An Australian in Paris Cannes

An Australian presence at the prestigious Cannes Film Festival hasn't exactly been loud and proud for many years now, although the occasional Samson & Delilah (un certain regard) and Bright Star (in competition) do surface to make local media take notice ever so briefly. So it's great news this year with four Australian productions screening at the festival, including in competition for the Palme d'Or!

Julia Leigh's "erotic fairy tale" Sleeping Beauty takes pole position amongst the Australian contingent having been given a competition slot despite being Leigh's first film as director. The screenplay, also by Leigh, is apparently a masterwork and was featured on the famed "Black List" in 2008 (alongside Easy A, Bad Teacher, Going the Distance, The Beaver and I'm with Cancer) so we could have a potential screenplay winner here? We'll certainly see, but the trailer (below) is a mixed bag. The idea of Jane Campion jumping on the "presented by" bandwagon that Quentin Tarantino and Eli Roth have been on for years is certainly exciting, but this sort of incredibly arch-looking arthouse to the extreme film can be hard to swallow. It reminds me a lot of Corroboree, which is not something I care to do very often. Sleeping Beauty stars Rachael Blake doing a knockout Charlotte Rampling impersonation, and Emily Browning. Surely it can already be considered more of a success than Sucker Punch, yes?

Sleeping Beauty from Pollen Digital on Vimeo.

Featuring in Un Certain Regard - the same platform that won Samson & Delilah the Camera d'Or for Warwick Thornton - will be Ivan Sen's Toomelah. I remember hearing this film announced at last year's MIFF screening of Sen's experimental Dreamland, but didn't expect it to arrive to quickly. Especially since Sen and his producing partner David Jowsey are still tinkering away at an official cut of Dreamland to be released in 2012. Toomelah is about a young Aboriginal boy who wants to be a gangster, and it stars all non-actors from the director's community. No trailer yet, but we'll bring it to you when it arrives!

Less exciting, however, is the inclusion of Justin Kurzel's Snowtown amongst the Director's Fortnight selections. Having seen it a couple of weeks back, I can't say I particularly enjoyed the experience. I'll surely have more to say closer to the release date, but I think it's one of the best made bad movies I've seen in quite a while. Wait, does that make sense? Yes. Yes it does.

Australian filmmakers have a strong history with short film success and this year Nash Edgerton will feature amongst Cannes' official short selections with Bear. The film, in which he stars, is Edgerton's followup to award-winning short Spider and his debut feature The Square. According to the press release Bear was co-written by Edgerton and David Michôd, who you will all know as the director of Animal Kingdom. Perhaps the rising profile of Blue Tongue Films, the production company behind Kingdom, The Square and more, gave it a leg up, but it's exciting nonetheless.


Stay tuned to the blog during the Cannes Film Festival to see how these films are being received by the press from France and around the world.

When the Dogtooth Falls Out

As you may or may not recall - all depending on how long you have been reading this blog - I saw Giorgos Lanthimos' Dogtooth at the Melbourne International Film Festival in 2009. I did not like it and walked out at around the 50-minute mark. I had been battling a particularly deranged variation of the flu (I maintain it was swine!) at the time, so I decided to pack up my belongings, go home and sleep. I've never second-guessed myself or regretted it, but my interest was recently piqued again by the film's Oscar nomination. Dogtooth received a local DVD release at last in mid-February and I decided to place it on my Quickflix queue to give it a re-evaluation and last night I finally watched it.

I can confirm that I made it through all 90 minutes this time. And not just that, but I didn't actively hate it, either! I think we can consider this a win for the film. Alas, I'm not all retroactive "masterpiece" on the beast.


One of major issues with the film beforehand was its almost slavish devotion to arthouse conventions just as much as mainstream films are to their own traditions. Unfortunately, I still think they suffocate the film for large stretches. The long, unmoving camera shots; the flat-toned acting that would be called "Ed Wood-ian" if it were in English; the abrupt end that doesn't give any sort of closure whatsoever; the numerous "look! i'm evocative!" moments that all but call for the film to be retitled Taboo: The Movie. The acting is the one I am most confused by. Were they acting? They all sounded like particularly bad amateur actors reading of cue cards. I could understand this from the children due to their sheltered upbringing, but the adults, too? Maybe someone could fill me in on the reasons for this? And unlike, say, Sofia Coppola's Somewhere, which uses a very similar visual style, I didn't think the static camera was all that interesting here.

Nevertheless, without the blur of disease I found some quite interesting things being said about the natural desires and instincts of young people. No matter how much you shelter them, a teenager (were they teenagers?) will always face certain issues in their life. The boy working out before his meeting with Christina was particularly telling. And, surprisingly, of all the provocative stuff being thrust about, it was the incest that felt most natural and relevant. Go figure.


