2 Documentaries worth seeing!

Thursday April 29, 2010

Next up was a preview of the film that premiered, and was the hottest ticket, at this year's Sundance: "Exit Through the Gift Shop" (***-87 minutes). The film is shrouded in mystery, which only adds to its appeal. In fact, the credits say "Film by Banksy" but there are no director credits to be seen.

Bansky is the elusive British street graffiti artist whose works have mysteriously appeared all over the world. In fact, he is interviewed on screen in darkness and wearing a hoodie to keep from being identified from those who would love to prosecute the dude. But, curiously, this filmic work is not about Banksy but more about a strange Frenchman, Thierry Guetta, who goes about videotaping his life and, more recently, graffiti artists.

The film begins by giving background on this strange character who seems to be quite the entrepreneur-setting up a successful clothing shop in L.A. However, most of the film documents his main activity as a rogue videographer of these artists (such as Invader, Shepard Fairey, Neckface and Swoon) who stealthily display their work on buildings, walls, and any available outdoor structure visible to all who pass by. Banksy is the #1 guy, however, who is the person whom Thierry meets and videos to know end-constantly following him in the shadows while documenting his work.

When Banksy suggests that Thierry should edit the hundreds and hundreds of tapes, the results are disastrous. So, Banksy takes over the project and, supposedly, this is the film that is created. And when Banksy suggests that Thierry (or "Mr Brainwash" as he aptly names himself) put together an art show of his own, the results, in June of 2008 in L.A. are startling.

The film is ably narrated by actor Rhys Ifans and the editing is fast paced and never bores while raising a multitude of questions, not the least of which is: Is this really art? And, as a friend, who was personally appalled, pointed out after the screening: Is it morally acceptable to deface private property in the name of art? The bottom line for me, however, was that this was an entertaining, humorous take on a subject that was previously in the background but is now a little more front and center.

At the screening hosted by Maryland Film Festival Director Jed Dietz (gearing up for the 11th annual Maryland Film Festival on May 6th) was Bart Walker, a movie vet associated with award winning films, including last year's "PRECIOUS". He's one of the partners of Cinetic Media, (prominent in the independent film world) which controls the new company distributing this film. At the Q&A, Bart said he has never met Banksy (someone in the audience asked him if he was actually the allusive street artist), but he has met Thierry. Although there were rumors coming out of Sunday that Thierry is not a real person and that the film is a total hoax, he confirmed that the Frenchman, a couple of weeks ago, put on a wildly successful show in New York (complete with lines of people that snaked around the block). And, as the film pointed out, he did design the cover of Madonna's latest album.

Banksy??

Thierry Guetta

Graffiti art by Banksy

Director of Maryland Film Festival Jed Dietz (l) and Cinetic Media
partner Bart Walker lead the post-screening Q&A

Sunday May 2, 2010

Back-to-back docs with another great offering by The Cinema Sunday folks. Time to leave the world of graffiti artists to artists who are at the forefront of another genre: the world of underground films.

67 year old Bronx-born twin brothers George & Mike Kuchar have created over 200 films since they graduated from N.Y.'s High School of Industrial Arts. And if you ever meet anybody more eccentric then these guys, I'd like to know. You may not have heard their names before, but after you see "It Came from Kuchar" (****-86 minutes), written and directed by Jennifer M. Kroot, you'll know full well why these 2 guys are considered icons & influential by such notables film makers & celebrities as Atom Egoyan ("The Sweet Hereafter"), Buck Henry, Guy Maddin ("My Winnipeg") , Wayne Wang ("The Joy Luck Club"), Baltimore's own John Waters, and countless others.

This is a sweet, loving, hilarious doc that gives a terrific profile of 2 guys who refused to sell out to Hollywood. To this day they continue to make movies, both together & separately, using their own creativity for special effects while at the same time avoiding casting agents and agencies by employing their friends & acquaintances as actors.

