lifetime opportunity... except it'll happen again next year...
Ps. Matt Dillon always struck me as a guy who is too good for most of the roles he's offered. I think he gets pigeon holed into playing those square-jawed, good looking alpha male characters that have no subversive depth or any other sort of depth to the character. Hopefully he can get more roles that play with that like "Drugstore Cowboy" or "Crash" in the future. He's really good at playing characters who exploit their charm/power in some way... like those flicks and in "Wild Things". But I could also see him playing just a genuinely good guy. He's an underrated actor overall. A little bit like Jason Patric.
I guess these movies are the real deal. I haven't seen them but I think I might like them if I did. These are the kind of movies, judging by your writing, that really matter. Which is why I find most comedies and certainly most action films and certainly ALL romantic comedies, irrelevant. I have nothing to gain from watching them. I don't want to watch something for even 30 minutes and go, what was the point of that? Of course I refer to the 'dumbing down' of movies that are intended to take over the reigns at the box office, or to offer a cheap laugh or two.
It's a shame movies like these don't get the resources they require to make 'em be seen by a wider audience. But that's got to do with the tastes of the public I suppose, and the studio people use that as a gauge to decide on what movies get (more or less) funding. Who or what is to blame, I don't know but I sure wish people would care to see films of this calibre.
"Baraka" makes me glad to be alive on this planet. It reminds me how much we forget that there is still beauty and magic in the world, that it isn't all negatives and sadness, that the world is made up of much more than just greed, murder, tragedy and apathy. This movie is the simplest of moviegoing experiences, the simple act of looking out the cinematic window at parts of the world that most of us will never get to experience.
While I was watching the film I began to relate it back to my own experience. When I saw that incredible Buddhist ceremony with those men who stand then sit then bow then kneel, I noticed myself smiling and then I wondered how any of those men would have felt watching me on Sunday standing at a pew with a hymnal in my hand, mouthing but not singing the words. Would they have found my ritual as curious as I found theirs?
I imagined pulling back from the moments in this film, out into space, turning the earth around and seeing what I was doing on that very day. My experience on this planet is so small, so limited. I thank Heavens for the motion picture camera, that while my feet may not ever take me to these places, my eyes and my mind can still travel.
I saw "Baraka" for the first time in early 1994, in a theater that was otherwise empty. Thereafter I refused to watch it on television until I got a flat-screen with that beautiful color. In the past few years I have wanted to share "Baraka" with my wife but I couldn't subject her to seeing those images on a 24 inch screen. The Discovery Channel's wonderful "Planet Earth" prepared me. That's when I knew I was ready to show the film to my wife and I had some of the same joy you did, Roger, at being able to sit back and experience the joy of others experiencing the film for the first time.
Roger,
Having just read yet another report from yet another EbertFest/Overlooked Film Festival, I can only say: I wish I was there. The detail with which you describe your audiences and their reactions and my love for most of the films you show (yes, I've seen most of the films you've shown) is matched only by my desire to see them in such an environment. I will get there one day - in fact, I probably could've this year had I recieved my financial capability just a bit sooner... Which brings me to a question: does your festival (in its entirety) ever sell out tickets, and if so when is the absolute latest you've found it possible to get some?
Then again, who knows: Perhaps I'll be there with my own film soon enough. :)
Your loyal reader and hopeful future attendee,
Eric.
Sounds like your festival was as entrancing and uplifting as I imagined it would be, Roger. How I wish this Virginian boy could have been there.
I know what you mean about "The Fall". I saw it, and knew immediately it was one of the year's best films. My best friend, who also has exquisite taste in movies, said he liked it, but didn't love it. I saw the film projected against a huge white wall in my apartment. He saw it on a LCD TV. From what you describe of how the audience sat in awe during the screening, I wonder if seeing the details of the film's images on the big screen is what makes the difference.
You've described what for me is akin to the power of silence in a world where all is sound and fury. Silence, which is increasingly rare, makes you stop and pay attention. And like a whisper when you bend to hear it, great films seduce your senses.
They work themselves upon you like magic and speaking to the parts of you that can feel it - which does indeed exist even if science can't measure it yet; maybe when it comes up for air after a long and pointless debate, even science will concede in light of your Festival offerings that "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio.." :)
Like B/W films that get 4 stars...
"Guy Maddin, the one-of-a-kind Canadian filmmaker, returned with his "My Winnipeg," which I said, quite seriously, evoked my feelings for my home town." - Roger Ebert
Urbana had a similar effect upon me. All those old photographs I'd found. Your geography is different from mine, but not how it felt to grow up there. Guy Maddin's films are truly wonderful moreover, and in case no one's ever seen one - shameless plug for Canadian film making... and yes, I was tempted to grab the Vampire one:
My Winnipeg - trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY9BtROpNQ4&feature=related
Brand Upon the Brain - trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVl5Bnj_EO8&feature=related
"Trouble the Water" made me think of Brad Pitt's efforts to help communities rebuild in the wake of Katrina, specifically: how the his plea caught the attention of Mike Holmes, arguably the world's most famous building contractor at this point and another fellow Canadian. He flew his crew down to New Orleans to rebuild an elderly woman's home and paid for all of it out of his own pocket. I watched it up here on HGTV and while it's not film Roger, it speaks to something just as worthy. People are touched by documentaries, but some are touched enough by the real people in them, to actually do more than just watch movies about them:
Holmes on Homes in New Orleans:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiQ43ixpWOA
And I can't even begin to tell you how much I like this one...
Begging Naked official site:
http://beggingnaked.com/Welcome.html
I've never seen it. But I plan to look for it now. I get why she missed "old" Times Square. It was raw but it was real, eh? I supplied the website as there's an art gallery page and folks can see more of her paintings. They're for adults, though.
"Let The Right One In" however is perfectly okay for a 12 year old girl - at least I was watching stuff like that when I was 12 yrs, Chuckle! Girls mature faster than boys, you know. :)
And I'm going to keep my eye on Catinca Untaru; I want to see her do more films, as I adored her in the Fall.
Roger wrote: "Is it a touching romance transcending the human/vampire/gender void, or is Eli subtly seducing her next familiar?"
Both.
"The screen dissolves to a repeat of the film's lengthy opening shot, snowflakes falling against a black background. The narrative returns to Oskar traveling on a train; a large trunk sits next to him, and inside, an unseen Eli taps the word "kiss" to Oskar in Morse code. Oskar taps back the same." - Wiki
She cares about him, as much as she needs him.
That said, her choice reveals an awareness of something potentially at work within his own pathology which makes it less creepy and more like birds of a feather; for he's a bullied 12-year-old boy who dreams of revenge. He enjoyed confronting his tormentors at last and gashing their leader's head with a pole. Oskar didn't flinch when Lacke - the suspicious neighbor, showed up at Eli's apartment and tried to kill her in the bathtub. He helped her "deal with it".
I think she's found herself a tiny Dexter. The makings of a serial killer. And so they're perfect for one another! How sweet! :)
P.S. I've seen "The Gospel According to St. Matthew" now. Director Pasolini reportedly said: "If you know that I am an unbeliever, then you know me better than I do myself. I may be an unbeliever, but I am an unbeliever who has a nostalgia for a belief."
That's basically what I took away from the film, too. My sense of it. Here's a guy who remembers how it used to feel to believe, and he's trying to film THAT. And from a male point of view, (Italian no less) he succeeds. I liked how straight forward it was; no over-the-top Hollywood production. It's still shot through a male lens though; cough. Where's Mary Harron?!
At least the actor playing Jesus, Enrique Irazoqui, was kinda cute. Will I burn in Hell for that?
http://static2.bareka.com/photos/medium/14475009.jpg
Grin.
As the old cine-hymn goes, "What a friend we have in Ebert." Once again, you drew together a collection of films that manage to speak to each other as well as the audience, building to Baraka's reminder that in the beginning was the Image. From the May-Irwin Kiss to 2001 to your current Fest's finale, we are reminded to look first, ask questions later.
I feel like it is my duty to see "Trouble the Water," in the same sense that it was my duty to see "Schindler's List" and "Hoop Dreams." None of the films would be easy to see, but each is important enough to warrant watching. So I'll see "Trouble the Water."
I was sitting in a parking lot, waiting for a gig to start, when one of my fellow Americans came on the radio. The woman was screaming for help, screaming that she had didn't have food or running water for her kids. I remember feeling desperately hopeless every time I heard another survivor begging for help on NPR. I could be wrong, but I'm betting that if a similar natural disaster happened in Kennebunkport or Martha's Vineyard, the response would have been more expedient.
I think Katrina was the first insight average Americans got into the incompetence of the Bush Administration. Bush even apologized and took responsibility at Jackson Square, something I never thought George W. Bush had in him. Still though, people defended his inaction. Why was this a partisan issue in the first place? He screwed up, just like he screwed up everything he did from 2001 until 2008. Even the most conservative of us should be ashamed at the way Katrina was handled.
The website for Sita Sings the Blues, where the film can be downloaded in a number of formats, including the 35mm-ready version mentioned above, and an HD version that can be viewed with a blank DVD and a compatible Blu-ray player:
http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/
Once again, Mr. Ebert, you prove how cinema, and the love for cinema seems to unite people on an invisible, almost subconscious level. I wish that there was an Ebertfest going on every day at my local multiplex.
I'd like to ask, Mr. Ebert, if your festival ever shows short films? Because if there's one segment of cinema that is difficult to get out to the viewers, it's short-form filmmaking.
I have the Blu-ray of "Baraka" as well, and am constantly showing it off to people who claim that digital imaging will overtake film. Just the other week they ran trailers for Michael Mann's new film "Public Enemies", also shot on digital, and the image quality was so smeary and blurred I could barely believe he was releasing it. It looked like something upscaled from a $100 VHS-C camcorder.
Digital's great for people who just want to make a movie -- grab a camera, pop open a lighting kit and get going. You master that, then you move on to the real thing. I love the idea of being able to shoot something with the camera you can pull out of your back pocket and not have it look half-bad, but as Werner Herzog has said (in a quote often used by you), man is hungry for images and without them will starve, and in the end we can't skimp on that.
Good article as always I would love to go to this film festival someday. I have wanted to purchase Baraka for blue ray for a while but have hesitated because there have been comments that the film does not work well on all blue ray players (see amazon.com). When I heard that the little actress from the Fall is still going strong that warmed my heart. I hope she goes on to make many more great movies and changes the world. I hope someday that movies are presented to the public the way they should be presented instead of the trashy way they are presented.
> They said it looked so good because it was made from the remastered 70mm print.
My understanding is that they digitized the old film in 8K resolution, and then restored and color-corrected that digitally, and from that (the digital, cleaned-up scan) they made the BluRay master AND struck a new 70mm print.
At least that's the impression I got from watching the extras on the BD.
I checked the website of film festival I will attend. According to the schedule, there will be audience Q & A after screening of "Goodbye Solo". I wonder what questions people will ask. They may be better than reporters. With movie magazine reporters, Q & A after screening has been horrible in my country. "How do you think about Korea?" becomes irritating cliche(One famous critic has already included this in her personal movie cliche encyclopedia). And they ask that kind of question again to Juliette Binoche this year.
P.S.
Last week, I watched "Monster vs. Aliens" 3D version and then watched 2D version. You're right. In 2D-version, I could see the bubbles in BOB more clear, and kids around me had a good time. The most impressive 3D effect to me was Intru 3D logo, and it was downhill after that. Good news: now we may see 3-D version of "Coraline" in my town because of this unsatisfying movie.
My dad used to rent those old silent Blackhawk movies from the public library in the early 1960s. We'd pop some corn, curl up on the couch, and the family would watch Keaton, Chaplin, Pickford and the Gish sisters on the movie projector. Roger, I've often thought I was lucky to have fallen in love with film in that order -- silents first. And as one of the "canaries," I can't wait to see Rod Lurie's film.
Someone should do a follow up documentary on the Katrina victims and see if any of them are better prepared now. Too most of us, sitting out a storm like that in a giant bowl seems insane. Hopefully they've learned that government should not be relied on for your livelihood. It's sad that people are saying that the Bush administration could have done more when they should be saying that Katrina victims could have done more.
Thank you for putting Baraka on your overlooked DVD of the week article a few months back. Never heard of it before and now I have. It's quite a breathtaking movie. It seems to even have a narrative without trying. Watching those little chicks slide down those chutes is quite an image that will sit in my head for a long time.
I no longer go to the picture show looking for a movie that will last forever.
I just try to go as often as I can, open to the experience. Even though I know my days are numbered, and my time is short. Because I can't be sure which will "ast forever" in my mind.
With this attitude, I've developed an unexpected, wholly-unforeseen love for the movies. I've come to understand why you, your colleagues,and the hundreds of dedicated and serious bloggers, do what you do, and bring the love that you love.
At the recent DC FilmFest, I had occasion to meet Annemarie Jacir, the director of "Salt of This Sea." I was informed that she is the first woman to direct a Palestinian film. I sensed the passion she brought to her film, her need to make the film, and I instantly loved it.
As for the sausage-machine of modern Big Budget movie-making -- I can't know how much passion is in any original idea, but I can easily imagine the forces wringing that passion out of the process. But, if anyone had told Brian Hutton in 1970 or 1971 that someday I would sit with my buffoonish friends, rapt in Kelly's Heroes, marveling at the humanity of Telly Savalas as "Big Joe" or Don Rickles as "Crapgame," he might well have responded "Sausage-Fest; I had a shot at a movie with the No. 1 Box-Office Star of the era, and Clint said yes. Whattya talking about?"
I have to hope that's not the case. And occasionally the sausage brings pleasure forever.
What a stupid metaphor for me to continue to use. . . .
"So many movies are extruded like sausages. Grind up everything that's usable, stuff it into the casing of a marketing campaign, package them six to the weekend, pull them off sale after they begin to spoil."
This is so incredibly accurate it makes me giggle. It's amazing how many people devour these sausages over and over. Their cinematic hearts clogging with grease, their intellectual waistlines spilling over their belts like muffin tops.
Congratulations on a successful festival. It must be a stressful thing to choose this sort of lineup. There are lots of great movies out there but they don't just come along out of the blue. You really need to look for them, and take good advice when you find it. I've copied the names of several movies off your blog and today I've copied more. I love going to my unique little video store (not a chain, thank you) its shelves packed full of titles most of us have never heard of. There is one twenty foot length of wall for the Hollywood blockbusters, but the Criterion section is actually bigger, the AFI Classics area isn't far behind. And then you go to work flipping through them all hunting for that one title you found on Roger's blog. VIOLA! Here it is, one battered copy!