As an unconventional take on an issue that has being more and more prevalent in recent years, I still can't say Dogtooth entirely worked for me. I can't quite tell whether I a) didn't "get" it at all, or b) I "got" it much earlier than Lanthimos thinks I should and then spent the rest of the movie feeling scenes were unnecessary. "Oh, another scene where the kids do some weird taught behaviour as if it's normal? Sure!" But I feel like I can now at least marginally appreciate what's trying to be said. I will say that no matter how much my opinion may have varied, I can say quite firmly that I didn't find it "hilarious" like this poster quote from Nicolas Rapold in the New York Times would have me think.

If I had to do MIFF2009 over again, however, I wouldn't change a thing. I'll always have Dogtooth as a reminder of how one's state of mind can have an impact on the reader of a film. It's good to be reminded that opinions change over time. I routinely find myself at odds with people who think their opinion is most definitely the right one - honestly, how many times have you read a commenter at a blog say "fact is, you're wrong! the movie is great/terrible" - as I've always held the belief that if films weren't meant to be subjective then what's the point? And it's particularly nice, if a tad confusing, to be subjective with my own self. This could lead to all sorts of doubts and worries about movies that I have no desire or time to watch a second time just to decide whether my initial reaction was right. And even then... I can't erase the fact that I loathed Dogtooth upon initial viewing. What makes this second viewing any more "correct" than the first?

I feel like I'm sending myself down a dangerous warren that I don't have the inclination to dive into.


Funny story: I recently visited my hometown of Geelong for my brother's birthday and whilst sitting around my mother asks if I'd seen Dogtooth (after an initial "dog... dog... something" forgetfulness of the title.) I chuckled and said I'd see half of it. Mum didn't quite know what to think of it, but I was suitable impressed that she'd seen it (it aired on Foxtel). My mum is a curious woman though - our film conversations can routinely swing from discussing Michael Haneke's Hidden to, er, Tom Shadyak's Evan Almighty and our opinions differed wildly on Shutter Island, which she watched multiple times within a few days. Hmmm. As for Dogtooth, she was much in the "I don't quite know what to think of it" camp, which is as understandable a place to be as any other, I suspect. She had to cover her eyes during the infamous feline scene, but didn't every cat lover? :(


So, take away from all of this whatever you choose to. I'm going to mark Dogtooth up to a C+, which is certainly an improvement! I'm going to leave you with my favourite image from the film. I liked it a lot because it the one that felt most like a shot from Invasion of the Body Snatchers, which I think would make an interesting double feature with Lanthimos' film, don't you think?


My dogtooth has fallen out and now I can move on.

London Calling

I hadn't seen this poster (a quad, naturally) for the 54th BFI London Film Festival, but MUBI named it their "poster of the day" and now that I have seen it I can't disagree. It's wonderful.

Granted, the idea of a poster made from movie posters is like crack to me, but I love this visual motif of torn movie posters. They hold so much visual depth and they're always fun to explore and what better way to sell a film festival than on, ya know, films? The below poster is a quad, as UK posters always are, and the posters featured on it are the British quad versions. I don't think you'll find that Requiem for a Dream design on a standard one sheet. And other times the traditionally sized posters for Lost in Translation, Sideways or This is England just work better in quad form since they work a horizontal design.

How many posters can you spot within the design?


There are the obvious ones that stand out: The Man Who Knew Too Much, Solaris, This is England, Jamon Jamon, Tonight Let's All Make Love in London (yes please), Kanal and Andrei Rublev. I can then also make out The Wrestler, Che, Requiem for a Dream, Sideways, Always Famous, My Beautiful Launderette, The Men Who Stare at Goats, The Long Good Friday (two variations on the design, actually), The Crime on Monsieur Lange, Nine Queens, Lost in Translation, Punch Drunk Love and Dutchman.

Meanwhile, there are a few others that, if someone said what they were, I'd go "well, obviously!" such as the design with the sunflowers, the H with the star in the middle and the red design of the faces that has a quote that, I think, reads "Funny" from BBC Online. Any helpers out there? Mubi has a larger version of the image, although it cuts off parts from the bottom and the side for some reason.

Aussies are Toronto Bound

It's always interesting to see how Australian films fare on the international festival circuit. Of the four biggies - Toronto, Berlin, Cannes and Venice - it is only the first two that seem to ever have a decent representation. Cannes occasionally welcomes a local film in one of their prestige sidebars (I went back ten years and Jane Campion's Bright Star was the only Palme d'Or nominee) while, if I remember correctly, the Venice Film Festival is stingy towards out product year in year out.

The Toronto International Film Festival just released its full roster and while the Aussie contingent can't reach last year's tally, six titles are going to be showing, which is good news for all. Last year TIFF audiences were let in on The Loved Ones and rewarded it with the Midnight Madness top honours. It has yet to be released here in Australia (it recently received a new Halloween-inspired release date that, sadly, it is no longer eligible for this year's AFI awards), one film that did get a release was Mao's Last Dancer, which became one of the highest grossing Australian films of all time. Let's see what TIFF 2010 has in store.