In documentaries such as this, you have the usual time spent with talking heads. But what really makes these 86 minutes worth its weight in gold are the numerous clips presented from such Kuchar classics like “Corruption of the Damned,” “Sins of the Fleshapoids” & “Hold Me While I’m Naked (which was ranked 52nd in the Critics' Poll of the 100 best films of the 20th century, appearing originally in the January 4, 2000 edition of The Village Voice).

At first you'll think "Ed Wood", but after a while you'll realize that these guys know exactly what they're doing and don't give a hoot if there isn't a CGI frame within a universe of their film. In the end, you'll understand that there is 100% talent and commitment behind all the camp, sexual innuendo, cheesy science fiction/horror effects, and overdone melodrama they create in film after film.

George ended up in San Francisco in the early '70's and, as the film shows, was an accomplished cartoonist; working, in fact, with the great Robert Crumb & Art Spiegelman . And, cartoonist Bill Griffith confessed that his "Zippy the Pinhead" was based on George. You can see that talent translated on the screen, which resemble in many ways the outlandish & outrageous visuals they create on the page. And George still resided in San Fran working, since 1971, as a film department teacher at the San Francisco Art Institute where he is revered by his students-past and present. All the while, he continues to spool out those underground movies.

The best interviews on screens are with the brothers themselves-even though Mike, who never fixates on the camera or interviewer, appears, as someone suggested during the Q&A afterwards, to suffering from asperger's syndrome.

The brothers have been honored at the 2007 Telluride Film Festival and in 2000 here at the 2nd Maryland Film Festival where they appeared along with many of their works. It was therefore fitting that Jed Dietz do the introductory honors & lead the post-screening Q&A. To prepare up for what we were about to see, he shared a hilarious quote written by George in 1989 reminiscing about his Bronx childhood; which perfectly explains the minds of these brilliant artists who are as eccentric as the movies they make:

"Going to elementary school in the Bronx was a series of humiliations which featured Wagnerian women in an endless chorus of: ‘Keep your mouth shut,’ ‘Where’s your homework?’, and ‘Spit that gum out!’ The male teachers were much shorter than the females and whatever masculine apparatus they possessed was well concealed amid the folds of oversized trousers. After school my twin brother and I would escape to the cinema, fleeing from our classmates; urban urchins who belched up egg creams and clouds of nicotine. In the safety of the theater we’d sit through hour upon hour of Indian squaws being eaten alive by fire ants, debauched pagans coughing up blood as the temples of God crashed down on their intestines, and naked monstrosities made from rubber lumbering out of radiation-poisoned waters to claw the flesh off women who had just lost their virginity.

"When three hours were up we would leave the theater refreshed and elated, having seen a world molded by adults, a world we would eventually mature into. At home, supper simmered on the stove, smoking, bubbling, and making plopping sounds as blisters of nutritious gruel burst just like the volcanic lava in those motion pictures. Oh how I wanted to grow up real fast and be one of the adults who sacrificed half-naked natives to Krakatoa or dripped hot wax on a nude body that resembled Marie Antoinette."

The film has been placed in limited release since April 9th.

Mike (l) & George Kuchar

On the set with The Kuchars

Jed Dietz (Director of The Maryland Film Festival) leads the Q&A

"The Square" **** (116 minutes)

Thursday April 22, 2010

Although not a Buddhist, I am somewhat a believer in Karma. That if you do something bad or good, somehow, someway, that act or deed will come back to either reward you or bite you in the posterior. I couldn't help thinking about that watching Australian director/screenwriter/actor/stuntman (more or that later) Nash Edgerton’s brilliantly conceived modern film noir “The Square”. The main protagonist, Ray, has so much coming to him that, watching it, I almost felt like I had to duck to get out of the way!

Off to another exiting event at the AFI Silver Theater to attend the advanced screening along with a Q&A with the director. The film is set in a small Australian town in New South Wales where we quickly observe married 40ish Ray (wonderfully played by virtual unknown actor David Roberts, who appeared in 1999’s “Me Myself I” with Rachel Griffiths) involved first in a kickback scheme as a housing supervisor in a housing development, and then having an affair with his married next door neighbor, young attractive Carla (newcomer Claire van der Boom).