Wow. It is so great to know that there is , as you put it, "a cathedral of cinema." It is great that so many people are still captivated by ageless, great movies. As a 15 year old, it is alarming how uninterested in the great movies my generation is. I have made small steps in trying to introduce them to the greats, such as "Taxi Driver" instead of trash like "Observe and Report," or "2001" instead of "Total Recall." Surely "The Excorcist" instead of "Saw." My friends seem to appreciate the great movies, and they now say "Pulp Fiction" is their favorite movie instead of "Die Hard."
Why is there such a general lack of curiosity in my generation? Is there a cure?
Sincerely,
Jackson
I was especially struck by the Q and A after "Baraka." It was fascinating to hear Mike Wadleigh and Ron Fricke's comparative outlooks on life and humanity. The former was so bleak and jaded, while the latter so hopeful and optimistic. It was unfortunate that someone who was a part of an incredible wave of change in the 1960s could be so sad and pessimistic, but refreshing to have someone like Fricke refute that sensibility, to say that "Yes we have made mistakes, but we are capable of change, and of self improvement, that we are fundamentally good." I admired Ron as a filmmaker before, but I left that theatre admiring him as a humanist and philosopher as well.
Thank you so much Roger and Chaz for making this festival possible! As a film student, I count on it every year to get my creative juices flowing. A few weeks before I started on my thesis documentary, I was at Ebertfest. And a few weeks after it premiered at SIU-Carbondale, I was back at Ebertfest! And now, I'm ready to make another film. And I've made it my life goal that one of films will one day screen at Ebertfest!
Brian Rose
MFA 2009
I was especially struck by the Q and A after "Baraka." It was fascinating to hear Mike Wadleigh and Ron Fricke's comparative outlooks on life and humanity. The former was so bleak and jaded, while the latter so hopeful and optimistic. It was unfortunate that someone who was a part of an incredible wave of change in the 1960s could be so sad and pessimistic, but refreshing to have someone like Fricke refute that sensibility, to say that "Yes we have made mistakes, but we are capable of change, and of self improvement, that we are fundamentally good." I admired Ron as a filmmaker before, but I left that theatre admiring him as a humanist and philosopher as well.
Thank you so much Roger and Chaz for making this festival possible! As a film student, I count on it every year to get my creative juices flowing. A few weeks before I started on my thesis documentary, I was at Ebertfest. And a few weeks after it premiered at SIU-Carbondale, I was back at Ebertfest! And now, I'm ready to make another film. And I've made it my life goal that one of films will one day screen at Ebertfest!
Brian Rose
MFA 2009
My excitement may be premature...could I really be first in line?
What went through your head when you saw members of the audience leave the showing of Let the Right One In?
Ebert: That most of them stayed for the Q&A until past midnight, and thanked me for bringing the movie.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. Thank you for your love of movies and your ardent fervor to share them. Without you to share these wonderful films, who would have discovered them? It seems that Hollywood is deprived of originality, but films like these come along that give us hope that there are filmmakers willing to take chances and bring us new and exciting images.
I was also fortunate enough to attend the book signing on Friday and was amazed at how grateful you seemed to be there with your fans. Not many would have walked through the line shaking hands with everyone in attendance. I think you summed up the festival and your fans perfectly with the inscription you included with your signature, "Movie lovers."
Again, thank you for your willingness to host the festival year after year and to share with all of us these wonderful films that would otherwise be overlooked for lesser films. Thank you for your time that you devote each year to this festival and the countless hours you put into viewing films that may be worthy of selection and for sharing your reviews with us. And most of all, thank you for being a movie lover.
Ebert: It wuz the movies made me do it.
It was a privilege to get to attend showings on Saturday at EbertFest 2009. The Virginia is quite a beautiful theater. I remember it from the early 80's when I lived for a year just off of the park nearby. A great example of the difference between a theater and a cinema, perhaps.
We had a theater like that in my hometown of Pekin, Illinois when I was growing up. It had an oriental theme, with large Buddha statues lit on the walls. I regret that I don't have any pictures of that theater that formed my love of fims when I was a child. Now we have a 14-plex with stadium seating. Very comfortable, and very much like every other 'plex in the country.
I enjoyed meeting other film lovers from around the country. Including Joe-the-scientist who sat next to me for "Nothing but the Truth" and discussed both film and evolution / ID with me. (but that's for the Stein thread!)
Mostly, it was good to see you, Roger, on stage. It was clear that you love the films and the participants. I was just glad to be there to see it. Thank you and your sponsors for putting EbertFest 2009 on.
Ebert: You were supposed to say hello!
Somehow I intuit it was not the scientist who brought up evolution. It was you, who mentioned, "I've been involved in this discussion on Roger's blog..." After--what? 1,800 comments?-- you have survived as the fittest advocate for I.D.
My thoughts on "The Fall":
Though I am not a photographer by trade, I am one at heart, and your advance description of this film as a visual masterpiece made it the film that I wanted to see most. It exceeded both my anticpation of it, and your excellent review of it. Stunning! I was entranced all the way through.
The film is captivating on two levels:
First, the real-time human interaction between the two hospital patients - the crippled stuntman and the injured little girl, forming a bond through exquisite story-telling. His manipulation of her to help achieve his suicide attempt, her innocence and need for a friend, the unexpected humor. Brilliant and captivating.
Second, the visual realization of the story-telling. Every moment grand in color and composition and location. The five bigger than life revengers, out to kill the evil Odious. The pin-up model Nurse/Princess Evelyn. Every detail splendid.
Put together, those two parts are the best that movie making can be.
My thoughts on "Nothing But the truth":
Let me start by saying that I am a political conservative, so I had trepidations going into this film. The festival guide blurb indicated that the film was based on the Valerie Plame story, which I consider to be one of the most mis-reported stories of the Bush Administration period. I was expecting another Bush-hating films like so many (Lions for Lambs, Rendition, Redacted) that have languished - rightly - at the box office.
Having said that, I want to say that I enjoyed this movie a great deal. I did so because the director chose to minimize the political partisanship of this Plame-alike tale, and focus on the common-ground element that we could all have a reasonable interest in and discussion about - the first amendment issue of a reporter jailed for refusing to reveal her source.
The story is seemingly about a conflict between two women: the reporter (the luminous Kate Beckinsale) and her subject (Vera ?, also quite attractive!), the CIA operative outed in her story. True, in the beginning. But for me the story was really about two people who would not give up their principles: the reporter and the prosecutor (Matt Dillon), who felt he was pursuing his mission of protecting national security by finding the source of the reporter's leak - even if it meant jailing the reporter for years. It was about principle, on both sides. The Plame-alike called the reporter a "water-walker" in one scene. In truth, so was the prosecutor. Their conflict was the central drama for me. Altogether, three great performances.
I thoroughly enjoyed the performances of the two lawyers for the newspaper. Noah Wylie's intense determination to protect the paper. Alan Alda's flamboyant elitist who came for the publicity and stayed for the humanity.
In sum, a highly entertaining and engrossing thriller, with some humor and political intrigue. Light on polarizing partisan name calling. Heavy, appropriately, on law & order vs. the 1st amendment. Engaging right through the last scene payoff.
There was, however, one starkly disconcerting moment in the Virginia Theater at the beginning of the film - at least for me - that said more about what we as viewers bring into the theater with us than it did about the film:
The film substitutes a make-believe crisis in place of the real Iraq-War crisis of the Plame affair: an assassination attempt on the President of the United States by the "Venezuelans". Given the hype that this film was a Plame-alike, the audience could make the connection that the president depicted was President Bush. Opening scene is the shooting of the President, followed by a news report on MSNBC.
At this news story on screen, about the attempted assassination of the President (Bush), a significant percent of the audience APPLAUDED, reflexively.
Really people? Applauding the shooting of the President? We've come to that level of partisan polarization in this country? Bush Derangement Syndrome, on display.
I wanted to ask the director a question in the Q&A: Did he anticipate / intend that audience reaction - applauding the news of the shooting of the President of the United States, or was he as disconcerted as I was? I found him deeply thoughtful and intelligent in his answers on stage and less partisan than I would have thought. The audience was clearly more partisan, in fact, than his film turned out to be. So, I would guess that he would have been disconcerted by that applause as well. Just my guess.
Ebert: Just as Guy Maddin's Winnipeg has buried, invisible levels, Urbana has a level I like to think of as the Peoples' Republic of Urbana.
The Fall is absolutely beautiful, devastatingly (is that even a real word?) stunning, and just gorgeous. It also makes me feel glad to be alive.
As for "Let the Right One In," a movie I really liked and heartily recommend, and your question of whether Eli's finding a new familiar - I tell everyone it's a film about a job interview.
Hah! Good stuff.
Rap for Ebertfest 2009
Perfect weather
Roger's better
Ideas a'flowin'
Breezes blowin'
Spring in C-U
... we'll always do!
Choppin' the shop
Breachin' the levee
Karen doesn't think Elise is heavy.
River freezin'
Catinca dreamin'
Sita is sure a'shimmy-in' and singin'
Valerie Plamin'
Swedish cats a blazin'
My how I love Ebertfest amazin'!
Your title to this reminded me of the story Harry Knowles told in his book Ain't It Cool? about the studio executive who displayed an embarrassing unfamiliarity with Spartacus, then defended himself by saying, "I don't watch movies from the '60 because I don't make movies for the '60s; I make movies for today." Knowles blew up at him, saying Kubrick made movies not for today, but for all time. It's amazing how people have to be reminded that it only takes 24 hours for today to become yesterday.
Thanks for giving the time to the movies that aren't about the opening weekend.
Ebert: If you start out to make a movie for today, you'll be releasing it a year late. Plan ahead. In "Fast and Furious V," everyone drives a Prius.
Dear Roger,
Am I jealous? You bet I am. I've missed all eleven of your Ebertfests and apparently I missed out on another of your famous shot-by-shot screenings. Seriously, this has got to stop. And by that I don't mean stop what you are doing, I mean do it online for all of us to enjoy. I'm not talking about pirating a movie, I'm talking about streaming the pannel discussions and the comments made in a shot-by-shot with a time-code in the corner so I can follow along from 3,000 miles away. Take a cue from Nina Paley's "Sita" successs story and use the net to reach us all (Urbana is a long way from Hyderabad). Not that you aren't doing that with this website... I'll stop being so demanding once you start obeying me!
I attended many movies at The Virginia, and have to ask... Was the concession stand open and serving popcorn and soda? I hope so.
Ebert: Of course. And candy was only $1. We moved a lot of Twizlers.
I've followed Ebertfest online since 1999. This is the first year I wished I was there. I am always concerned I won't make it through three or four movies a day but I think the only one I would have skipped is Let The Right One In. I saw Trouble The Water in Manhattan last year and it would have been great to be in the room with the Roberts family and the film makers.
Ebert: The first year? You know what I'm thinking.
The Roberts family rocked.
In response to Jackson:
I think that 2001 AND Total Recall are great movies. Well, Total Recall is disguised as trash, but under the surface it´s full of wild and original ideas - in my opinion.
And if I wouldn´t live far away from your country, in Germany, I´d love to visit Mr. Ebert´s festival.
Ebert: I liked it, too.
So much to consider and perhaps comment about after reading your journal about the just completed Eberfest. To be brief, only a few notes.
Our immediate connection is from being patrons of the Virginia Theater for two and a half years, beginning in 1963, and our history includes having two of three children born in Urbana! (We lived on the Champaign side, near railroad tracks, and not far from a doughnut bakery where the people came to work, whatever the weather, at about two in the morning.)
You may have had other comments about the following, already. Near the end of your journal entry it says, "The ticky-tacky multiplexes get the movies they deserve." Sadly, unless one is lucky enough to live where there exists a restored cinema or a film center/museum with proper resources, that multiplex is the only venue available. I wonder, then, the extent to which we, the people who pay for admission, "deserve" what we get. At the same time, it is no surprise that many will decide to turn away from the mall offerings, even when that means the alternative is to see films at home. Fortunately, there are benefits when we and our two small dogs gather on the sofa for our private screenings.
All the best to you, inspiring me as well, by the way, with your regular writing!
--Martin Fass
Your comments about "Let the Right One In" prod me to write and ask (Spoiler Alert),How did Eli enter the pool room near the end of the film? If indeed she has to be asked in, who would have invited her in?
Ebert: You know, I think you've made an excellent point.
Ebertfest is awesome and I have never been to it. However, I feel like if a person enjoys cinema and reads your coverage, you’re a late, displaced honorary guest.
Your wife Chaz has a smile for all seasons. What a way to open a festival!
I put on a similar, smaller scale festival with my friends. Yeah, it is just a bunch of us getting together and watching (and discussing) movies they had never heard of before I heard about them from you. They (and I) would like to thank you for introducing them (me) to "Playtime" and "Army of Shadows".
P.S. -- It was most unfortunate to hear about your refusal to undergo anymore surgeries in the hopes to regain your speech. However, it is completely understandable, seeing how as prior operations nearly cast you through the threshold of death. That being said, your condition has not left you in any state of professional torpor or sojourn from cinema.
On the other hand, it seemed bittersweet as soon as I heard your statement, as if somewhere down the line I would have gotten into a conversation about movies with you in classic, rapid-fire “At the Movies” fashion: like a "My Dinner With Roger". Of course, that would have been as likely as me shooting hoops with Michael Jordan, but the notion was cool.
Jackson, as Ebert said in an Answer Man column, interest in many great movies generally requires an interest in people. A lot people in our generation (I'm only five years older than you) aren't very interested in people; they spend so much time interfacing via things like Twitter, text messaging, and Facebook, that interest in a live person isn't something they often experience. The lack of desire to watch great movies isn't a disease but a symptom, in my view.
Greetings Roger and fellow Readers!
Congratulations to Roger and the volunteers for the staging of another successful extravaganza. Judging by the comments and reports, if ever there was an event which deserved the moniker 'festival' it is Ebertfest.
I'm struck by the comments of attendees which seem to suggest a wonderful celebration of craft and the quality of the actual experience itself.
Bravo, well done!
Chris Alders
Nova Scotia, Canada
This is the first year I have been able to attend Ebertfest.
I can't describe what these past few days have been like for me. I am a cinema student at the university, and to be surrounded by such authentic cinephelia was the experience of a lifetime. Never before have I had the opportunities that I had at your festival. To see filmmakers discuss their work immediately after screenings was a rare treat, it added a whole new dimension to viewing. Too often people (sometimes including myself) view films as inanimate objects, instead of the manifestations of personal humanity that they are.