Blame is another film that recently changed release dates and, thus, is no longer competing in the AFI Awards. Nevertheless, this Perth-filmed thriller tells of a group of teens/twenty-somethings who decide to commit the perfect murder, but are brought undone by messy mistakes. It stars Kestie Morassi, Sophie Lowe, Simon Stone, Damian de Montemas and Mark Leonard Winter and is directed by Michael Henry. I didn't hear much out of it's MIFF premiere, unfortunately.


Controversial teen high school drama Wasted on the Young will be screening at TIFF. It sorta sounds like 2:37 mated with Gasper Noe and several people who saw it at the Sydney Film Festival were not to pleased while others were suitably impressed. It's local release is set for early 2011 and I wonder how an international audience will respond to it. Completely different is Louise Alston's Jucy, the director's follow up to the charming romantic comedy All My Friends are Leaving Brisbane. I really enjoyed that one, but the trailer for Jucy looks just abominable (watch the trailer below). Naturally, I am now intrigued to see what it was that got it accepted into TIFF.



Two documentaries will screen, one of which is Mark Hartley's Machete Maidens Unleashed, which recently had its world premiere at MIFF and which I reviewed. It's probably got a subject matter that would be of interest to a more global lot of viewers, but the movie isn't as good as Hartley's first doco Not Quite Hollywood. The second documentary screening is Mother of Rock: Lillian Roxon, which I had never even heard about. Filmink describes it as "a fascinating insight into the life of the acclaimed rock journalist and an overview of the 1960s record industry." Okay then.

The biggest title, however, that most of us Aussie cinephiles are looking for at Toronto will be Griff the Invisible. As far as I can recall, Griff will be the first locally made superhero movie since The Return of Captain Invincible in 1983 (starring Alan Arkin, no less). This new film from first time director Leon Ford stars Ryan Kwanten (sure to get some True Blood fans in the audience for this one) and Maeve Dermody. We recently marvelled at some images from the film and I'm loving the festival poster that was designed by, of course, Jeremy Saunders.

We'll see how they all go once they've screened, but here's hoping they're all good and the Canadians like them.

MIFF 2010 Round-Up

As I type this the final sessions of MIFF 2010 are about to be unveiled, including the Australian premiere of Scott Pilgrim Vs the World, which I am seeing tomorrow. I could have waiting until then and included it in here, but that would mean I'd have to wait and I really couldn't be bothered!

MIFF is exhausting enough doing 23 films, so I can't imagine how some of my fellow Melburnian film fanatics - Lee Zachariah, Thomas Caldwell and Richard Watts included - who see upwards of 70 feel. I plan to write more reviews of some of the other films I have seen at the fest, although some of them might come around when they receive a theatrical release (Red Hill for instance). One film you won't see me review is Clara Law's Like a Dream because it was my sole walk out of the festival. It wasn't exactly good in any way, but I was just so tired and when you're not enjoying a movie sometimes you just have to just throw in the towel.

I have ranked all 22 films and I'm glad that I was able to see so many good movies. Only at around #17 do the films truly start getting a bit iffy. And, of course, titles like Certified Copy could very easily rise even higher as the process of time works its magic.

Note that some of the "Review" links below send you to Trespass Mag where I did a few MIFF pieces. Enjoy.

1. Dreamland (dir. Ivan Sen - Review)
2. Brotherhood (dir. Nicolo Donato - Review)
3. The Illusionist (dir. Sylvain Chomet)
4. I Love You Phillip Morris (dir. Glenn Ficcara & John Requa - Review)
5. Four Lions (dir. Chris Morris)
6. Life During Wartime (dir. Todd Solondz - Review)
7. Certified Copy (dir. Abbas Kiarostami)
8. City of Life and Death (dir. Chuan Lu)
9. Jean-Michael Basquiat: The Radiant Child (dir. Tamra Davis)
10. Red Hill (dir. Patrick Hughes - Review)
11. Women Without Men (dir. Shirin Neshat)
12. The Actresses (dir. Je-Yong Lee)
13. Beeswax (dir. Andrew Bujalski)
14. Machete Maidens Unleashed! (dir. Mark Hartley - Review)
15. Cane Toads: The Conquest (dir. Mark Lewis)
16. The Myth of the American Sleepover (dir. David Robert Mitchell - Review)
17. Blank City (dir. Celine Danhier)
18. Winter's Bone (dir. Debra Granik - Review)
19. Piggies (dir. Robert Glinksi)
20. 1981 (dir. Ricardo Trogi - Review)
21. She, A Chinese (dir. Xiaolu Guo)
22. The Silent House (dir. Gustavo Hernández - Review)

Those final two are the only ones that I would consider truly terrible cinema, so all in all it was a very successful festival!