Despite all of this, he seems like a pleasant enough bloke, but things start to get a tad more difficult when Carla discovers a hidden suitcase full of money in the attic, and gets the great idea that maybe Ray can take care of her seedy hubby Smithy (Anthony Hayes) so that both could live happily ever after.

In the vein of such noirs as “Blood Simple” & 1998’s great “A Simple Plan”, things (and I do mean lots and lots of things) start to go horribly wrong. I won’t spoil the fun in any way. Just be certain you don’t have to leave your seat for a minute because so much is happening that you’ll be lost trying to figure out the plot lines.

Screenwriters Joel Edgerton (Nash’s younger sibling) & Matthew Dabner have created a brilliant noir that moves at a deliberate but steady pace. And the plot is always plausible and even possible-despite the incredible amount of that bad karma that ensues.

Preceding the screening we were treated to Nash’s 2007 mischievous 9 minute short film “Spider” (which he co-wrote, directed, & starred) which will help to prepare you to no end for the upcoming shenanigans in “The Square”. Although the practice of showing shorts was once a staple in movie houses in the past, and is only carried on today by the brilliant folks over at Pixar, I wish that most films go back to presenting the short film as an appetizer to the main course, instead of the endless ads and/or trailers we are now subjected to. I’m certain that after you experience these 2 gems, you’ll be hankering for the same. And, if you plan to go, be sure to arrive on time because Nash revealed that “Spider” will be offered at every screening of “The Square” throughout the country. You don’t want to miss it!

Both films, released by Apparition, have begun a platform release around the country. Their first appearance is scheduled for the Baltimore/DC area May 7th at The Landmark. Be certain to look for it!

___________________________________________________

After the film, AFI film programmer Todd Hitchcock sat down with Nash for a quick interview followed by an informative Q&A. Here were some of the interesting facts revealed by the director:

-Nash began his career in the early 90’s as a stuntman and he still performs falling down stairs, getting hit by cars, getting shot, etc.-although, understandably, insurance regulations in place by the producers prevented him from participating in that capacity during the filming of “The Square”. He has nearly 100 stunt credits including “The Matrix”, “The Thin Red Line”, “Mission Impossible”, & “Star Wars.
-The film actually premiered 2 years ago and has been playing the festival circuit ever since. The founder of the newly created Apparition Films (which specializes in independents) actually saw it a couple of years ago and had it in mind all along to distribute it once he had his own company.
-Although he keeps hearing comparisons of the film to “Blood Simple”, the director admitted that he never saw the film so he didn't reference it in any way.
-Brother Joel was supposed to be at the screening but was caught in Norway while filming a prequel to “The Thing” during the Icelandic volcanic eruption and he couldn't get a flight out. Joel wanted to return to DC after spending 7 or 8 weeks there last year acting in “A Streetcar Named Desire” playing the part of Stanley.
-Nash spent some time talking about the fabulous casting. He said he was adamant that Ray be played by an unknown and that he look like an ordinary/ everyman guy. He didn't want the audience in any way to be influenced by someone they recognized. As Nash put it, David Roberts, “just had a look on his face that he’s in trouble”. He then went on to talk about, what he called, his best find when he cast the part of 16-year-old Lily, who plays the girlfriend of the hit man hired by Ray to kill Smithy. He said the part was originally written for someone in her late 20’s or early 30’s. Nash worked on a friend’s short film and in it was a 16 year old actress who was unknown at the time, Mia Wasikowska, who reminded him of Sissy Spacek in “Badlands”. It seemed perfect sense to him to instead cast the part as a teenager. Unfortunately, Mia’s career had taken off in between and she has since been cast in “Alice in Wonderland” and the current “The Kids are All Rights". Now that Mia was unavailable, Nash suggested Hanna Mangan Lawrence whom he had worked with at age 12 but would now have been the right age. Coincidentally, the same actress had just worked with Joel on a short film. As it turns out, Hanna gives an understated naive persona that perfectly fits the role making her a great choice.
-Although not usually revealed by film makers, when asked, Nash divulged that the film cost 2 million to make-not unusual for an Independent.
-Regarding his short films, Nash stated he practiced his chops making shorts-making them mainly for himself. As for why he is including “Spider” in the screenings, he humorously stated that the short lets people know “what’s wrong with me, what kind of sense of humor I have, let’s you know what you're in, for in a way, when the film starts, and makes you really ready for it-or not”.
-His current project is a film he and Joel are writing which is a road movie with, not surprisingly, a dark sense of humor.