I saw five films and loved them all. But perhaps the most inspiring moment for me was the screening of "Baraka." It was an incredible experience. To me, it contained the awe-inspiring power of '2001.' The whole idea of non-verbal film is so intriguing. After "Baraka," I just though to myself "Yes... this is it. This is what I want to do."
You once wrote to Werner Herzog:
"When you open “Encounters at the End of the World” by following a marine biologist under the ice floes of the South Pole, and listening to the alien sounds of the creatures who thrive there, you show me a place on my planet I did not know about, and I am richer."
Well, Roger, after attending your festival, you, the filmmakers, the Virginia Theatre... have shown me worlds that I was unfamiliar with, and I am most certainly a richer person for it.
Thank you for this wonderful event.
Joey
Reply to: Ebert: These films were so different. They all shared one quality: The fervent passion of their makers... So many movies are extruded like sausages. Grind up everything that's usable, stuff it into the casing of a marketing campaign, package them six to the weekend, pull them off sale after they begin to spoil. These films were not disposable.
Thank you for this entry. It seems wrong to post comments on Roger Ebert's blog and not talk about movies or the current situation in Chicago's newspapers.
I have an opinion about today's movies. The studios are limiting themseles to scripts that present conflict in every scene. There are many components to a movie: dialogue, visuals, friendship. But the studios have reached a consensus that audiences need a trailer with overwhelming and wall-to-wall conflict before they will buy a ticket. (Star Trek and Wolverine both showed trailers in prime time last night.)
When Disney asked Michael Bay to make a movie for them, he chose a script for "Pearl Harbor." Because that attack represented a real event that involved ultimate conflict, which led directly to the first use of atomic bombs.
But if you go down the list of All-Time Great Movies, "story" is more important than "Conflict." We find people we care about, in situations that often pose moral dilemmas that reveal character with the threat of danger rather than explosions.
"Casablanca," for example, forces Rick Blaine to decide whether Ilsa will leave with her husband, or the man she fell in love with in Paris.
http://www.oscars.org/events-exhibitions/events/2009/bestpics1939.html
1939 has been called "Hollywood's Greatest year." Ten movies were nominated for Best Picture, among them "Gone With The Wind" "Stagecoach" "Wuthering Heights" "Goodbye Mr. Chips" "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" and "The Wizard of Oz."
Not to mention a 1939 serial of “Buck Rogers”
Reply to: Ebert: He said the canaries in the coal mine are a paper's film critics and editorial cartoonists. They provide unique local voices. I could not agree with him more. He knows the subject at first hand. He is a former film critic, and the son of the great editorial cartoonist Ranan Lurie.
Does that quote belong to Matt Dillon or the director Rod Lurie?
When Steven Spielberg wanted to make his own version of James Bond, his friend George Lucas said "I want to make a movie about the adventures of Indiana Smith." Indiana was the name of George's dog.. but it worked. Is there a better name for an action hero than Indiana Jones?
How about... Roger Dodger?
As I see it, Mr. Montgomery Curtis Rogers is the great-grandson of a Brit who made a fortune by opening a Soho strip club and publishing adult magazines like Mayfair. His parents live in a condo in Water Tower Place and they own a newspaper which is losing money at the rate of several million dollars a year. The family has decided to close down the newspaper and cut their losses. Young Mr. Rogers has always gone by the nickname "Roger Dodger," given to him by an Ace (Assistant city Editor). Before he went to college, he took a camera and went to war zones, to the ice flows where penguins live, and took photos. Then he came back to the newspaper, and he intensely feels the pain of everyone working there, people who will lose their jobs if the newspaper shuts down. Roger Dodger is known as "The Man With the Plan."
I just wanted to write out the name and see if a character named "Roger Dodger" could capture the same magic as "Indiana Jones" or "Rhett Butler" or "James Bond" or "Tintin" or even "Rin Tin Tin" or "Lassie." Is there a great movie in the adventures of young Roger Dodger?
How do you create a modern movie that isn't "extruded like sausages"? How do you create a movie that belongs on the list of Best Picture nominees from 1939? How do you bump "The Godfather" and "Citizen Kane" from the top of the All-Time Best Picture list? By creating characters that people CARE about. Creating a new Rhett Butler who can't forget Scarlett's pouty face.
My guess is... the readers here might care about a photographer named Roger Dodger.
Re "Sita Sings The Blues":
>If you have the bandwidth and time, you can even download a full 35mm file, and make a print yourself, which you will then own and be free to exhibit.
Please tell us how this may be done!
Wonderful article. Wish I could've been there.
Ebert: I boldfaced a whole comment somewhere in this thred with the URL.
You can watch it streaming online, download it for QuickTime, RealPlayer or Windows Media, download it and burn a DVD, download it and burn a Blu-ray, anything. It's yours. Post the file on your own website. Give it away. Sell it. Nina Paley has the courage of her conviction, and you know what? Her strategy has been a great success.
Let's see, you write great article after great article here on your blog. Seems like you personally read every comment, and many times thoughtfully respond. You attend a dedication ceremony last week, preside over your film festival over the weekend, plus hand in several reviews and a Great Movie treatise for Friday's Sun-Times edition. My God, Roger, get some sleep!!
Congratulations on another successful Ebertfest (there was also an excellent report about it in today's paper by Laura Emerick). Particularily enjoyed your mention of Matt Dillon being in attendance. I agree with another reader's comments that he is vastly underrated as an actor. I disagree with the comments by someone else about how the lessons of Katrina were that we should not rely on government in the aftermath of a natural disaster. Is that supposed to be an excuse, indeed, the WHOLE POINT of President Bush's incompetence? Ludicrous.
But I don't want to go off on a flame war here. Just wanted to say thanks for all you do. Now, again, Roger, some REST please?!
Full agreement on The Fall. Inklings of Tarsem Singh's greatness wowed me in his visionary film, The Cell (2000) with the predictably great Dylan Baker and Vincent D'Onofrio, and surprisingly good acting of J'Lo.
Films like The Fall are exceedingly rare for their near frame-by-frame brilliance. I can only think of one other, Diva (1981). Did you mention that Tarsem "borrowed" the shaman healing scene from Baraka?
I never, ever thought I'd defend Fox news, but, at the same time, I think you're jab at them is a little thin. As someone who lives 20 minutes from N.O., I (as well as anyone else) can tell you there was an amazing amount of looting, perpetrated by all races and, yes, by many blacks. If Fox made that picture out to be something more than what it was/is, then I agree that that's ridiculous. But, at the same, every other news network was working in manic mode and sometimes making outrageous claims (swine flu, anyone?). Did I have many friends who got mugged/looted, or who found themselves in dangerous situations? Yes; and while that doesn't excuse any crazy depiction of a bread stealer, I also believe the news, out of fear or P.C. bullshit, didn't show all they could have. The situation is always more complicated the news depicts, but also more complicated, probably, than a first-person documentary. I wish we could put all the cards on the table all the time, but, either through subversion or in-completeness, that never happens.
Ebert: You may have a point. Rod Lurie specifically criticized both Fox and MSNBC. Although I will take Rachel Maddow over Bill O'Reilly any day of the week, and twice on Saturday. I persist in believing CNN is the one that at least tries to be fair and balanced.
But hold on. Are you saying swine flu is an outrageous claim? Me, I'm scared of it.
Hello to Monkey from Baraka. One of the finest performances I have ever seen in my life. Better then Brando in The Godfather. Better then Nickelson in One Flew Over...
How come the monkey has never won an award?
I come here like a penitent seeking refuge and you present me with memories of one of the most beautiful films ever made. I leave now with a full belly and a fatter soul. Congratulations on the festival. It sounds like a blast. Feel free to send me directions on how to copy it next year in Dublin.
Go raibh mile maith agat.
I meet many students of film who seem to focus on stardom as a goal as important as craft. I don’t blame them, for fame seems to be a key component to a film’s success (in box office proportions, of course). But this, dare I say, addiction to attention and visions of grandeur and fame appears to spur nothing more than heads in clouds. Even I, in writing this post, know that I will certainly read it at least once again if it appears on the board (and three or four more times if you happen to respond). Microcosms of my self interests aside, I know I can’t be mistaken if I say there are more girls today who wish they were Jennifer Aniston than there were half a century ago wishing they were Marilyn Monroe (terrible comparison?). I wonder how films have changed/will change for the better/worse due to this thirst for fame.
The reason I write this is that in your entry, you speak of, Misty Upham as unrecognizable from her film appearance; Matt Dillon’s rejection of an Associated Press-filled local paper in favor of the local writers; Catinca Untaru and her intention to become an actress, not a star; Kimberly and Scott Rivers Roberts, who, as you said, had become “politically savvy” and Kimberly a “rapper,” encouraged by an audience’s warm reaction; Nina Paley, who “wrote, produced, directed, animated, designed and edited [“Blues”] herself with your estimation of a very low budget; Elise Hill, whose brightness you described as outshining her mental illness; the director and producer of “The Fall” challenging innovators of HD to outdo traditional filming; etc., etc.
You write that the audiences were captivated by many of the films, receiving the films’ messages and themes with care and concentration. You say that 70mm projectors were used (meaning nothing to me, but I can take your word that it makes for a better viewing).
Are independent films made by more knowledgeable, more disciplined, more modest, more artistic, more ambitious, but less big budget worthy filmmakers?
Who knows, what if Universal Studios released “The Fall” in the U.S. They could advertise well (I’m guessing the film’s beautiful picture would only help matters), they could put the actors in promo interviews, and they could have some stars emerge if people react well to it (subtitles are, in my mind, an easily conquerable task). Would the director/actors/producers want that coverage? Would these artists be more tempted to “sell out” for the big bucks, compromising potential? Or is it just at EbertFest that these kinds of creatures come out of their caves to show us how its really done, for half the price of production... with 70mm projectors?
Ebert: There are many gifted actors and filmmakers within the Hollywood system. They flee gossip instead of desiring it. Paul Newman in Connecticut. Sean Penn, surviving Madonna's paparazzi. Catinca Untaru is down to earth. Her gift for languages and her splendid English reminds me of Jodie Foster, who translated into and out of French at the "Taxi Driver" press conference at Cannes when she was 13.
I have to second the comments about James Bond and Steve Kraus. Films like The Fall and Baraka, made with such care attention to the visual image, deserve skills like theirs. The title sequence for The Fall in particular was luscious.
One thing you didn't mention: the sound system was much improved this year. James Bond told me they brought in new equipment for the show. Gone was the hiss and odd occasional background noise. Instead we had sound as clear as the image on the screen, with great channel separation (particularly important for Woodstock). I may never eat yogurt again...
Congrats on another Ebertfest! I've long wanted to make the trip down there, especially for the 70mm and silent prints that I wouldn't have the opportunity to see elsewhere. Oh well, maybe next year…
I have no doubt that the meeting of Von Sternberg's and Janning's egos must have been something to behold, but how great that they nevertheless managed to work together on two other films (The Blue Angel and the lost Street of Sin).
Von Sternberg's photography is like a visual narcotic, at once mischievous and stately with its shimmering lighting and precise compositions. Just when you think you could bake in the glow of one shot forever, he hits you with another one that's equally astonishing.
Bogdanovich has a good case billing 1928 as the best year in the history of cinema, but I think the 1927-28 period may be more accurate. That way you have The General as well as Steamboat Bill, Jr. and The Cameraman, Sunrise as well as The Crowd. But I digress…
Seongyong Cho: I hope more people begin to recognize that the 3D emperor has no clothes. Chris and I discussed it a few Same Dame podcasts back and both signaled our dedication to see films in 2D in the future, even if it means driving an hour.
Did the frozen horse event in Maddin's film really occur. This guy http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/every-which-way-at-once-42843057.html
says no. Nothing in Wikipedia on it. What's the truth?
Ebert: I have 1,600 eyewitnesses who heard Guy Maddin say it did. All you've got is one article from the Winnipeg Free Press.
Was there ever a time when you felt that perhaps you had lost your passion for film. After all as part of your job you have to see quite the unnatural quota of terrible films (although that number seems to have decreased now that more populist (dumb) films that Hollywood produces bypasses pre-release screening for critics). If this ever happened did any film then remind you that this is the a great, vibrant art medium?
This happened to me once. I am obsessed with film, and after seeing a string of truly heinous films, I began to think that I was wasting my life watching too many movies. I decided to then watch what I consider to be one of the all time great films, Woody Allen's Manhattan. This film reaffirmed my faith in the power and the beauty of film.
I only ask because the festival, which I have never had the opportunity to attend, seems like an antidote, a reminder that there are great films, they are just generally under-appreciated and overlooked.
My own two favorite films from 2008 were box office disasters: Synecdoche, New York and Che
What do the masses know anyway, the largest moviegoing audience is comprised of horny teenage boys who are interested in the various forms of explosions. (sorry to rant here at the end. Just disgruntled. Hoping Charlie Kaufman will be able to make another film as director. You can ignore this whole last paragraph)
Hi Roger,
I totally loved this year's festival. There was not a single film that did not move me in some way and the majority of them moved me in ways I could not have imagined. I was one of the fortunate few to have the opportunity to purchase one of Elise Hill's paintings I(now resting comfortably on my mantel until I find the right frame). The documentary "Begging Naked" moved me the most. A compelling documentary that I hope everyone gets to see. When Canvas screened at the festival I was deeply moved by it's fictional portrayal of the impact of mental illness on a family. I am deeply gratefull that I got to see Elise's story.
Thank you for bringing us these films and introducing them. Between the accent and mispronunciations of the computer generated alter-ego-voice and your gestures to add emphasis where the computer didn't seem capable, we enjoyed seeing you back on stage where you belong. I look forward to next year.
Sincerely,
Don
I never understood how you could analyze a film a shot at a time for ten hours straight like you have done with films such as Citizen Kane and Pulp Fiction.
Individual shots are important with regard to analyzing technical composition and providing vital information with regard to the director's vision for the film; however, there would have to be a greater discussion about the themes of the film that are not directly tied to a specific shot to encompass ten straight hours.
Large groups of people, especially with a filmic background, must provide enormous amounts of insight, surely, and any hopeful director or critic, certainly, would be very wise to attend your film festivals if only to better understand a human's visceral reaction to a film. But ten hours?
Ebert: "Shot by shot" is a misleading label. Sometimes it's a frame at a time. Sometimes a long shot will go past. Anything and everything is discussed. Whatever the film suggests. And the audience does as much of the talking as the ringmaster does. It's a group experience. Howard Higman called it "democracy in the dark."