The Men:
Two performances stand out from the pack: Ewan McGregor in I Love You Phillip Morris and David Denkic from Brotherhood. McGregor hasn't been this alive on screen in years and is his best performance in over a decade (I'd have to go back to before Moulin Rouge!, even, to find a better performance from him). He's so knowing about his surroundings and balances the fine mix of flamboyance and sweetness. Denkic on the other hand is all bubbling rage, sexual longing and sadness and during Brotherhood's best scenes he is the focal point.

Other male performances that registered were Steve Bisley in Red Hill, Ciarán Hinds in Life During Wartime, John Hawkes in Winter's Bone and while William Shimell is obviously playing second fiddle to Juliette Binoche in Certified Copy he has some fine, delicate work there, too. Lastly a big - BIG - shoutout to the terrible ensemble of Four Lions, my favourite of which was probably Kayvan Novak (he's sexy too!).


The Women:
You don't win Best Actress at Cannes for just being pretty, so it's no surprise that Juliette Binoche shone brightly in Certified Copy. So many expressions go by on that woman's face over the running time of Kiarostami's movie, you'd think she was going to pull a muscle! Jennifer Lawrence was low-key in Winter's Bone, but still fine, however I much preferred her support in the form of Dale Dickey. Allison Janney and Ally Sheedy, the latter in a bizarre but hilarious cameo, were tops in Life During Wartime and, yet another ensemble, the women of The Actresses were all fantastic but my favourite was definitely Yoon Yeo-Jung.


Experiences:
There were individual moments that I will remember for a very long time. How about the meditative and 2001-inspired ending of Dreamland or the beautiful, stunning end to Sylvain Chomet's The Illusionist. I won't ruin it for anybody out there, but the card on the table? It will tear your heart open! Juliette Binoche putting her earrings on in Certified Copy, the discovery of so many long-forgetting films in Machete Maidens Unleashed! (CLEOPATRA WONG is at the very top of my must-see list), the anger I felt at the end of The Silent House, the lush 3D of Cane Toads: The Conquest or that stunning confrontation scene between Ciaran Hinds and Chris Marquette in Life During Wartime. All amazing, all unforgettable.


Sound:
I'm not sure what it was with MIFF this year, but I could fill out the Academy's Best Sound Design/Editing categories just from the movies I saw at this festival alone! The soundscapes of Dreamworld were second-to-none, the shot-blasts of Red Hill were teeth-shattering, the gunfire of City of Life and Death rattled... even the way Binoche's feet clapped against the Tuscan stone paths in Certified Copy felt blissful to me.

Music, too, played a major role in several of the films. Come February 2010 I really hope to see Sylvain Chomet's name listed as a nominee for the Oscar for Best Original Score. His music to The Illusionist was divine. Probably the best score I've heard since Alexandre Desplat's work on Birth. And if you know me that is high praise, indeed.

~-~
And so that about wraps it up. You'll no doubt be hearing about several of these titles throughout the rest of the year and next and I've had a ball. It will be good to be able to back to having a diet free of shoving KFC down by gob and being able to just relax at home in the evening instead of having to rush about hoping to get a good spot in line. And, just quietly, I will be able to get back to such things as Scream to Scream, Scene by Scene, which I'm sure you're excited about (as am I!)

{fin}

MIFF 2010 Review: Brotherhood

Brotherhood
Dir. Nicolo Donato
Year: 2009
Aus Rating: TBC
Running Time: 97mins

I'm not sure what it is that the Danes have in their water supply, but they are somehow able to churn out cinema of a better quality than almost anywhere else. I'm sure any Danish people out there will easily be able to refute such a claim - everybody has serious issues with their home country's film industry - but for such a small country they seem to pop up on the international film circuit far more often than others and Donato is another name to include on the list of names such as Lars Von Trier, Lone Scherfig, Susanne Bier, Anders Thomas Jensen and Thomas Vinterberg. And their abilities to deal with issues such as the Iraq war, religion and, in the case of Brotherhood, homosexuality in ways that put others to shame.

The synopsis for Nicolo Donato’s debut film reads like a satire on film festival movies: Two gay neo-Nazis fall in love! And it’s got subtitles, too. If they ate pudding then this would be a big comical joke. Brotherhood is, however, far more than just a typically mopey arthouse drama trying to shoehorn as many important "issues" into its running time as possible. It is a poignant, tender and ultimately destructive look at how the power of love can tear apart at anybody, anywhere. Even, it would seem, neo-Nazis.


Brotherhood stars Thure Lindhart as Lars, a general who quits the Army after he is accused of sexually harassing several of his soldiers. He soon falls into a crowd of neo-Nazis who aim to rid Denmark of Pakistani refugees, the violence from which is brutal and confronting, but Lars falls for fellow "comrade" Jimmy, played by David Dencik. Together they navigate their insular world, trying to keep this secret that could prove fatal if discovered. It’s a powerful indictment on society’s lack of understanding of gay people, and even the lack of understanding by gay people themselves, as well as a compelling look at Denmark’s hidden race issues and proves to be a stunning, teary-eyed romance between the most unlikely of characters.