Ray (David Roberts)

Carla (Claire van der Boom)

Smithy (Anthony Hayes)

AFI film programmer Todd Hitchcock (l) & director Nash Edgerton

"The Joneses" ** 1/2 (96 minutes)

Tuesday April 13, 2010

I'm a huge fan of TV & movie satires. When done right, this form of entertainment can be quite satisfying on a number of levels. For me, the best satirical films that come immediately to mind are 1976's "Network" (satire on the television industry), 1984's "This is Spinal Tap" (satire on the music industry), Mel Brook's 1968 "The Producers" (satire about Broadway conventions), & Kubrick's 1965 brilliant "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb" (satire on the global nuclear war threat).'

First time director/co-screenwriter Derrick Borte (who, not surprisingly, has an advertising background) tries to hit a home run but it turns into a long fly out at the fence with this satire based on consumerism. The premise is based on the catchphrase "keeping up with the Joneses" and, although it begins with great promise, the film unfortunately fizzles out in the last reel or two, when Borte tries to abruptly change direction, loses his way, & turns the plot into a maudlin conventional mess.

David Duchovny (last seen in the 2008 theatrical version of his hit TV series, the "X-files: I Want to Believe") does a more than adequate turn as Steve Jones, the head of an attractive, yet fictional family unit who arrive & set-up shop in an affluent community. He, "wife" Kate (Demi Moore, who gives her best performance in years), along with their teenage "daughter" (Amber Heard) & "son" (Ben Hollingsworth) are all actually working for some unnamed marketing firm (nice to see Lauren Hutton as their employer's go-between contact). The idea is to send these bogus attractive families into communities to try and convince everyone they meet (be it neighbors, golf buds, schoolmates, etc.), using just their attractiveness, popularity, & friendly nature, to buy anything and everything the bogus family uses.

Borte plays beautifully on this concept until the story takes a darker turn involving their next door neighbors Larry & Summer (played by the steady Gary Cole & Glenne Headly). And, of course, you can't have attractive folks living in the same space without personal/sexual motives & tensions getting in the way of the professional plan.

I was very close to giving this a 3 star salute but, because the film maker failed to stick with his conviction to make a definitive commentary on why we buy the things we do, my rating is what it is. However, if I could give a 2 3/4 review this one would probably get it.

A near-miss.

The Joneses (l to r: actors Ben Hollingsworth, Amber Heard,
Demi Moore & David Duchovny)

Steve Jones (l) with his golfing bud & neighbor
Larry (Gary Cole) & friend

"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" **** (154 minutes)

Sunday March 28, 2010

Time for another Sunday morning offering at Cinema Sundays for this film, based on the international bestselling novel by the late Stieg Larsson, that has been generating some terrific buzz, as well as terrific reviews surrounding its platform release date of March 19th.

Larsson, who died of a massive heart attack in 2004 at age 50, was a Swedish journalist and writer who had completed 3 manuscripts and part of another before his untimely death. They were part of the Millennium Trilogy of crime novels (he actually completed the synopsis for a 4th & 5th, with a planned total of 10). He never had them published before his death-writing basically for his own pleasure. When the first 3 were posthumously published, they became instant hits. The first was "Men who hate Women"-renamed "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" when it was published in English. Each novel has Lisbeth Salander & Mikael Blomkvist as its primary characters.