This blog entry is a starting place:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/08/how_to_read_a_movie.html
I first heard of your festival one week after the third edition concluded back in 2001. When I found out that I had missed out on meeting Sir Arthur C. Clarke in person, I almost became physically ill. Eight festivals later, I haven't missed a single film since. Inspiring and rejuvinating, I've come to learn that Ebertfest is good for the soul. It's the one thing I treat myself to every year. And for 2009 (just as in previous years), what an incredible selection of films.
I want to mention one other thing. I always attend with my cousin, who is truly my oldest friend; and I also attend with a gentleman who is an authentic film fanatic. He is 39 years old and I've known him for almost 20 years now. This friend is developmentally challenged, and while thoughtful and functional, he is considered to be significantly "slow."
Our annual Eberfest tradition means a lot to our little trio. Mainly I wanted you to know that this particular friend of mine has felt the embrace of the event planners, the volunteers, our fellow festival-goers, and the community at large. We have come to know this as a safe and comfortable event for one and all. The Ebertfest family hath risen to the occasion, and we are grateful.
After the "Baraka" Q&A concluded, we were walking to my car to begin the 4 hour trek home. Your assistant was escorting you to your vehicle, and I briefly stopped you to say hello and to express my gratitude for the 8 festivals we have enjoyed thus far. It was an honor to meet you.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Ebert: I have some consolation for you. Sir Arthur was via internet; not in person.
Under what circumstances would an upcoming EbertFest include a screening of "Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom"? My longtime curiosity about your opinion of that movie has, at last, reached a tension that is causing hair loss.
Ebert: Can't help you. I'm not the president; I'm not even a member.
I don't see my post. I remembered to save it though and I've just re-read it; oh dear, I think I used way too much shorthand in an effort to be less wordy and I'm guessing it didn't read as intended. Trying again...
First, I'm glad your Festival went well and some truly wonderful films were seen and enjoyed. I wish I could have seen Baraka in 70mm; maybe one day!
When you mentioned how so many movies these days are like "extruded sausages" it brought to mind the noise that often accompanies them; the media blitz of hype, along with all the sound and fury to be found inside the ticky-tacky multiplexes. And by contrast, the films at this year's Festival strike me as akin to welcomed moments of silence in a world where it's getting increasingly harder to hear yourself think. Ie: they don't scream at you, these films. They don't shout to draw you in but rather, they whisper. And by whisper, I mean "they don't hit you over the head like a rock" and dull your senses. They don't bombard you with flashing bells and whistles alla the Fast and Furious. There's no obvious product tie-in (ex: I can't see "Baraka" as a game on XBox.) They're not trying to sell you anything, they're not pandering to a specific demographic; true, it's necessary to earn a living but these are not films made for the love of money.
I was glad to hear Guy Maddin's film "My Winnipeg" was one of the entries this year. Along with Sarah Polley and David Cronenberg, he's one of Canada's jems. I hope more people will be inspired to check out his past films too, some of my favorites include his 2002 silent film "Dracula, Pages From a Virgin's Diary" and "Brand Upon the Brain" from 2006. I've always found his work heroic - he's like St. George battling the repression of middle-class Canadian life. And his humour is the embodiment of "Canadian". :)
I was genuinely surprised to read that a few had walked out of "Let The Right One In" - I guess I'm just disturbed by other things? Note: I've read the book which actually features much darker elements, including pedophilia. Way ickier.
Ebert wrote: "Is it a touching romance transcending the human/vampire/gender void, or is Eli subtly seducing her next familiar?"
Imo, both. I think they need one another for different reasons while at the same time, genuinely care for one another.
Scott S. wrote on April 27, 2009 9:27 AM - "Someone should do a follow up documentary on the Katrina victims and see if any of them are better prepared now. To most of us, sitting out a storm like that in a giant bowl seems insane. Hopefully they've learned that government should not be relied on for your livelihood. It's sad that people are saying that the Bush administration could have done more when they should be saying that Katrina victims could have done more."
Careful, your humanitarianism is showing.
Scott Neal wrote on April 27, 2009 2:08 PM - "Your comments about "Let the Right One In" prod me to write and ask (Spoiler Alert),How did Eli enter the pool room near the end of the film? If indeed she has to be asked in, who would have invited her in?"
Ooo! I can answer that! According to Vampire lore, at least in the Jossverse, it only applies to a private residence; someone's home - as that's a space you personally control. Whereas a store, school, library, it's owned by the city. Public spaces are fair game. :)
Although to be absolutely sure, you'd have to ask Catinca Untaru; as apparently Romania has Vampires and so she'd know. Grin.
Speaking of which, I'm going to go watch The Fall again! I never get tired of it, there's always something new to discover.
P.S. I wish ABC hadn't canceled "Pushing Daises" as I really liked Lee Pace in that, too. He played Ned the Pie Hole owner and pie maker!
Ebert: Just a word of reassurance, Marie. I have never failed to post one of your entries. I know a few seem to gave gone MIA, but I plead innocent. Your comments are always very readable.
RE: René's assessment of "Total Recall":
"Well, 'Total Recall' is disguised as trash, but under the surface it´s full of wild and original ideas - in my opinion."
Yet it suffers from what I like to call the "Overkill Kill" in which filmmakers feel the need to dispatch characters with the most over-the-top, unnecessarily gruesome means. When I see a man's head expand and his eyes pop out or a man's face melt off (as in 'Raiders') it worries me that someone THOUGHT of that. I'm inclined to quote Bugs Bunny and ask "Was this trip really necessary?"
Hi Roger. I posted 30 or so of my pictures from Ebertfest on my amatuer photography website, if anyone is interested in seeing them. I got some good shots, I think, of the decor of the Virginia - the "cathedral of the cinema" as you called it.
www.lickcreekphotography.com
The featured gallery is "Ebertfest 2009". Enjoy. Tell me if you liked a particular one.
Ebert: Randy, I liked them all. You evoke the warm ambiance of the Virginia. I'd love a copy of the photo showing Catinca holding her bouquet of flowers; she said it was a childhood dream to be presented with a bouquet onstage, and I'd like to send it to her.
BTW, that's you holding your pass, right?
The pool scene at the end of "Let the Right One In" was wonderfully shot. I've told people that I've never observed a scene where I can so wonderfully visualize the action of what is happening off-screen.
I once met someone at a party who told me they loved movies. We started talking about film, and at some point in the conversation the person said: "I could never watch the same movie more than once. I don't know how people do that."
The conversation didn't go very far after that.
Some time later, I went to a showing of 'Ran' (I think it was when the film was re-released in 2000), that was hosted by several film professors from local universities. The entire audience had, like me seen the movie multiple times, had talked about it, thought about it, made it a part of their lives. The professors held a group discussion about the film, it's impact, legacy, etc, and invited the audience to participate. It was a wonderful experience.
I sometimes think about that brief conversation I had with the person at the party, and about how there are, no doubt, many people who think and feel the same way. I wonder how different the lives of those people must be from my own. I try to imagine what it would be like to have no desire to see a film a second, third, thirtieth time. I wonder if they feel the same way about books, or music, or the ocean.
And as I hard as try to understand that kind of person, the only conclusion I can draw is this: Some people are very different than me.
Thanks for another great post, Mr Ebert. Making the festival next year will be at the top of my to-do list.
Ebert: The one thing I have never understood about Pauline Kael is that she never saw a movie twice. However, she did have a near-flawless memory.
Baraka is indeed one of the most beautiful films made. Roger, great summary and incredible foresight to have this as part of your showcase. This film has been overlooked by many and is one of my favorites. Be well.
First off, as an attendee of every Ebertfest except 2007 (I was getting married that week) I want to thank you Roger for ten years of great festivals that keep me coming back long after I graduated from U of I. I wanted to clear up the concern over the perception that the audience applauded during the scene in "Nothing But The Truth" when the president was shot. I do not think that the audience was applauding the attempted assassination, but rather, that just happened to be the moment that Rod Lurie's (or Matt Dillon's, I don't remember which) named appeared on screen as part of the beginning credits. It has been a tradition at Ebertfest that the audience applauds the name of any festival attendee when their name appears on screen at the beginning of each film, and the timing of this particular credit was unfortunate relative to events on screen.
Ebert: I believe you're right. I was still returning to my seat at that moment. Thank you for this!
Roger, I don't know if this post goes here, but one of the comments above (or is it below?) made me realize something that I really hate about the movies: DVD artwork. When did studios start Photoshopping heads onto other bodies with such obvious and wanton carelessness? I check this guy's blog (http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/) fairly consistently and he has a number of DVD releases that he singles out for heinous behavior. Most are DVDs for crappy movies. Advertising and home video artwork has, until recently I think, been as classy as the films, but even good films are getting Photoshop treatments that should make us all cringe. Did someone tell some marketing goofball that the only way to sell a DVD is to play cut-and-paste with heads or to just Photoshop a series of floating heads together on the DVD cover? One of my favorite posters of all time is Vertigo, with those spinning silhouettes descending into spirals of madness. It should be the cover for every release, no exception, and if not that than NEVER cutouts of all the stars over the San Francisco Bridge with Photoshopped churches and bra blueprints. I think this warrants a journal entry.
my partner & i have attended each year of your festival (she hasn't missed a single film!), and i have to say this was one of the best! the film selections were inspired and inspiring. i cannot commend you enough for what you bring to our community with this festival.
i think it may have been the first year something wasn't announced as worthy of going "straight to the pool room!", but i think this year's line-up is deserving of that honor. thank you
SPOILER REGARDING "LET THE RIGHT ONE IN":
Regarding Eli's appearance in the swimming pool area, the traditional legend is that the devil may not enter your home without being invited.
The pool room is not someone's home, but a public building.
Going by the original poster's logic, no vampire could enter any building without being invited, and that doesn't seem to make sense and certainly would toss out a good deal of what happens in most vampire movies and novels.
Seeing the scene in "Let the Right One In" where Eli waits to be invited in reminded me of that episode of The Twilight Zone where Robert Redford (playing Death) tries to talk his way into the apartment of an old woman who vehemently refuses to invite him in. Good sense had she.
Ebert: Another poster explains that in the book, Eli was invited in, and says the kid who let her in can be glimpsed in the film's final shot. I think the way the film handles Eli's entrance is much more dramatic. What a masterful single shot.
That would be Philip K. Dick's (the same writer responsible for Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, the basis for Blade Runner) doing; the film was "inspired by" his story "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale."
By Scott Neal on April 27, 2009 2:08 PM
Your comments about "Let the Right One In" prod me to write and ask (Spoiler Alert),How did Eli enter the pool room near the end of the film? If indeed she has to be asked in, who would have invited her in?
The pool's not a residence so the threshold effect on her, if any, is a lot less strong. No resident, no invitation needed. The most profound effects are when she needs to get into a home, even if the home is a hospital room. Similarly, she could get on a train without an invitation.
To answer Scott Neal's earlier question about the finale of "Let The Right One In" (SPOILERS, natch):
I know it's become slightly passe to explain away a movie's shortcomings by saying "The book explained it so much better," but in this case, John Ajvide Lindqvist's original novel spells out quite a few things the movie left (by most accounts, intentionally) ambiguous. In the book, as Oskar is being attacked, one of the bullies is guilt-ridden and can't bear to watch the boy drown....he moves to leave the pool, and sees Eli knocking at the door. She asks him to let her in and, in panic, he agrees.
To the movies credit...it DID leave several aspects ambiguous, but it did show that one of the bullies had obvious reservations about what the rest were doing...and that he was the only one left alive after it was all over. In that final wide shot showing the various dismembered corpses, the repentant bully is visible, crying and sobbing in a corner.
It may not be crystal clear for all viewers, but the movie does at least leave enough information to connect the dots. Although I still remain entirely conflicted whether Eli truly cared for Oskar, or (as Ali Arkikan said above) the film was about "a job interview." That this remains completely ambiguous is the movie's brilliance.
to: Erik Anderson
Thank you for your explanation about the unfortunate timing of the clapping in "Nothing But the Truth". As a first time festival goer, I accept that innocent explanation with great relief!
I love Misty Upham. That's so great that you met her. She's one of our true Native actresses!
Ebertfest 2009 was wonderful, life changing - I am trying not to gush here... Thank you for such a gift.
To be able to talk to these great talents, hear their back stories, see these beautiful films.. I am overwhelmed and still reeling from it! I blogged everyday from Ebertfest 2009 and everyone says:
"I wished I had gone!" Suckers! I told 'em to come... I told 'em it would be amazing... next year! Do you have the dates? I want to block out the weekend!!
P.S. I made real friends with three of the filmmakers there. We have been emailing.
Did I say thank you again?
Ebert: Your questions were most excellent. Your blog is so enthusiastic we may have to institute crowd control measures.
Michael V. wrote on April 28, 2009 4:09 PM - "Roger, I don't know if this post goes here, but one of the comments above (or is it below?) made me realize something that I really hate about the movies: DVD artwork. When did studios start Photoshopping heads onto other bodies with such obvious and wanton carelessness?..."
I've never worked on DVD box art myself, but I have friends who have; a lot gets outsourced and sub-contracted to cheaper places, be it Canada or Asia etc. And so here's the scoop...
The product managers for the main studios are invariably also the Art Directors in charge the DVD boxes - and they're not artists, not even close; there's no Saul Bass in charge. They're marketing dudes and they don't have a freakin' clue. All they care about is "moving product" off the shelf at a Wal-Mart.
And they want to see BIG type and FAMOUS heads on the box, so it'll stand a better chance of catching someone's eye in the store. ie: think of what's under your kitchen sink or in the bathroom; common household products. How they're designed, the colors used etc. That's the mental approach they take to box art.
Now imagine on top of that, the studio is trying to squeeze as much as it can out of its initial investment, and so they're not going to pay for anything they don't have to; like calling the actors back in order to shoot a special cover for the DVD and stuff like that. They've got the film, they can grab whatever they need off that; screen caps. Cut and paste. They cannibalize the stock and create their reference material. And to save even more money, they outsource the gig and it ends up in the foreign hands of some poor, overworked and underpaid grunt at the bottom of the food chain. Someone desperate enough to let themselves be taken advantage of, as they follow instructions akin to designing a new room deodorizer. And you've got a quota; pump it out.
That's why box art often looks slapped together and printed on cheap card stock, moreover. That's why the colors (especially flesh tones) usually aren't right, and you can spot mistakes or heads not matching bodies etc. Suits who know nothing about art have been increasingly allowed to make decisions about design while cutting corners and refusing to pay people what they're worth. And I personally think it took a turn for the worse in the U.S., about 10 years ago. At least that's when I started to notice it.
Note: to be fair to those who make an effort, it's not always like that. This past March, KINO released a new 6 DVD box set featuring the films of "Murnau" - Nosferatu / Faust / The Last Laugh / Tartuffe / The Haunted Castle / The Finances of the Grand Duke...