Despite the fact that it's about characters as repulsive as neo-Nazis, the way the romance was told was done so delicately that it almost didn't matter. I feel the very point of the film that is you can fall in love with anybody and that no matter the personal circumstances you just can't fight it. Even if you're indoctrinated to hate gay people as they are here, and the gay bashing scene that opens the film is discomforting in its realism, there are some things that even being a neo-Nazi can't protect you from.


Performances are uniformly great with the standout being Denkic. He has mostly worked on television and had a part in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, plus a quick Google search shows he regularly looks nothing like the hulking skinhead that he does here, but his performance blew me away. Such anger and sadness within him, expressed to vividly on his face. The film has the visual look of much Danish cinema - it looks overcast and natural, but that is definitely the best way to represent the material. This isn't a romanticised vision of a gay relationship like Brokeback Mountain. When violence is committed against one of the men it shows in brutal closeup and the way these two men court each other, in their own way, is far more realistic. Brokeback Mountain played its way, Brotherhood plays another and in some ways it's even more impressive.

One might consider the neo-Nazi aspect as, perhaps, a gimmick used to rile up controversy - gay Nazis would surely arouse more interest than a mere gay romance even world, surely - but it works as a parallel to any other group of people, whether it be a sports code, a workplace or wherever. In nearly every society gay people are forced to hide their relationships and here is no different. It also helps that director Donato, who co-wrote the screenplay with Rasmus Birch, has shown the obvious homo-erotic tendencies of the movement and the hypocrisy it implies. This, too, leads to a fascinating look at the inner-workings of the neo-Nazi groups that have apparently found growing numbers in Denmark that I feel I am too uneducated about to really comment. Brotherhood slayed me, I'm not going to lie. A

MIFF 2010 Review: Winter's Bone

Winter's Bone
Dir. Debra Granik
Year: 2010
Aus Rating: TBC
Running Time: 100mins

Debra Granik came to prominence with her debut feature Down to the Bone, which put a spotlight on an up-and-coming actress named Vera Farmiga who would go on to win the Los Angeles Film Critics Circle Award for her performance and, five years later, become an Oscar-nominee for the George Clooney vehicle Up in the Air. With her second film Granik has cast another up-and-coming actress in the form of Jennifer Lawrence. I have not seen Down to the Bone (it went direct-to-DVD here in Australia,) but it seems obvious that Granik has an eye for spotting talent. I am not too sure, however, whether the film in this case holds up like the performances of her 20-year-old star and those around her.

Lawrence plays "Ree Dolly", a 17-year-old whose meth-cooking father has disappeared, leaving her to care for a near-catatonic mother and two younger siblings. She chops wood, scrounges food for the family horse, teaches her brother and sister how to shoot for squirrel and how to cook moose soup while trying to locate the father who has placed their lowly Missouri home as a part of his Bond to be released from prison. Without him they will lose the house and they're out on the street (or, more likely, the dusty dirty road since this town doesn't appear to have too many paved streets).


The sub-sub-genre of movies about hard-done by women doing what they have to do to get by has had some true, honest to God astonishing movies in the last ten years. Primarily Kimberley Peirce's Boys Don't Cry, Patty Jenkins' Monster and Courtney Hunt's Frozen River, all of which Winter's Bone probably owes some sort of debt. Where Granik's film differs is in its protagonist. Lawrence's Ree Dolly is not as powerful a character as the leads in those three films - all of which garnered Oscar nominations (and a couple of wins) for their leading ladies - in that she doesn't go through any big change. She doesn't have a big moment that will pull on the heartstrings of audience members. In fact, she barely changes at all from the opening scene to the last. She doesn't create strength or discover anything within her she never knew she had, which is something that rids the film of something structurally crucial.

Therein lies the problem with Winter's Bone. A set up so filled with possibility, a white-trash Twin Peaks if you will where secret organisations and double-crossings are the norm, but Granik, who co-wrote the screenplay with Anne Rosellini from the novel by Daniel Woodrell, doesn't do enough with it. Once the mystery of where her father is resolved - a solidly plotted mystery, that must be said, with several excellently filmed setpieces - the film just seems to end with no dramatic arc having been completed. The most powerful scene comes early when Ree must walk her siblings to school and sees the friends and the life she was forced to give up so she could become the mother she is far too young to be.


Lawrence is very good in the lead role, but it's in the supporting roles where the film truly shines. John Hawkes receives Best in Show honours as the uncle who knows more than he's letting on. Dale Dickey, a woman whose face is so recognisable and distinct, is also powerful as a local who tries to warn Ree of the ring of trouble she's stepping into. Garret Dillahunt is a surprise addition to the cast as the local sheriff while newcomer Lauren Sweetser shows strong support as Ree’s best friend. Granik's cinematographer Michael McDonough and production designer Mark White should also be congratulated for their accomplished work making this tiny town of farmers and gamblers look as authentic as it does.