When the film opens, we see an elderly man meticulously opening a package. When he sees that it is a pressed flower in a frame, he begins to weep. The scene shifts to the case of investigative journalist Blomkvist (played with perfect conviction & believability by Michael Nyqvist) who has just been found guilty of libel and is preparing to serve a jail sentence 6 months hence. Fully prepared to accept his fate without appeal, he is asked to meet with wealthy tycoon, Henrik Vanger (Sven-Bertil Taube, "The Eagle Has Landed").

It seems Henrik, who lives in a gloomy mansion on a remote island, has been forlorn ever since 1966 when his favorite niece, Harriet, disappeared at the age of 16 on the day the only bridge off the island was temporarily closed. The suspects? Only all 30 of the Vanger clan-some of which are Nazi sympathizers! It seems that Mikael used to be babysat by Harriet. Henrik feels that Mikael was, therefore, the perfect person to uncover the mystery once and for all-at least before he scoots off to jail.

After he sets up shop in the mansion, his computer investigative activity related to trying to solve the decades old cold case is intercepted by the intense Lisbeth, a sexy Goth hacker (Noomi Rapace in a truly electrifying unforgettable performance). She's a private investigator, on probation for an unknown crime, who had been previously hired to investigate Blomkvist during his libel trial. Unable to unearth anything tangible on him, she becomes curious when she stumbles onto his computer activity while he's trying to solve the disappearance/murder.

We learn that she is a master investigator herself and when she sends him a clue while stealthily analyzing his data, he contacts her and soon she becomes his assistant.

There are a couple of separate subplots that are necessarily laid out that beautifully explains who these characters are and add to the wonderful tapestry, as well as some graphic sequences that are not exploitive and are absolutely essential to the story. If you love a great thriller/mystery (think Agatha Cristie for the computer age) with rich characters and enough action to keep you intrigued throughout-if you relish trying to solve a puzzle-then this is the film for you!

And speaking of computers, I loved the way they're used to investigate the mystery. Director Niels Arden Oplev uses the Internet, web cams, photo-editing, scanners-you name it, to such believability, that you never doubt the authenticity of the action. (I loved the way the director uses photographs to a chilling effect throughout.) Everything from the stark cinematography, to the exquisite soundtrack by Jacob Groth, works to produce one heck of a memorable 2 1/2 hours. And don't let that running time stop you in the least. This film never stops moving from the first opening scene to the last satisfying conclusion.

When host/moderator Jonathan Pelevsky, standing in front of the near capacity audience, asked how many had read the book, over half read their hands. Judging from the Q&A that followed, and talking with several people afterward, those who read the book agreed that the film was as good or better than the novel. High praise considering that such transformations to the screen are not usually successful-especially when translating an over 800 page novel!

An American 2011 remake (groan!!!) is in the works. After seeing US film makers hack other remakes in the past, I strongly urge you to make every effort possible to see this version, especially considering it won 3 2009 Golden Beetles (Swedish Oscars) for Best Picture, Leading Actress (Rapace), as well as the Audience Award!

Lisbeth (Noomi Rapace)

Lisbeth & Mikael (Michael Nyqvist) investigate a break-in at their cottage

"Up" **** (96 minutes)

Saturday March 20, 2010

When I saw a chance to see the phenomenal character-driven PIXAR film with director/co-writer Pete Docter doing the Q&A, I couldn't pass it up. Docter's credentials are impressive, to say the least: he's credited with the story for the original "Toy Story" & 2008's "Wall-E" as well as directing last year's "Monsters, Inc". So down I-95 to D.C. I traveled to attend a special one-time only presentation of The Academy's 2009 Animation winner (and one of the richly deserved 10 Best Picture nominees), showing as part of this year's D.C. Environmental Film Festival at the National Geographic Museum.

Following a brief intro it was time to settle in to view the latest PIXAR masterwork that just happened to open last year's Cannes Film Festival-the first ever animated film to be so honored.