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ettquygfL.jpg
I love the design of that one! So too, the cover for the film "Princes et Princesses" by Michel Ocelot - a 2000 compilation of the 1989 French TV series Ciné si, ie: a collection of wonderful fairy tales using Silhouette animation. KINO is distributing that too...
http://www.kino.com/press/kimstim_ocelot/PrincesAndPrincesses_DVD.jpg
I thought to mention it because "Sita Sings the Blues" pays heavy tribute to it; ie: same sort of animation style.
NOTE: I'm dissident-minded by nature and love nothing blindly, but that doesn't mean I think it's nice to dump on something and run. So I hope no one reading this who may be working for a company producing those DVD box sets, goes away thinking I don't get it or understand. I do; it's called working for living. And I hope that came across?
Sometimes I see a thing better than I can write about it, in here.
Ebert: I am looking at that Kino set as we speak, and you are correct. Also, it is a magnificent collection. Anyone who loves Criterion must love Kino:
http://www.kino.com/video/
The best of all sources for Claude Chabrol. Great silent classics. Rare film noir. Poverty row landmarks. A $6.99 sale.
As someone who loves the silent oeuvres of Murnau and Vidor, I am indebted to Guy Maddin for keeping their spirits alive. He's to fans of silent and early sound films what Quentin Tarantino is for aficionados of 70s exploitation fare or Joe Dante is to connoisseurs of 50s sci-fi. For instance, did anyone else notice that The Saddest Music in the World is essentially a homage to the Tod Browning-Lon Chaney collaborations? There's even a clown which looks exactly like Chaney in He Who Gets Slapped. And Maddin's Archangel actually fooled me into thinking that it was an actual early-Thirties Soviet film, as it perfectly replicated the films of Pudovkin and Dovzhenko.
Ebert: The more you see his films, the more you want to. Of all modern directors, does he not have the most distinct style?
I really need to attend this festival. It sounds like a great line-up. I appreciate the vast expanse of film subjects, eras, and genres.
I am excited to see Guy Maddin's "My Winnipeg." I was completely entranced by his "The Saddest Music in the World," which took me into a surrealist narrative. I was laughing at the ridiculousness of the picture at first, and then I became overwhelmed and completely absorbed. Once it was over, I couldn't believe that someone had the ambition to put that material to celluloid. Just amazing.
Regarding, "Let the Right One In," I agree with the praise it has received. I have a couple of questions about it, however: Was Eli's caretaker deliberately making his attacks in places that were likely to get him caught? Was this his way of perhaps ending his own self-manufactured imprisonment? And what was with the acid on the face incident?
Ebert: We also showed "The Saddest Music in the World."
This was my second year getting the full-festival pass, which must be the single greatest bargain around for film lovers. No matter how many more festivals I attend here or elsewhere, the Saturday lineup of The Fall, Sita, Nothing But The Truth, and Let the Right One In may never be topped--what a day at the theater!
Thank you for introducing me to so many great movies over the years, especially those without wide theatrical release.
I don't know whether the frozen horses really happened in Winnipeg, but such a scene was in Curzio Malaparte's Kaputt (1944) chapter III, Ice Horses.
Hi Roger,
I haven't seen Baraka yet, but judging from your descriptions and high admiration of the film, I think it would be the perfect candidate to include into a future Voyager-like mission to send off into deep space. Voyagers 1 & 2 each had a "golden" phonographic record that contained mostly sounds and music, plus 115 analog images, from our planet. What if future missions were to replace these with moving pictures instead? Of course, this is assuming, among other matters such as finances, that NASA already has the technological capability of producing nearly incorruptible film media that could withstand the harshness of space and the length of time. If so, Baraka would certainly fit that bill.
Sounds like a wonderful festival. Fortunately we're blessed with a calendar full of them here in Melbourne, with visitors and pictures from all over the globe.
It does frustrate me to see and hear explicit political commentary at events like this, though. A point that's been made before, no doubt. But here we're talking about "Movies that are made for forever" - doesn't that get compromised the second someone moves the discussion towards things like biases in Katrina coverage or the Bush Administration?
Ebert: A movie is forever not because of what it is about, but how it is about it. The Bush administration will be a historic blot on American history. Just as Johnson used the Gulf of Tonkin "incident," it represents the second time our nation went to war with justifications that were lies.
It sounds fantastic, and I look forward to attending next year. Is it in Chicago or Champagne?
Ebert: Champaign-Urbana, 135 miles south of Chicago, reachable by plane, train or automobile. www.ebertfest.com
Hi Roger, I've just been to your review of Baraka (1992) and found out that you already made mention of the film as being time-capsule material.
A healthy human sleep cycle averages ninety minutes. ("The Promise of Sleep", Dement, 1999)
The movie-watching experience is often of a similar duration?
"Watcher of the skies, watcher of all!"
I would posit that anytime a nation goes to war it does so because it is in the perceived and narrow best interests of what group(s) has momentarily captured sufficient power to make it so. To sell it to those who are required to, you know, actually fight or otherwise support these narrow interests contains the lies. If this is correct it would place the number greater than 2. But I agree, Bush2.0 was buggy (buggier than recent previous releases is a perhaps a matter of opinion).
Ebert: The more you see his films, the more you want to. Of all modern directors, does he not have the most distinct style?
Yes, definitely. His use of colors and hues, in particular, is the most distinctive and stylized since Mario Bava. I'm suddenly reminded again of Jack Cardiff, who passed away earlier this month. Both Maddin's films, and the Powell-Pressburger films which Cardiff photographed should be used in film classes to demonstrate the importance of the choice and use of color in direction and cinematography.
Just curious, what are the differences between Baraka and Koyaanisqatsi that cause so many people to laud the first so much more than the second?
I was mesmerized by the score in the latter....
Ebert: Both great films. One important difference is that "Baraka" is in 70mm. On video, you can really sense that with the Blu-ray disc.
"The one thing I have never understood about Pauline Kael is that she never saw a movie twice."
Me too! In fact, I found it almost tragic. I feel the same when I read an interview with a director who says "I never watch my own movies". I think "Then why make them?!"
Ebert: Of course that director has seen every frame a thousand times in editing, and sat through test screenings and previews.
At a time when she had made perhaps 150 films, Jeanne Moreau told me, "I have seen only three or four of them?" Why? "My job is to make them. Yiur job is to see them. For me, it is all about five in the morning, still dark, a cold location, the first espresso, the first cigarette, a little group gathered to do this thing."
I am so pleased to see The Fall included in your festival. I saw it on your recommendation and was very moved by its story. I was sad that it received such a poor response from most critics-- I felt people were essentially missing the point of the story. It seems like it is all about *how* stories are told, to me. The power storytellers have, but even more the power of the audience to shape those stories fluidly through their own perception of them. It has wonderful visuals, but it is not really a fantasy story. It draws us into our characters' lives through those visuals, and gives them greater weight because of it.
I just wanted to thank you for bringing the film to my attention, and the attention of so many others.
Watch out director's and you so called film geeks, the future giant's of filmmaking are here: Guy Maddin; Jack of all trade's and the master of one, Tarsem Singh; is anyone familiar with Alejandro Jodorowsky or Federico Fellini?, I think not, so pathetically sad. Ramin Bahrani, Darren Aronofsky, David Gordon Green, Paul Thomas Anderson, Christopher Nolan, David Fincher, Spike Jonze and Guillermo del Toro. Not to mention Todd Solondz, Neil Labute, Todd Field and Richard Linklater and the already established Quentin Tarantino and Larry Clark. I think the future is bright for Cinema, yes indeed; now it's a matter of casting the right actors/people to work with them.
Ebert: Urgent to anybody who is not familiar with Fellini: Right now, today, this moment, get your hands on "La Dolce Vita" and watch it.
By all descriptions this was a wonderful festival, and I'm so sorry I missed it. Thanks to you, Roger, I rented "The Fall" and was completely mesmerized by it. I tell everyone I know that, "It's the best movie you've never heard of...!" I really enjoyed "Sita", too--and can only imagine it's magic on the BIG screen.
I have been reading a biography of Tennessee Williams, TOM by Lyle Leverich. It is interesting to note that much is made of the number of movies Williams saw as a young man. (Frequent trips to see movies is just one dramatic subject/element in THE GLASS MENAGERIE but a critical one.) The biography also makes note of the inexpensiveness of going to the movies...even during the Great Depression. Going to the movies became a common/shared experience for millions regardless of their financial status. Movies brought people together.
With the current high cost of going to the movies, it should be no surprise then that movies have become as much of a polarizing influence in our society as they were once a unifying one. It seems sad that the most popular box office films are aimed at only those who can afford to go.
I believe that a new economic model for film-making is required...perhaps our new president can foster something similar to what FDR did with the Art-Theater-Writers projects of the WPA.
Your blog and a lifetime of fine criticism champion film as a means for bringing people together. More is needed. (Please don't ask an old pauper like me to take the bull by the horns.) Can you do something? Can you speak to the Big "O" or some other movers and shakers who might know how to bring about such a thing?
Sending movies into outer space is whimsical at best...sending them to schools and rec centers and hospitals and convalescent care facilities is a better idea.
A movie is forever not because of what it is about, but how it is about it. The Bush administration will be a historic blot on American history. Just as Johnson used the Gulf of Tonkin "incident," it represents the second time our nation went to war with justifications that were lies.
Agreed in full.
The movie that has had the most profound impact on me is Grave of the Fireflies, precisely for the reason you cite in your opening sentence above. Many commentaries, including yours, have called it an "anti-war movie". I disagree slightly. I don't think Grave is built around an explicit anti-war message. However, the story is so powerful, so agenda-free, so real that it invariably moves the viewer to consider and, to an extent, live with the ramifications of the events of the film. This is the height of the artform, in my eyes.
I've yet to see a picture about the Bush Administration, or the events therein, containing a reasonable message that goes significantly beyond "Bush/Cheney are bad" or "Bush/Cheney are incompetent" or "Bush/Cheney have conflicted interests". Frankly, most people don't need to see films to reach these conclusions.
Ebert wrote: Just a word of reassurance, Marie. I have never failed to post one of your entries. I know a few seem to gone MIA, but I plead innocent. Your comments are always very readable.
Oh thank God!
I thought I'd written something really stupid - and I can do that, I'm Canadian; we're fearless.
And in one of those MIA posts, I'd sort of vaguely mocked the blind spot of testosterone currently on display in the Science vs God thread re: their pointless academic-minded pissing contest in an effort to have the last word on Knowing; non-opinionated stuff like that. And I know how much you love science and that your evil twin is totally enjoying the rooster fight, so... I wasn't sure. :)
Ooo, speaking of fighting.... your review of X-Men Origins!
"Their story starts in "1840 -- the Northwest Territories of Canada," a neat trick, since Canada was formed in 1867, and its Northwest Territories in 1870. But you didn't come here for a history lesson. Or maybe you did, if you need to know that Logan and Victor became Americans (still before they could be Canadians) and fought side by side in the Civil War, World War I, World War II and Vietnam. Why they did this, I have no idea. Maybe they just enjoyed themselves." - Ebert
I laughed out loud upon reading that, for it immediately had me thinking of "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever" in which you'd noted "...these U.S. agencies wage what amounts to warfare in Vancouver, which is actually in a nation named Canada, which has agencies and bureaus of its own and takes a dim view of machine guns, rocket launchers, plastic explosives and the other weapons the American agents and their enemies use to litter the streets of the city with the dead."
So, there you go - that's why! 'Cause that's what Americans do when they're in Canada; get stuff wrong while blowing it up. :)
Side note: "New Moon" is currently shooting in Vancouver and Ohmygod! Teenage girls from all over North America have descended upon us like aliens! They actively scour the streets looking for signs of the production crew, "Twittering" any newly discovered location shoots and all in a bid to catch sight of their beloved "Edward Cullen" - who's reportedly now taken to hiding in his hotel room when he's not filming.
Meanwhile, the province of Manitoba was also created in 1870, a tiny square around Winnipeg, which then enlarged in 1881 to a rectangular region. And I went to Winnipeg (online) looking for the source of the old newspaper story re: the frozen horses in the Red River as seen in Maddin's film. I couldn't find it. BUT... I did find a hell of story while looking for it!
"Fighting Bill Code was a little Irishman from Dublin. He came to Winnipeg in 1874 and worked as a printer for the Manitoba Free Press. His career in fire fighting started when he became one of the six original volunteer firemen in 1874. He joined full time when the brigade was formally set up in 1882. Bill Code worked for 40 years and is reputed to have fought more fires than any other fireman in Canada. He was a man of legend and seems to have had more lives than a cat. He was crushed by falling timbers in the Ashdown store explosion and fire of 1882, overcome by smoke 6 times, trampled by frantic horses at the Mandeville Bros livery stable fire on Fort St, and hurled a distance by an explosion in the Winnipeg Paint and Glass fire of 1907. And during the Sterling building fire of Dec 1909, he was found completely frozen to the pavement. His men broke him off the pavement and thawed him out in a neighboring hotel. In the next day's paper he was called "the Living Icicle." Code was a collector of articles on the Fire department and accumulated 3 massive volumes of clippings from which much of the history of the Winnipeg fire department is drawn. Despite being caught in many life and death predicaments, he survived every one living to the ripe age of 92." - http://winnipegtimemachine.blogspot.com/
HOLY CRAP, eh?! The Living Icicle! So don't tell me those horses didn't freeze in the river. That's obviously nothing compared to what can happen to you in Winnipeg! Chuckle!
Ebert wrote: I am looking at that Kino set as we speak, and you are correct. Also, it is a magnificent collection. Anyone who loves Criterion must love Kino...
Love doesn't begin to describe my feelings for Kino. Have you ever received promotional art as a member of the Press? You know, like big hi-res photos & production stills? If so, I'm not talking about having recently found that stuff or anything of the sort as it pertains to Kino, while looking for a photo of Max Schreck as Dracula.
I'm just thinking out loud inside the blog, as I stare at a few pictures on my wall. :)
Meanwhile and because I'm all about sharing the wealth, I understand you collect stamps! Back in 1985 the British Post Office released a special set of stamps celebrating British Film. My brother-in-law is English and he brought some back which I've scanned so you can have them too, in case you'd like to have the pictures! Assuming of course, you don't already have these and would like them...
Alfred Hitchcock -
http://www3.telus.net/thiliasspace/Marie/jpegs/hitchcock_stamp.jpg
Charlie Chaplin -
http://www3.telus.net/thiliasspace/Marie/jpegs/chaplin_stamp.jpg
I like Alfred's best, myself - I've been wondering for YEARS what he's writing with his pen?!