It's just a shame that, in the end, Winter's Bone proves to be such a strangely uninvolving film. It starts, some events happen, and then it ends and everything is just as it was 100 minutes earlier. The film is worthy for its performances, and Lawrence has already used this calling card to her advantage by scoring a big role in X-Men: First Class, but audiences shouldn't expect something of brute force. It's quiet, unassuming and coasts through its running time without ever raising much of a sweat. It will work for others, but me? Not so much. C+

MIFF 2010 Review: The Silent House

The Silent House
Dir. Gustavo Hernández
Year: 2010
Aus Rating: TBC
Running Time: 79mins

Sometimes seeing a movie at a film festival can provide viewers with the chance of hearing from the people who made it. They can provide insight and give a perspective of how hard it truly is to make a movie in a time when the fate of many hangs perilously on the whim of a few people. One thumb down and years of your life can go down the drain. I recently walked out on Clara Law's new film Like a Dream - for reasons including the quality and my own inability to stay awake after a day of work, so you won't be seeing a review of that popping up - but I didn't feel the urge to seek her out and spit in her face. I imagine if Uruguayan director Gustavo Hernández had have been in the vicinity of the screening of The Silent House that I attended then I very well may have done just that.

The first film from Uruguay that I have ever seen and it is not an auspicious start. Receiving its fair share of press for its gimmick of being filmed in real time in "one take" - although that credit seems dubious at best due to the number of scenes of pitch darkness - and for a decent amount of its running time it manages to do exactly what it should have been aiming for. A lot of creepiness alongside several big frights - one involving a Polaroid camera is particularly jump-out-of-your-seat worthy - alongside numerous nods to well-serving movie clichés. Yes, things go bump in the night, the camera lingers on mirrors just a fraction too long, ominous ghostly children appear and so on. What I wasn't betting on, however, was the absurdity of the final act that undoes all the good work that came before.


The Silent House stars Florencia Colucci as "Laura" and Gustavo Alonso as her father, both of whom arrive at the run down country cottage of a local acquaintance (Abel Tripaldi) in order to fix it up and make it suitable for sale. Cue nightfall and scary noises coming from upstairs. What follows is scary and tense and a little bit stupid. These characters certainly belong in a scary movie, I'll grant them that. They go upstairs when they're explicitly warned not to, they investigate noises that they know they shouldn't, they go up the stairs when they should be going out the front door (it's insulting) and, here's a tip, if you discover a girl screaming and covered in the blood standing in the middle of the road DON'T return to where she came from and definitely DON'T go inside and investigate for yourself. You're just asking for trouble.

Of course director Gustavo Hernández and screenwriter Oscar Estévez have other things on their mind and pull a twist so farcical and absurd out of thin air that it beggars belief. And not only that, but they steal this ridiculous twist from ANOTHER MOVIE that also failed due to the absurdity of its twist. Who do these people think they are? I am sure the filmmakers would say it was supposed to pull the rug out from under the viewer or that it is a statement on how the Uruguay government mistreated its residents during some war in the 1950s (horror movie directors have been pulling that trick since the 1950s, it ain't original), but whatever it was meant to be about it's stupid and even insulting. I wasted 80 minutes on a movie that was so willing to mock its audience. If Gustavo Hernández had've been there that night I would've given him a piece of my mind. Screw him and his movie. D-

MIFF 2010 Review: Machete Maidens Unleashed!

Machete Maidens Unleashed!
Dir. Mark Hartley
Year: 2010
Aus Rating: TBC
Running Time: 85mins

Have you heard of these movies? The Big Bird House? The Hot Box? Cleopatra Wong? How about Ebony, Ivory & Jade, Cover Girl Models, Night of the Cobra Woman, Beyond Atlantis, Dynamite Johnson, TNT Jackson, Savage! or Black Mama, White Mama? If not then you are in for a treat with Machete Maidens Unleashed!, an unofficial sequel to Mark Hartley's brilliant 2008 documentary Not Quite Hollywood that charted the history of Aussie genre films of the 1970s and '80s. All of those titles listed above, and others like The One-Armed Executioner and the Beast of Blood franchise, spawned out of the Filipino film industry with the help of American filmmakers like Roger Corman and now rank as near unknown and forgotten cult niche titles for the amusement of stoned college students.

The same crew that worked on Not Quite Hollywood - the opening night film of MIFF 2008 and my #6 film of that year - have again been assembled to craft this ode to Filipino action movies. Snappily edited, Machete Maidens Unleashed! is simply 85 minutes of clips from movies about nubile young actress firing rifles, karate chopping and waving machetes around in between bouts of baring their breasts while mud wrestling in jungle prisons and causing political uprisings through the backwater swamps of he Philippines.