By now, most film goers have seen the beautifully rendered animation that explains how it is never too late to pursue a dream. The trailers never hint at the wonderful arc the story line takes (I had repeated bouts of laughter & tears alternating throughout-not usually expected when viewing an animated film). And based on those trailers, you would think that this was merely a story about an old geezer who floats away in his house with an unexpected visitor at his door after the house is airborne. There is so much more to the narrative that Docter, and his co-writer Bob Peterson, have created that, if you haven't seen it I won't spoil it for you here-best to be surprised.

We are first introduced to Carl (the crotchety old man in the house) as a pre-teen in a movie theater in the 30's watching one of those newsreels shorts (and you older readers will know exactly what I'm referring to) that shows the latest international human interest story to the audience. This one concentrates on the exploits of the world famous explorer Charles Muntz (voiced by Christopher Plummer) who has unearthed a newly discovered creature in South America. Carl idolizes Muntz and yearns to be an adventurer in his footsteps when he grows up.

We then see him meet the effervescent Ellie and together they form a pack to explore the world together. Early on we witness their love affair from youngsters to adults and there is a stretch which summarizes their life together that is one of the most magical excerpts I have ever witnessed-be it live or animated (more on this later). Although Ellie is actually on screen for a fraction of its length (she's not even hinted at in the trailers) she is a main focus of the story. Her presence is always felt and helps to drive the remarkable tale forward.

After Ellie passes, their dream of exploration a forgotten memory (after all, saving for their life-long adventure isn't easy with bills and unexpected events keeping the dream from being realized), Carl (wonderfully voiced by Ed Asner, whose visage resembles Carl) becomes grumpy & forlorn with only pictures of Ellie gracing the walls of their long-time love nest to forever remind him of her presence. When faced with eviction because his house is in the way of the latest urban development, he solves the dilemma with those thousands of balloons and, voila, the dream comes alive.

Where he lands and what he founds there is what this tale is all about and by the end, you learn, along with our hero, that life and dreams can indeed intertwine, we should always be open to new lessons, and that one is never too old to change. A film for young and old that will bring happiness and sadness and make you think more than once about what it means to be alive. You'll realize that life is a journey full of surprises that you don't necessarily need a house lifted by balloons to experience. This is a true work of art on so many levels.

-----------------------------------------------------

What followed the screening was one of the most remarkably entertaining Q&A's I've ever witnessed. The 40 minutes began with Pete, who has been working at PIXAR for over 20 years, displaying a wonderful slide show to show how the project came together. He said the characters came to look like actual people (it was no accident that the young Explorer Scout who shows up on the front porch to join in the adventure appears Asian as his inspiration came from someone in Pete's office). And the South American falls predominate in the film was an actual location: the huge Angel Falls in Mt. Roraima in Venezuela-discovered in 1884 and was the inspiration in Arthur Conan Doyles "The Lost World". Since the film focused on the magnificent falls, it provided the ideas for the design of the film. To that end, the production team ventured to the actual site to scope it out and to make the drawings on the hillside like painters doing landscapes. These drawings translated beautifully to the magnificent color palette seen on the screen.

Revealed during the discussion was that it took 5 years from the time that Pete started scribbling his idea for the story on restaurant napkins to the final product. (This is not atypical for PIXAR, who allow their artists the necessary time for them to work their brilliance. Pete mentioned that "Cars" took 6 years!) And that wonderful silent (except for music) sweet & sentimental sequence that shows Carl & Ellie's life together took a year & a half to complete to, as Pete said, "To get it right". And get it right they've done! The string of scenes, written by Bob Peterson, depicting Carl & Ellie's life together, originally was 20 minutes long covering 20 story reels which included snippets of dialogue. They needed to shorten it so they cut out the dialogue until each scene was carefully orchestrated by either setting something up or paying something off. When complimented on the sequence, he revealed that it was the portion of the film he was most proud of. An absolutely brilliant interlude that I've never witnessed before in an animated film.

Pete also mentioned that his inspiration as an artist and a person was the late Disney legend Joe Grant-who designed the Wicked Queen in Disney's 1937's "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs", and, at 95 was still drawing (he came up with the name "Monsters, Inc."). He died at age 96 in 2005.