Probably how to murder somebody. :)
Ebert: He's writing: Good even...ing.
Back atcha: http://tcmmoviemorlocks.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/canadian-postage-stamps.jpg
We had a great time, not least because you could strike up a conversion with almost any audience member on any film topic, no matter how arcane, and have an interesting time.
If there was a theme linking all the films - and I think there was - it was the survival of the human spirit against odds of various levels of whelming. Ale in Chop Shop, Kimberly and her family in Trouble the Water, Nina in Sita, Guy Madden's alter ego who can never quite leave Winnipeg, the kids going for mudslides at Woodstock, ...all these folks make the best of the hands they're dealt. (Biggest reason why Woodstock couldn't happen today: sunscreen.)
Nothing But the Truth was the movie I liked least: it felt Hollywoodized, is the only way I can put it. (Plus, I think Rod Lurie's ideas about females and maternal feelings are certainly not universally applicable, and rather irritating, and I think this undercurrent also did not help me love this movie.)
Sadly, the perfect screenings - flawless prints, flawless projection, superb, clean, not overly cranked-up sound - did not make me think, "I must reverse the change of habit of a decade and start going to theaters again". I've drifted to watching movies on DVD and in DIVXs because theaters in general are no fun any more. If they're crowded, mobile phones ring, watches beep, potato chip bags rattle, and people talk. If they're not crowded you don't get the audience experience. And the timing is difficult, the sound is loud and distorted, the picture is often out of focus (indeed, I have been in a theater in central London where the angle of the screen means the picture can *never* be completely in focus), the seats are angled wrong, the projectionists vanish, the staff are surly, it's cold - and in London you get to pay £10 for this experience plus travel costs. Even for *one* person buying a DVD is cheaper. Plus, most of the independent/art houses are gone; Twenty years ago, one of the great things about London was the breadth of the movies you could see - I saw Satyajit Ray's The Home and the World in a theater on Piccadilly where I think I was the only person who needed to read the subtitles. It doesn't help that the friends I used to go to movies with have moved out of town, had kids, or are constantly travelling. The first-rate experience at ebertfest is a sad reminder of how second-rate most theatrical movie-going now is.*
Folks might like to search Twitter on #ebertfest to see the posts made by Tweeters during the festival - lots of links to articles, reviews, blog entries, etc. Plus some general silliness, of course. A trickle is still coming in.
wg
Twitter: wendyg
*The NFT still does a pretty good job, by and large, and I suspect the Prince Charles, too.
Ebert: Readers: Listen to Wendy:
http://www.pelicancrossing.net/mp3s.htm
I keep telling myself I'm going to make the trek downstate to Ebertfest every year, but after hearing about the positive response from this year's great lineup, I truly am kicking myself right now. Like that old saying goes, maybe next year.
Also, I'm extremely happy to hear that Chop Shop is eliciting such great reactions from all who see it. I find myself missing my copy of the DVD for weeks at a time; I lend it to a friend, saying that they MUST see it, who in return lends it to another friend, saying the exact same thing. And on and on it goes.
Of course, I know the same thing will happen when Goodbye Solo is released on DVD. It's one of the very few films that has left me stunned and speechless.
On a side note to the festival:
I'm a few chapters into your book "Awake in the Dark", which I picked up on the way out. Very readable and enjoyable.
My favorite moment in the book so far is in the Tom Hanks chapter. I am thrilled that you really liked "Joe Vs. The Volcano". Me too. And not only Tom Hanks, who was excellent, but Meg Ryan playing three roles wonderfully.
That movie was kind of a bellweather for me, as far as seeming to be completely out of touch with film reviewers. As I remember, that movie seemed to be universally panned. I thought "how can I like a movie so much, and professional reviewers like it so little?" It didn't make me like the movie any less - I trust my own tastes. It just made me disregard reviewers more.
But now I know that at least one critic liked it. That sets the world right again in a small way. I don't feel so much the odd-man-out now.
Roger, It was so exciting to come to Ebertfest this year on my first press pass. I've been there since the first one, so I felt like I had arrived. Even moreso by your gracious compliment; I know you know how much people love you and what you do, but I just want to reiterate that you're my role model and gaining validation from you makes me feel like a rock star.
I enjoyed the fest, as I always do, and take to heart what Chaz said about making suggestions for the next festival (I'm definitely looking forward to The Man with the Movie Camera). If you want another Baraka kind of experience, consider The Sky, The Earth, and The Rain, my favorite film from the 2008 Chicago International Film Festival (and that includes Let the Right One In). Here's a little of what I wrote about it:
Ebert: Sounds like my kinda film Do you know it's not on IMDb or Amazon?
You can find it under its Spanish name, "El cielo, la tierra, y la lluvia" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1135965/). It doesn't seem to be for sale from Amazon. I'm not finding a DVD so far, but Cinema/Chicago could probably connect you with a screener or the filmmaker.
Wendy M. Grossman wrote on April 30, 2009 8:25 AM - "Sadly, the perfect screenings - flawless prints, flawless projection, superb, clean, not overly cranked-up sound - did not make me think, "I must reverse the change of habit of a decade and start going to theaters again". I've drifted to watching movies on DVD and in DIVXs because theaters in general are no fun any more.... and in London you get to pay £10 for this experience plus travel costs. Even for *one* person buying a DVD is cheaper.... The first-rate experience at ebertfest is a sad reminder of how second-rate most theatrical movie-going now is."
TEN pounds?!
That's $17.67 Canadian! Based on today's exchange rates. One Canadian dollar is worth 56p. And the pound is worth $1.76 Canadian. Although I was in London once when the exchange rate was at it's worst, and in order to convert 1 dollar CAN into 1 pound, I had to spend $2.50 Can. I remember paying $20.00 for a hamburger, coke and fries. And 25p for a little packet of ketchup!
A regular movie ticket where I live, depending on the venue, runs around $12.00 or £6.78. They used to have cheap Tuesdays - I think it was $8.00 a ticket, which proved SO popular the theaters stopped doing it.
And I'm in total accord with your sentiments as quoted above. Not only is it invariably nicer to see a film at home owing to how people behave these days, but it's also cheaper. And travel costs are also an issue for me; my friends are scattered all over and in different cities. One is even on an island off the coast!
My local library is a treasure trove of old movies and foreign imports; being a library, they naturally aren't trying to replace a big box rental chain. And I get a few extra TV channels which showcase non-mainstream films; BRAVO! Canada, for example. That's where I found one of the most extraordinary films I've ever seen:
"Before The Rain" - a Macedonian film set during the Bosnian war, by Milcho Manchevski. That's something I'd love to see with a group of people at a film festival; in order to tap into the shared experience of its emotional impact.
I will always remember the start - which shows a monastic garden, and the jarring juxtaposition when suddenly later on, the local thugs arrive; you hear the Beastie Boys on a walkman "So What'cha, What'cha-What'cha Want" - as up until that moment I didn't know we weren't in the 17th century! I remember when the door opened and one of the local militia stood there with his gun - he didn't have to say anything; my blood turned cold. I remember children burning turtles as a kind of crucifixion, and a cat being riddled for fun with bullets on a rooftop - it reminds me of the infamous laughing Nazi in "Schindler's List" who shoots at burning corpses because he's insane. I remember all of it. It seared itself into memory and etched itself upon my senses like acid on a copper plate.
Religion, in the hands of men governed by testosterone and not sentient thought, leads to a mindless and incestuous cycle of hatred, sexism and war; in part enabled by Religion, moreover, not just ethnic differences. Men don't usually tell such stories this honestly - ego gets in the way of it, but not in this case. It's an unflinching look at the truth. The camera catches moments through a female lens, if you know what I mean? For noticing "the little things" that say so much. That's what I took away from the film, the visual style of which spoke to me in a way few ever have. I got it. I wasn't lost or confused or wondering WTF? I understood the overlapping connections as events moved back and forth across time - and why it hit me like a bullet.
Not everything has to be this weighty. Film as Art can be lighthearted and silly too, and still have something to say. But when it is weighty, imo, "Before The Rain" is a good example of doing it right. And the sort of film you'd hope to find at Festival, eh?
P.S. until I figure out why some posts are going MIA, I'm going to make a note as to "when" they were sent, so I can hopefully track it. As no less 6 posts disappeared this week! Okay, so it's friday May 1st 4:47 pm PST. :)
Ebert: Six? Good gravy.
"Before the Rain?" Yes!
Ugh, i'm going to sound like such a sycophant but i have been a fan of yours ever since a friend introduced me to 'Siskel & Ebert' some 28 years ago. for years i've wanted to attend your film festival but my natural tendency to procrastinate resulted in extreme frustration. this year, mirabile dictu, i remembered to buy tickets as soon as i could. i am sooo happy i did. the festival was perfection. imagine waking up on a glorious spring day with nothing better to do than watch great films all day long? ah, heaven. although i had seen many before i gladly watched them again. i saw every film and stayed for every q&a and relished every moment. my favorites were 'woodstock' (i'm still humming music from it over a week later), 'the fall' and 'let the right one in.' i'm also thinking of buying a blu-ray player for 'barka' and the best film ever made, '2001:a space odyssey.' thank you, thank you, thank you, roger for the wonderful film festival and for nearly 40 years of insightful (and amusing!) movie reviews.
To Nina Paley, I enjoyed Sita Sings the Blues immensely. Thank you very much for this generous contribution of yours. Just out of curiosity, what happened to Lexi the cat? At first, I thought the New York cat was Lexi, but then I remembered the SF tabby was sort of calico in color (or something like that).
Ebert: Still alive, still loved, living with the sub-lessors.
A while back on some other entry, somebody suggested Happy Feet - I also commented, but I guess I was, alas, too late for the conversation. So, I'm bringing it up now, along with their description, which is the most apt I've heard of it:
"I don't know what Mr. Ebert's thoughts are, but, I completely agree with your assessment of "Happy Feet", which, I think, is one of the few modern animated films containing what Pauline Kael called "movie-making fervor". Having seen it many times, I'm continuously fascinated by the way it shifts between scenes that are silly and whimsical to scenes that are deeply, potently mythological (some critics, I think, just couldn't handle that).
It's a great, great movie...and, I believe, George Miller is the most under-appreciated film-maker working today."
This, along with Watership Down and The Plague Dogs. And, Babe: Pig In the City, just for good measure. One can never have enough of George Miller, but Martin Rosen is a severely underappreciated animation director. It's a sad, sad thing that his last film was the monotone "Stacking," from 1988 or thereabouts.
To Marilyn Ferdinand, here is a website that caters to indie animators (if you don't know this one already):
A personal favorite is Evergreen from 2007.
And come summer, everyone will need to chill out: Mr. Fortune, 2006.
Btw, Marilyn Ferdinand, turn up the volume.
Best Regards,
Robert
Attention to cat lovers (Ali Arikan):
What do cats dream about in their long, long, long (afternoon) naps:
The Dreamer
Mr. Ebert,
It has been some time since I was last in Chicago, and I lament that I was unable to attend this year's festival. I have read your reviews for most of the films discussed above and I look forward to seeing them very soon.
If I may, and recognizing that this is entirely out of place, I wanted to remark on a recent comment of yours in a review for the Wolverine film. You said:
"Oh, the film is well-made. Gavin Hood, the director, made the great film 'Tsotsi' (2005) and the damned good film 'Rendition' (2007) before signing on here. Fat chance 'Wolverine' fans will seek out those two."
Who are you reviewing here?
I can appreciate that the film was a series of contrived action sequences, but is it possible that "fans" of this film recognize its flaws and still enjoy it?
I am not disputing your two-star review of the film (or the substantive review that led to your two-star rating). As you point out, there are some very good movies in the superhero genre, which stand on their own when compared to other fine films.
However, I take exception to the notion that a movie-goer could not enjoy a well-put-together peice of action and mayhem (even if lacking in the moral struggle or narrative of other, better films of its ilk), and then turn around and be moved by Tsotsi. Perhaps movies can sometimes be pigeon-holed into narrow market categories, but must movie-goers be as well? Are our souls so small?
My father grew up in a small country town. He was the third of ten children born to a nurse mother, and, for most of his childhood, an unemployed father. They were poor, if you hadn't guessed. Dirt poor.
One of the few pleasures in my father's young life was seeing B-movie matinees on the weekends. These were almost always Westerns at the local theatre.
My father left the farm and finished school. He moved to the city and their became a person of refined tastes. And then the universe invented the "Western Channel." My dad is now getting close to retirement. On weekends, if he has a block of free time, he will sit and watch the same B-grade westerns that he used to go see as a kid. I have watched many of these with him and concluded that they are universally shabby. They were made on shoe-string budgets with no-name actors in some blighted desert wasteland where not even the buffalo roam (nor bison for that matter). They have stilted dialogue, zero-character developement, and just an overall shabbiness about them. Still, there is something meaningful and comforting to my father in seeing these films. At his most vulnerable, my dad got to see people who were unconflicted, who were certain that right would prevail, and who were always correct in that belief. The characters in these films are entirely devoid of moral failing, of nuance, or of, well, anything interesting. It makes for fairly banal cinema, and my father knows it. But the meaning is there nonetheless.*
The point is that my father's love of these lackluster, second-rate, cowpoke shows, hasn't diminished his ability to discern what is shabby and what is fine (both within and outside of his favorite genre). I haven't yet shown him Tsotsi, but I have shown him many other fine films, and he has shown me many. He knows a fine performance and fine filmmaking when he sees it, but he still likes to sit down on the weekend and watch different (but decidedly similar looking) heroes defending separate (but decidedly similar looking) towns against, well, you know . . . .
All this is to say that I think the chances are more than fat that many fans of Wolverine will seek out Tsotsi and Rendition.
*(I think that for the fanboy there is the same sense of weakness and uncertainty identifying with, or longing for, strength and certainty.)
Ebert: Of course you are quite right.
Robert of Taoyuan City, Taiwan wrote on May 1, 2009 11:17 PM - "A personal favorite is Evergreen from 2007."
Oh my GOD! (Making squeely noises!) I know this dude! Well, not personally, but I've seen some the work done by Wanda Productions, who also producted "Evergreen" - I remember this great Ad for Tiji - the French Children’s Channel. It won an award and everything!
I dedicate the following to Roger Ebert...
"The Balloon" Tiji: director Yoann Lemoine, Wanda Productions
http://www.yoannlemoine.com/video.php?id=tiji
Isn't that wonderful?! I can't tell you yet what I love about it, as it would spoil the SURPRISE. :)
Meanwhile, and in the spirit of Film Festivals and doing things the old way...