Interspersed throughout all of this pan and scan insanity (most of the films have never been remastered for DVD release) are interviews with well-known directors like John Landis, Brian Trenchard-Smith and Joe Dante as well as notable behind the scenes figures like George Corman, Eddie Romero, Jack Hill and an assortment of actors that made a presence for themselves in this sub-genre of film. Names like Gloria Hendry, Margaret Markov, Colleen Camp, Judy Brown and Marlene Clark may not be familiar names, but they should be after you've heard their fascinating anecdotes about working in the jungles of the Philippines. Higher profile names like R Lee Ermy, Sid Haig and Chris Mitchum are also there for their own hilarious stories, but unfortunately Pam Grier, surely the biggest name to arise out of the Filipino genre films - she made The Big Doll House, Women in Cages, Twilight People, The Big Bird Cage and Black Mama, White Mama before blaxploitation hits Coffy and Foxy Brown made her a star - refused to be interviewed. While everyone seems at least partially ashamed of their contributions to cinema here, they are all open and admit to being willing participants. It's a shame that Grier didn't see it the same way.

"Rated R for Ridiculous", as the poster says, sums up Mark Hartley's second documentary feature perfectly. I haven't even got into titles such as For Y'ur Height Only that starred Filipino dwarf superstar Weng Weng as a James Bond spoof or Up from the Depths, which was made to cash in on the success of Piranha one year earlier. If movies such as Machete Maidens Unleashed! achieve anything substantial then it's making someone like me really want to seek out movies like Cleopatra Wong (nuns with assault rifles) and Dynamite Johnson (some undecipherable plot that involves a robotic dragon). Hopefully these titles get some sort of DVD release after this movie gets seen by the right people like many of the Ozploitation films did after Not Quite Hollywood.


Sadly, Machete Maidens doesn't achieve the levels of success that director Hartley had with Not Quite Hollywood. Whereas that film spanned various genres from sex comedies to horror and science fiction, this one is far more limited to the films it covers. It is easy to mistake many of the movie clips featured within as being all from the one movie about a group of sexy and sassy American women being held captive in a prison deep within the jungle wherein they must use their sexual force to break out of. There's also a distinct lack of passion compared to its predecessor. Perhaps its the fact that these films are even more obscure than Patrick or Dead-End Drive In of the so-called "Ozploitation" movement, but there's no effort made to show how the effects of these Filipino genre films are still being felt today. Perhaps the Filipino film industry is as closed tight as Imelda Marcos' box of secrets and umbrellas, but Machete Maidens Unleashed doesn't have quite the same insight. Nevertheless, it is still a wild and hilariously entertaining hour and a half of absurd insanity. B

MIFF 2010 Review: The Myth of the American Sleepover

The Myth of the American Sleepover
Dir. David Robert Mitchell
Year: 2010
Aus Rating: TBC
Running Time: 97mins

For a movie that was apparently "several years in the making", David Robert Mitchell's debut feature The Myth of the American Sleepover seems curiously unacquainted with its central characters. The likes of Maggie (Claire Sloma, who's given the most to do), Rob (impressive Marlon Morton), Claudia (Amanda Bauer) and Scott (Brett Jacobsen) all feel like recognisable and realistic teens, but lack a certain deeper understanding that Mitchell should have provided for his non-professional actors. The actors, uniformly good, play their roles, but they don't go anywhere that transcends the quaint material. This makes Sleepover an affable film to watch, but one lacking any substantial drama to make it truly memorable.

Set over one night towards the end of the American summer, several teenagers' experiences mimic one another as they trawl the neighbourhood, going from one sleepover to the next. I don't recall any of my sleepovers being this big and elaborate - unfortunately, no Ouija boards for me - so perhaps it is an American thing, but the character-based situations that arise are familiar and audiences should respond accordingly. Some of the characters will learn something about themselves and others over this night that, I imagine, but nothing incredibly important. Perhaps there is just too much restraint in showing this and instead makes the events transpiring feel a little bit too inconsequential.

All the archetypes are there - the horny boys, the girl desperate to be popular and her mousy friend, the gay boy who hasn't told anybody, the slutty one, the bitchy one and so on. Some are instantly more interesting than others and viewers will surely pin point the one they identify with moth. Familiar teenage occurrences that adults look back on with embarrassment and laughs like walking around the supermarket in circles just to catch a fleeting glimpse of that cute someone you passed earlier, swiping a can of beer from a stranger's open esky or doing anything, leaving behind all dignity, to "accidentally" cross paths with a crush are well played by the cast and feel organic to the story and brought a smile to my face. Only one plot strand, involving a college dropout who's attracted to a set of twins, is truly superfluous and should have been axed. This thread verges far to close to a juvenile Hollywood mentality.