Marv Newland is the creator of the short film Bambi Meets Godzilla (1969) which became a cult classic. He's produced and directed numerous animated shorts as well as the longer-format Tales from the Far Side (1994) which won the Grand Prix at Annecy. He was also my boss for several years.
And he's been working on a film called "Postalolio".
The film is pencil-and-paper animated, then traced onto blank postcard, water-coloured, stamped and mailed to Frederator Studio in New York. Every frame of the film will have gone through the mail! Some of the postcards have been mailed from foreign countries to add colour and variety to the stamps and cancellations. The music will be a tune by the late jazz guitarist Joe Venuti. Marv animated most of the picture and water-coloured all of it. Dieter Mueller and Peter MacAdams, two well-known International Rocketship animators, have contributed a scene or two. “Postalolio” is reportedly set appear at international film festivals throughout 2009. There's no clip or link up yet, though.
However, here's a "single frame" of his hand-painted short...
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1381/1455034610_6bcb833228.jpg?v=0
Marv Newland is one of the last hold outs. He refuses to hang-up his pencil. He prefers the "old" way and not computers. And when I heard about his postcard project, I confess a part of me celebrated. For he's kinda like the guy who still wants to make B/W silent films in an age when everyone's rushing towards 3D. Atta boy Marv! Don't let 'em take you alive! :)
And it's an interesting contrast, eh? I mean on the one hand, you've got this modern animated commercial - and it's genuinely moving and delightful. And yet here's a guy who's doing his entirely by hand. One frame at a time and sent through the mail.
Nobody asked, but maybe next year at Ebertfest, you could find a pair of animated shorts which illustrate the above? Really modern techniques juxtaposed against traditional, classical animation? And show them the way theaters used to, back in the day! Before the film starts... you get to watch a cartoon! :)
It's May 3rd, 2:32 am PST and I wrote this entirely in the comment box. I am now clicking submit... yes, I have copied and saved it first; chuckle!
I saw Aguirre, the Wrath of God for the first time last night and I am still thinking about it. It upsets me that films that are this intelligent aren't being seen by very many people anymore.
Hurray!
I see my post; smile.
So now we know where balloons go, when children lose them! They float ever higher up and up, avoiding planes and bad weather too, past mountain tops and through the clouds, beyond the atmosphere itself and the reaching hands of astronauts, undeterred even by comets - until finally coming to rest on the ceiling of the universe; which apparently "is" finite. :)
I immediately thought of that children's short "The Red Balloon". And of cartoons I'd drawn of Roger floating around the blog and being stalked by Harold and Maude. I thought of all the posts ever posted pondering the unknown mysteries of the Universe, how it began and where it'll end.... and then smiled at the thought that "maybe" beyond the view of telescopes, there's a place where kitty balloons and variations thereof, are clustered in silence, waiting to be discovered, retrieved and brought back down to earth again like reincarnated souls.
And why it seemed like a good thing to share in here. :)
Ironic segue... I picked-up a DVD at my library today.
"BARAKA" - Special Collector's Edition, 16x9 Anamorphic Widescreen Feature, new 70MM Film Transfer, digitally remastered 5.1 Dolby Digital. Rubbing hands together!
And I'm having one of those surreal Joseph Campbell moments, wherein the timing of events makes you stop and think. For several things have happened over the span of the past 24 hrs:
1. I locate the Balloon clip, which relates to so much in here.
2. The mystery of the missing posts is solved; spam folder!
3. The library gets "Baraka" for me; a world beyond words.
3. E-mail arrives: a girl friend's back in town from Italy having just made it in time for her father to die in her arms; Alzheimers.
I tend to see connections everywhere, as that's the way my mind works, but even so - you see it too, yes? What was once held in the hand of a child, floats away. What's been missing and seemingly lost forever, is found. What spans the world not with words but images, arrives. And what arrives does so in time to let go of what it once held as a child.
Note: it was a hardship caring for her father, as she's an only child and so while there is a sense of loss - there's also a weight lifting off her now too.
And all of that's connecting for me on a "Sunday" inside a blog thread where there's mention of a Cathedral and experiences transcendent!
Ie: trippy! And leading me now to wonder if it means anything to have observed it? Just because you can of course, doesn't in and of itself, mean anything. That's why they call it "trippy". It's akin to seeing a pirate ship sailing past you when you stare at a cloud formation. It's free association, nothing more. But then, that becomes an argument in support of NEVER paying attention to anything because it is so easy to "see a pirate ship" so to speak; and gosh, if you do THAT, you're going to miss tons of stuff!
I know, I know; I think too much. I'm a slave to irony. :)
But they also have "Aguirre, the Wrath of God" at the library too, and I spotted it while picking-up Baraka. So go figure?
Ebert:
There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.
I rent a lot of movies at the Red Box 1$ a day movie rental machines. Just today I rented "Happy-Go-Lucky", a joyous movie, and the day before "Lawrence of Arabia" (I know: it doesn't really count unless at the theaters, which I will do if I get the chance). I also rented "Synechdoche, New York" and "Rachel Getting Married" and "Milk" when they were released onto DVD for only a dollar. If only the multi-plexes did the same. Can't they play these type of movies for just one day?
Robert - That is great, and probably what they dream about. But what do they do, when we are asleep? TS Eliot helpfully provides the answer:
But when the day's hustle and bustle is done,
Then the Gumbie Cat's work is but hardly begun.
And when all the family's in bed and asleep,
She slips down the stairs to the basement to creep.
She is deeply concerned with the ways of the mice -
Their behaviour's not good and their manners not nice;
So when she has got them lined up on the matting,
She teaches them music, crocheting and tatting.
By the way, Robert, I can't find your email address. Blogger is playing silly-billies with my computer, so I can't post or respond to your comments on my blog. Can you email me please?
The most gripping bit of news coverage to emerge out of Katrina actually occurred on Fox News.
Geraldo Rivera and Sheppard Smith were down in Nola telling everyone how dire the situation was. With George W. Bush still President, this was not something host Sean Hannity wanted to hear. But it was gripping television all the same.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPswpqB73SA
As you said, the movies at an Ebertfest seem to be of a piece, don't they. I think that's party because of the intensity -- in some ways, difficulty -- of the experience.
Almost every movie, in each year I've gone, has been so emotionally and aesthetically overwheling, taken alone, a movie like that would take days if not weeks for me to digest fully. But there is no time to digest; we are on to the next, wrung out again.
Working critics know something of this on a regular basis. Three films a day, then researching them, then writing about them, is a different form of marathon. The difference, however, is that most of the films in that regimen are going to suck (Sturgeon's Law, which I've known you to quote: 90% of everything is crap). (Friend and fellow SF writer Harlan Ellison's explication: "That is, merely avererage. Pistols, puppies, puddings, people. There is only 10% grandeur anywhere.)" At Ebertfest, it's one peak experience after another, and there is just NO WAY to appreciate them fully at the time.
Instead, what happens is a slow unpacking of the experience, literally for months. I go to Ebertfest for the recharge I need to carry me through at least the next six months of WOLVERINEs. The last six months, I'm on my own. Thank god fourth quarter usually ticks upwards, and now I have Guy Maddin's back catalog to Netflix (a new verb?).
A summation. I had the strong desire to stand up at the end and make the comment. Michael Wadleigh, the director of the four-hour, transformative experience WOODSTOCK (one of my top ten moments in a theater, ever) said that that moment is not buried in history; we need to claim it, and find our own. I think we need to claim and find many. That's how we will turn the world around -- and that, andthe fact that people can be awful but are also capable of greatness, are, I think, the common thread between all your festivals, year after year.
In summation, this: EBERTFEST IS OUR FILM WOODSTOCK.
I truly enjoyed reading your thoughts and feelings about your festival and the audience's reactions to the films. What I love about film festivals is how rewarding it is to be able to hear what strikes fellow audience members as significant and thrilling and troubling about what they have just seen. It is so dispiriting to me when the audience trudges out of the multiplex screening room silently or maybe chatting about the film with their companions; it always makes me think back to my trips to Sundance and other fests where the end of the film is just the beginning of a lively discussion. And it is, of course, such a true honor when the filmmakers themselves are there to talk about their work.
On a final note, I was happy to see that you reviewed "The Merry Gentleman." I was at the world premiere of that film at Sundance in 2008, and I really liked its tone and the way it was shot. The actors did a terrific job inhabiting their characters' lives. It's not every film that can evoke such sympathy for a career hitman. And I, too, really liked the ending. Anyway, thanks for bringing attention to this quiet but very nicely done film.
Stephen: Careful, there. Although I have it on good authority that some of the very worst movies of all time were B-Westerns from the Thirties through the Forties, there's good films and bad films in every genre, and that includes the Westerns put out by Republic, Monogram, and other Poverty Row studios. I'm particularly fond of RIDERS OF THE WHISTLING SKULL, an offbeat cross between a B Western and an Old Dark House mystery.
Hi Ali,
Thanks for TS Eliot.
Btw, I sent you an email late last night. Also, I discovered that the email in my Blogger account primarily had not been made open to the public. I have corrected the situation.
Cheers,
Robert
Toronto Todd,
Oh, man. You are 100% right about that Fox News coverage on youtube.com.
Everybody should watch that.
Is anybody watching the news now?
As someone living in the news now...
It is unfortunate that I had to explain to my students why there is a flying banner of an aborted fetus circling the area in and around Notre Dame today. For those not in the know, President Obama is speaking at Commencement and Randall Terry and Alan Keyes have decided to turn it into a circus. (Their term.) I'm a fencesitter on the abortion issue: Glad Mom didn't have one, but don't presume to make that choice for others. Still though, I am passionate about a few issues, affordable healthcare for all of us being one of them. Taking Terry's lead, I am looking for sponsors of my own flying banner: That of an emaciated corpse of an American who couldn't afford chemotherapy. Any takers?
Ebert wrote:
"There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures."
The quote is from Shakespeare, Julius Caesar! Albeit sometimes vexing, the Internet is a powerful tool. :)
And I only understood the quote on a surface level, so I Googled and found this at Answers Yahoo! Seems someone else wanted to know what it meant 2 years ago and the answer supplied is still there!
"Brutus speaks these words in Act IV, scene ii in order to convince Cassius that it is time to begin the battle against Octavius and Antony. He speaks figuratively of a “tide” in the lives of human beings: if one takes advantage of the high tide, one may float out to sea and travel far; if one misses this chance, the “voyage” that one’s life comprises will remain forever confined to the shallows, and one will never experience anything more glorious than the mundane events in this narrow little bay. Brutus reproaches Cassius that if they do not “take the current” now, when the time is right, they will lose their “ventures,” or opportunities.
The passage elegantly formulates a complex conception of the interplay between fate and free will in human life. Throughout the play, the reader must frequently contemplate the forces of fate versus free will and ponder whether characters might be able to prevent tragedy if they could only understand and heed the many omens that they encounter. This musing brings up further questions, such as whether one can achieve success through virtue, ambition, courage, and commitment or whether one is simply fated to succeed or fail, with no ability to affect this destiny. Here, Brutus conceives of life as influenced by both fate and free will: human beings must be shrewd enough to recognize when fate offers them an opportunity and bold enough to take advantage of it. Thus, Brutus believes, does man achieve a delicate and valuable balance between fate and free will.
This philosophy seems wise; it contains a certain beauty as well, suggesting that while we do not have total control over our lives, we do have a responsibility to take what few measures we can to live nobly and honorably. The only problem, as the play illustrates over and over again, is that it is not always so easy to recognize these nudges of fate, be they opportunities or warnings. The characters’ repeated failures to interpret signs correctly and to adapt themselves to events as they unfold form the basis for most of the tragedy that occurs in the play." - http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070316161148AA1eb93
So in others words, you just have to pick a course of action and hope for the best - carpe dieum! Yes?
If so, it's a pretty good use of a quote, and I mentally shake hands with you for it. :)
Reply to: Ebert: Matt Dillon was here with Rod Lurie's film "Nothing But the Truth." I'll be reviewing it in a few days. Lurie's film involves a newspaper reporter, and he knows the subject at first hand. He is a former film critic, and the son of the great editorial cartoonist Ranan Lurie.
I wanted to watch "Nothing But The Truth" on DVD before I made a comment.
The concept and the packaging were terrible. Simply not up to modern standards. If you read a synopsis, you immediately think, "Boring." This movie failed at the Premise. Acting and dialogue were OK, and set design was passable... but it was a WEAK movie that didn't satisfy audiences on a emotional level. As the end credits rolled, we felt cheated.
Reply to: Karlos: Matt Dillon gets pigeon holed into playing those square-jawed, good looking alpha male characters that have no subversive depth or any other sort of depth to the character
Two huge problems emerged. First, the Matt Dillon character is full of himself and seems to abuse women. In a Hollywood movie, the heroine would find a way to turn the tables. In "Nothing But The Truth," there's no resolution. There's just a minor reveal at the end, as the journalist is taken to prison a second time.
Second, there is no concept of "family." Kate's husband (David Schwimmer) has a new girlfriend as soon as she's taken away. No one to root for. Nothing to root about.
In a better version, the journalist would have gone to the top of the chain of command (the POTUS, apparently) and made a bargain. "You want me to give up my principles? Then my price for the name is ending the career of a federal prosecutor who abuses women." Raise the stakes. obviously, there's no downside to releasing the name. Force her to change the way she looks at life in order to accomplish a greater good. When the name of the source is announced, even the POTUS realizes that she has done nothing wrong, and punishes Dillon. That's a movie.
Lurie needs a home run with his next movie. he starts filming "Straw Dogs" in August.
Why would a studio remake "Straw Dogs"? For actor James Marsden, it's a good career move. After being eye candy as cyclops in X-Men, he could use a movie where he kills some people. Aside from that, "Straw Dogs" is a terrible choice. Unless you change the plot line, it has no chance for commercial success.
We've got a full catalog of "gritty revenge movies." "Straw Dogs" is also a male rape fantasy. Five ugly men break into a house and rape a young wife in a troubled marriage, and she likes it!
"Straw Dogs" i based on a novel called "The Siege at Trencher's Farm." A young couple bring home an injured stranger, who turns out to have just escaped from a mental hospital. Men in the town think he has kidnapped a mentally challenged girl, so they want to hang him. The hero (Dustin Hoffman in the original) has to become a violent man to save him.