Tracking shots featuring youthful exuberance remind of Van Sant and characters present an exterior that masks their inner feelings like one would expect from an independent study of teenagers. Cinematographer Juli Perez IV has made this suburbia recognisable and real and, thankfully, characters don't succumb to silliness and convene by accident like a Paul Haggis movie. I just wish these characters were given something truly affecting to work with. The Myth of the American Sleepover is a slice of life, sure, but when it's all over and done it doesn't feel like much has been gained or achieved by any of the characters or the audience. B-

MIFF 2010 Review: Dreamland

Dreamland
Dir. Ivan Sen
Year: 2010
Aus Rating: TBC
Running Time: 86mins

Ivan Sen burst out of the filmmaking gates eight years ago with Beneath Clouds, a beautiful film that preceded Samson & Delilah with its tale of two quiet Aboriginal teens on the run from the law and themselves. His second film has come 8 years later and it shares many things with Beneath Clouds while also sharing nothing at all. Dreamland is filmed in raw black and white and is, perhaps, trying to say something about our place on this Earth and in this universe. Dreamland is a film that I sat and watched and gradually surrendered to. It captivated me and by the time it ended I felt I had encountered something akin to a transcendental experience. It's truly special and I feel blessed for having witnessed it.

Sen has spent the last eight years mostly making Australian television documentaries, most notably Yellow Fella in 2005, but I can't help but feel something happened to him on a personal level between then and now. Dreamland was, for me, concerned with issues of life and death, Earth and space - who we are, why we are and where we come from. By film's end has "Dan", the film's only major character, discovered the birthplace of life as we know it? Has he discovered the secret to life on other planets? I'm not sure, they are mere theories, but as human being are we not prone to seek out mysteries? The mysteries of alien life, the mysteries of Dreamland. Are they, perhaps, one and the same? Is Sen's film an essay of sorts on what it means to feel alien to ourselves and to others? Are we the aliens? Take the baton and the run with it, folks, I imagine the possibilities of this film are infinite.


Dreamland stars Daniel Roberts as Dan, a man to spends the entirety of the film's 86 minutes travelling through the Nevada desert, home to Area 51. He visits various locations that have history in terms of abductions and UFO sightings. He drives around these areas and hikes up mountains; he performs star jumps, guzzles water and urinates on the side of the road. He occasionally comes across other people, but we never learn anything about them. They could be as lost as he, seeking their own private redemption. Dan never speaks. He does meet, albeit briefly, April, his soon-to-be ex wife who is played by Tasma Walton. Is it really her? Is she an illusion or an oasis? She doesn't seem real, materialising right in front of us and seemingly speaking in riddles. "Have you found that thing that you’re looking for?” Dan doesn't respond. Is he looking for aliens, for himself, for her, for God or for something completely foreign to us?

The film has next to no dialogue whatsoever apart from the sounds of a frequency radio and the brief scenes with Walton. Sequences seem to have no rhyme or reason to them other than to provoke some sort of internal reaction. There are moments of horror, like the scene where Dan hears something cry out in the Nevada desert. Interspersed throughout are scenes of space footage that may or may not be real. Is it Dan? The movie is a soundscape of ideas and the speakers are constantly blaring out a mixture of bleeps, boops, static, alien voices and synthesised score. There are on screen quotes by Giordano Bruno, a famed astronomer who was burnt at the stake in 1600 and a speech by former President of the USA Harry Truman.


There is a pureness to Dreamland that made me want to weep. I could be reductive and call this a cross between David Lynch's INLAND EMPIRE and Peter Weir's Picnic at Hanging Rock, and if that makes you feel better than by all means go with it. It is as apt a description as I could come up with, but there are also aspects of Rolf de Heer's Epsilon, Lawrence Johnston's Night and Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Dreamland, however, is not a film that can be judged based on traditional crafts such as acting, writing, directing, editing and photography. Much like INLAND EMPIRE, but even more dramatically, Dreamland is probably more concerned with being an art project that just happens to be exhibited in cinemas rather than being classified as actual film. Sen directed, wrote, photographed, edited, composed and designed the sound while it was filmed on location. The black and white photography, filled with camera tricks and visual distortions, lends the region a definitely otherworldly atmosphere.

I’ve never been one of those people who feel gradings are beneath them, or who only assign films a mark due to some sort of cinephile peer pressure. With Dreamland, however, I have decided to refuse a score for the simple fact that no amount of fives, sevens, nines or tens out of ten, nor any A+, C- and F grades can truly express the feeling I hold deep within my soul for this movie. This film touched my heart in ways that goes beyond mere letter grades and touched a pure point within that only I can tap into and reference. No matter what I say, think or feel I can guarantee that you will feel different about it so to quantify it with a grade would be dishonest to myself and to you dear readers. It touched the very essence of my being in a way I may not ever understand and for that I will be eternally grateful.


Dreamland has one more MIFF screening on Wednesday 28 July. If you can attend, please do. I am sure there are many out there who will hate this movie - the man sitting next to me yesterday was not impressed and spent the second half with his head in his lap - but I feel this film is so important and yet probably won't even get distribution here. Why spend money of Scott Pilgrim or The Kids Are All Right at MIFF when there is something like Dreamland waiting to be discovered?