From a site: Knowing something about the screenplay and the direction of the film, the casting of Marsden might be more appropriate than some might think. Firstly, the character isn't meant to be the nebbish type, as he was played by Hoffman in the 1971 movie. Instead, Rod Lurie seems to be going back to the original novel as reference, and in his version,
Marsden's character is a screenwriter doing research on a film about Stalingrad, a pivotal battle during WWII where the Russians turned the tide on the German invasion. Lurie's military background from his time at West Point might come into play with how Marsden deals with the men who threaten him and his wife (end)
I looked back at Lurie's career:
(1) His debut feaure, Deterrence, concerned a US President trapped in a diner during a snowstorm and came out in 1999.
(2) The Contender with Joan Allen as the first female President.
(3) Lurie also wrote and directed The Last Castle with Robert Redford and James Gandolfini,
(4) Resurrecting the Champ with Samuel L. Jackson and Josh Hartnett and
(5) the TV series Commander-in-Chief.
How do you change the concept of "Straw Dogs" into something that would draw audiences in the same way that "Iron Man" and "The Dark Knight" did?
Create the kind of hero that James Marsden needs to play at this point in his career.
And then, create an opponent who isn't a cast reject from "Deliverance." Who doesn't insult every person who lives in "the deep south" by being offensive.
I'm looking at the term "Straw Dogs." The title "Straw Dogs" does not appear in the source material. It's from a poem:
Heaven and earth are ruthless, and treat the myriad creatures as straw dogs. The sage is ruthless, and treats the people as straw dogs
SITE: The term refers to the ancient practice of constructing animal figures out of straw for use as religious offerings. Such figures would be treated with utmost reverence prior to the sacrificial fires--but afterward, their ashes were swept up and discarded with the common refuse...
there's the plot line for "Straw Dogs."
Audienced loved the idea of "undead pirates" in "Pirates of the Caribbean." "One ring to command them all" in "Lord of the Rings."
Don't make your opponents an insulting bunch of Southern louts who decide to break into a man's house and ultimately rape his wife. Why? Do I have to explain it? No one wants to see that in a movie. No one.
Instead, give the heroine a doppelganger who makes "straw dogs" and burns them as part of an occult ritual... and when the fire consumes the images, the animals magically appear and carry out her commands.
Give the movie an opponent that you can't see on TV every night. Give it something unique that teases the audience, "You'll want to pay to see this in a theater."
The Disney and Bruckheimer version of "The Lone Ranger" is based on the folk lore that silver bullets are used to kill werewolves. Therefore, the Lone Ranger and Tonto will go up against werewolves.
In the "Twilight" series, we've got hunky vampires AND hunky werewolves in the next one.
I don't see today's audiences embracing a movie where James Marsden defends his home against the same idiots that Burt Reynolds fought in "Deliverance." If his wife had an old boyfriend, he should be a military officer who forms an alliance and HELPS his former girlfriend fight off the monsters. Monsters that are summoned by burning the Straw Dogs.
I don't know much about Lurie's script. But from I've read, it won't be much better than "Nothing But The Truth." It won't capture the magic. It will just re-make a movie that doesn't need to be remade. Because the idea of a man having coming home and finding that his wife has been raped during his absence... isn't a story we want to see, much less pay money to see.
Anonymous wrote on May 5, 2009 3:10 AM - So in others words, you just have to pick a course of action and hope for the best - carpe dieum! Yes?
Note to self: remember to sign your NAME before you post, Marie! :)
RWA wrote on May 4, 2009 6:30 PM - "I'm particularly fond of RIDERS OF THE WHISTLING SKULL, an offbeat cross between a B Western and an Old Dark House mystery."
There's a movie called "Riders of the Whistling Skull"..? No way, are you serious?! I have to check this out, hang on..!
OhmyGod, there is!
"A supernatural western? Well, not quite. But there's a missing archaeologist, a lost city full of gold guarded by an ancient "cult" of Indians, murders by weapons with strange "hieroglyphics" that speak of a curse, and that Whistling Skull that provides the title. Even a sacrificial altar and a mummified Indian for good measure. (And for the ladies: Ray "Crash" Corrigan running around shirtless for about ten minutes.)
There was a time when westerns like this regularly filled out the bill as part of an evening out at the movies. Leading up to the main attraction, B movies whetted the appetite of the filmgoer. They ran about an hour (with at least five minutes of medium long shots of men on horses riding from one side of the frame to the other) and were filled with action and folksy humor. But they were also made quickly and cheaply and overly formulaic with more time spent setting up and getting to the gunfight than spent worrying about plot and character or even much of a resolution.
Which is why Riders of the Whistling Skull (1937) is such fun. It does have many of the limitations and deserved criticism of those B westerns, but it has so much more going for it. It's got a story that's more like an adventure or horror tale than your typical western. Along with good location work and excellent stunts, it stands apart from so many similar films."
http://everything2.com/title/Riders%2520of%2520the%2520Whistling%2520Skull
I started humming "Riders of the Storm" by the Doors and it turned into "Rawhide" and now I'm just laughing as I type!
Note: there's a LOT of information about the film and its cast and crew over at that link, including the following tidbit...
"Robert Livingston (played Stony brooke) began following his father's footsteps (he was a newspaper editor) and became a reporter. After covering a story on the Pasadena Playhouse he got the acting bug. Sadly, his final films are I Spit on on Your Corpse! (1974), Naughty Stewardesses, and Blazing Stewardesses (depending on the source it might be 1973 and 1975, respectively; or 1974 and 1975, respectively; or both 1975), all directed by exploitation schlockmeister Al Adamson."
Riders of the Whistling Skull sounds like a really fun movie to watch while drunk with friends, eh? :)
And gosh - starting out as newspaper reporter, only to end up making movies like "I Spit on your Corpse!" I wonder what would have happened to Roger, if the tide of opportunity had presented itself in the form of a part in a movie..? If Fate had somehow managed to pull him away from pursuing a life as a Film Critic?
Would we be in here talking to someone else about the career of Roger Ebert, and the films he'd made?
Either way, it's something to think about. :)
Riders of the whistling Skull? Of course. There was also a Western hero named Idaho Smith.
"Raiders of the Lost Ark?" Totally ripped-off from earlier movies. A hero on horseback who goes after a convoy of trucks? "Zorro's Fighting Legion."
Lash LaRue's bullwhip? I have a copy of a transcripts of George's week-long meeting with Steven and Larry Kasdan:
George Lucas: "The strongest image is the "Treasure of Sierra Madre" outfit, which is the khaki pans, he's got Bogart's leather jacket, that sort of felt hat, and the pistol and holster with a World War One sort of flap over it. The other thing we've added, which may be fun, is a bull whip. That's really his trade mark. He has a pistol, but the bull whip is his weapon of choice. Maybe he came from Montana. There are freaks who love bull whips. It's a device that hasn't been used in a long time.
Steven Spielberg: You can knock somebody's belt off and the guys pants fall down. At some point in the movie he must use it to get a girl back. She's walking out of the room and he wraps her up and she twirls as he pulls her back. She spins into his arms. You have to use it for more things than just saving himself
George Lucas (later) : Now, on top of that, he's a sort of expert in the occult. He gets into situations where there are taboos, voodoos, things, and he's the guy they hire to check out ghosts and psychic phenomenon. He's sort of an archeological exorcist. When there's a haunted Temple (ie, the Temple of Doom) and nobody will go near it, he's the one. And some of the curses are hoaxes, but some are real. People will desecrate the tomb of a Pharoah and something will happen. They die twenty-four hours after violating the crypt. Nobody knows why, but the curse of Mabutu is on that place. Well, Indy goes into the pyramid and sees a fissure and deadly gas coming out. Because he's an intelligent professor, he knows his science and can sort of deduce a hoax. There was a comic book a long time about a guy who did nothing but show up hoaxes.
Larry Kasdan: Some of the hoaxes may have been set up by the natives.
George Lucas: He's a professor with a lot of experience in the occult, and he is not afraid to stand up against any man, but he's also not afraid to stand up against the unknown.
Steven Spielberg: What is he afraid of? He's got to be afraid of something.
George Lucas: If we don't make him vulnerable, he's got no inner problems. We'll come back to that.
Spielberg: Remember the movie "Soldier of Fortune" with Clak Gable? There was a lot of Rhett Butler in that character. The devil-may-care kind of guy who is so glib, he bluffs everybody around him. We want to have "Wind and the Lion" action. Spend our money on stunt guys falling off horses, rather than one crowd scene with sixteen thousand extras.
(Later)
Spielberg: When he goes through that cave, there's nothing more terrifying than skeletons.
Lucas: There's also things like spiders, snakes. Cut to a snake slithering across the ground, then he walks across the same ground. You never know when a snake's going to be curled up on his leg.
Spielberg: This is the first scene in the movie. This scene should get at least four major screams. the audience won't trust anyone after that. They won't trust the film
George: You can do your famous "Jaws" trick where there's a hand on the shoulder, and we pull back to see it's a skeleton
Spielberg: What we're doing here, really, is designing a ride at Disneyland.
George: They get to the main throne room and there's an idol, just a teeny little idol, rather than this giant thing. Voodoo, whatever. If the idol is really small, it's spookier. Like one of those voodoo dolls where you can almost believe the curse on the thing. He moves in and studies it. It's almost like a karate or a tai-chi exercise. He's knows there's a trap and he's trying to figure it out. All of a sudden you hear the... we cut to a little insert of sand going... starting to fill up something. He hears it and he just runs like hell to get out of the room before whatever it is... That's when the big stone goes... we can work that out, be more specific about what exactly the trap is. You think he's got it, and he's starting his way back, but there's some kind of a delayed thing. And you hear some giant mechanism at work that's going to crush the entire temple or something. Maybe it kills off the other guy or sends him fleeing, screaming into the night.
Spielberg: I have a great idea. He hears this, comes to a corridor, and there's a sixty five foot boulder that rolls down the corridor. And its a race. He gets to outrun the bolulder. Then it comes to rest and blocks the entrance to the cave. Nobody will ever come in again. This boulder is the size of a house.
George: It's sort of "Land of the Pharoahs" stuff. Giant crazy traps that were set so long ago to keep people from getting in there. Keep it fast... (end)
I'm thinking about how the title "Straw Dogs" fits with George and Steven's Game Plan.
Rod Lurie has already signed on to remake "Straw Dogs". Filming starts in August. They have a script. There's no way that anything we say or post here can hurt his creative process. Lurie's creative process is done. But what we can do is, figure out what a movie needs, or what George or Steven would put into a movie, and when "Straw Dogs" comes out, see if we're right.
You start with an American hero in the thirties. He's a college professor with a dark side. He's like Clark Kent AND superman. He's a smart guy who loves students AND he's a surly tomb raider who uses a bullwhip to stay alive.
this is how you make a movie that will last forever.
And it usually involves stealing or borrowing ideas from older movies that worked.
An expert who deals with hoaxes. yeah, I took that one to heart. (So did Richard Roeper.) christianity is a hoax, and it delights me to explain WHY they created a hoax about a man who was dead for three days and came back to life.
My attitude... is like Indiana Jones. I hear a story, and when I find out it was a scam, it makes me want to dig in and expose the creeps.
In "Straw Dogs," James Marsden is married. He goes back to the hometown where his wife grew up and he discovers a hoax. Maybe there was a war memorial for a battle that never took place. And the people in the town don't want the hoax exposed. But the premise is no good UNLESS it's got four big scary moments that make the audience scream.
John Truby said, "95% of movies fail at the premise." You've got to START with a premise that gives you four "big screams" in a short period of time. A hand reaches out to grab his shoulder, and it turns out to belong to a skeleton. Snakes. I just saw Ellen DeGeneres holding half of a giant python on the set of her TV show. If you can get a real snake for a TV show, why not "Straw Dogs"?
the hero has to be afraid of something. He's got to show that vulnerable side. After meeting the man who seems to be afraid of nothing, he stands in the door of this room and says, "I'm not going in there." so, what's in the room that scares the man without fear?
Why does he walk around with a bull whip?
I'm not asking Rod Lurie to make a movie. My point is completely different. Don't make a movie that you know won't work just by reading the script. A male rape fantasy... today... doesn't. Going down to the "deep South" and making the Southern accent a sign of a dimwit who spends all his time dreaming about raping this guy's wife... doesn't. Every character, and especially the Darth Vader role, needs to be heroic in his own way. When Vader made his original entrance, no one realized he was the true hero of the six-part saga. Not even George Lucas. George was going to bring in Anakin later, but he thought Vader had killed Anakin.
The best place in America is Canada. Breathe in. Breathe out.
How on earth does Ebert find the time to read all these comments, watch a million movies, and write write write? I had a dream the other night where I saw Mr. Ebert sitting at his computer. He was typing so fast his fingers were a blur.
Hi Roger,
If any of your readers hail from Melbourne, Australia, they may be interested to hear the wonderful Australian Centre for the Moving Image is screening Sita Sings the Blues this coming Sunday, and again the following Sunday. All for the phenomenally low price of $5 AUD a ticket! (For comparative purposes an adult ticket at a regular cinema costs me $16.50 AUD). For more information people can check here:
http://www.acmi.net.au/kids_sita_sings_the_blues.aspx
Incidentally, I feel very fortunate to live in a city with a great institution like the ACMI in town. It has nourished me greatly.
Dear Mr. Ebert
I have volunteered at Ebertfest for the last 3 years. I think I enjoyed this year the most, and likely "Woodstock" benefited from the large screen presentation, as it is really necessary to help keep such a long film engaging. I knew it was long, but I was never bored.
I was sad to learn you showed "Lawrence of Arabia" a few years ago, as I recently discovered the film and know it would benefit tremendously from a large screen. Next year will be my last in CU, so I hope it isn't impertinent of me to suggest either "The Godfather" or "Apocalypse Now". I would prefer "Godfather", but "Apocalypse" is hardly a concession.
Ebert: Hmmm.
Every year I am envious of those who are able to attend this most wonderful and personal of film festivals. One day I'll make the trek. Thank you for reflecting on this year's selections.
"The second most macabre use of dead horses in film"
OK, I'll bite. What's the most macabre use of dead horses in film?
Perhaps an infamous scene from The Godfather was what you (or your editor) had in mind, but Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev contains a shot of a horse that falls down a set of stairs then is stabbed by a spear. Macabre, I'd say.
Hi Roger,
Last night I finally got to watch a DVD copy of "Frozen River", which I missed at EbertFest.
(I had rented it after EbertFest and promptly lost it. I eventually gave up and paid Hollywood Video for it as lost, without having seen it. Of course, I found it the next day. And watched it.)
Worth it, even on the small screen. A good, solid, quiet film.
It gave me this pleasant flashback: I drove a green Dodge Spirit just like the smuggler-mobile for several years. Great car. I bought mine new from a dealer, drove the new car smell off of it for years, and hated to trade it in.
Thanks again for recommending it.
Randy