Someone mentioned the brilliant score by Michael Giacchino, who also composed the scores for "Ratatouille" & "The Incredibles". His talent in establishing themes and his ability to fit the music of the times to the visuals is nothing short of amazing.

Other inside looks at the creative process: unlike other animated films, he made a conscious effort not to include a reference to anything (well-except for the dogs playing poker drawing); the later segment involving Muntz was rewritten and reboarded over 50 times; the story is first scripted followed by 6 or 7 artists drawing it out to thousands of storyboards. These storyboards are then put to film with music, dialogue, & sound effects-allowing them to actually edit before it is shot in order to find the right story and characters; what is actually on the screen are not actual drawings but are computer photographs of conventional objects that utilizes a sort of stop-action animation (like Tim Burton's "The Nightmare Before Christmas"); Peter is the voice of Kevin, the rare bird in the film.

He finally informed us that PIXAR will release Toy Story 3 this summer & a sequel to "Cars" sometime next year.

If you haven't seen this extraordinary work, be certain to put it at the top of your list of must-sees!

Director/co-screenwriter Pete Docter leads the Q&A at

the D.C. Environmental Film Festival screening

Carl & Russell reach their destination

Carl and his house under attack

"Yes Men Fix The World" *** (96 minutes)

Friday March 19, 2010

Michael Moore has made his living successfully exposing various corporate/government/individual misdoings ever since he hit the scene with his 1989 brilliant General Motors expose, "Roger & Me". However, over the years, his film making tactics have been controversial & polarizing-especially from the right side of the political spectrum.

What was needed was a somewhat softer approach to illuminate to the majority of the world's populist the evil greed exhibited by a lot of the same targets Moore had in his sights throughout his career. Enter stage right Mick Bonnano (Jacques Servin) & Andy Bichbaum (Igor Vamos)-university professors in real life but here known as The Yes Men.

Off to the historic Senator Theater where Yes Man Mike was hosting their latest-a follow-up to their critically acclaimed 2004 "The Yes Men". This time around, we watch them unleash their resources and energy on Dow Chemical, Halliburton, Exxon, and the U.S Government's Chamber of Commerce and Department of Housing.

We see them in their "office", which is actually a run-down warehouse equipped with a computer and a couple of chairs, as they set-up a fake Dow Chemical website. In 1984, a Union Carbide pesticide plant exploded in Bhopal India-killing over 8,000 and injuring many more. Its long lasting effects can be seen in birth defects that are still occurring today in the populace. As the 20th anniversary of the disaster approached, their idea was to represent Dow Chemical (who bought out Union Carbide in 2001) and, in a breath of corporate fresh air, admit to the wrongdoing by "offering" 12 billion dollars of corporate profits to the victims of Bhopal. That's exactly 12 billion more than was previously offered by the now defunct Union Carbide.

That's where the fake web site comes in. When they were asked to be interviewed by The BBC, they were off and running as Andy, posing as a bogus Dow rep, announced to the world that the corporate giant was ready to make good and come clean by compensating the victims in honor of the 20th anniversary. Needless to say, the stock market didn't approve as the company's position on Wall Street promptly dropped like a piano in a lake.

The point was made that maybe this wasn't such a good idea-that it was a cruel hoax on the Indian victims who were given tons of false hope. However, when they visited Bhopal after being exposed, the Yes Men were actually greeted as heroes by the residents because of the resulting world coverage that served to reinforce the corporation's greed as it continues to refuse to right a terrible wrong.

Next on their agenda was the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. We observe them holding a phony press conference at the National Press Club in D.C. after the agency "declares" they are reversing their decision on global warming. It was fun to see Fox News reporting on it throughout the day (raising the old adage that you can't always believe what is being reported).

Another target was the corporate giant Halliburton. Posing as Halliburton execs, they are present at an insurers' conference where they are introducing their latest invention: the Suvivaball (see the poster above) meant to save the inhabitants in the event of any and all catastrophic events. Hilarious. Surely anyone in the audience would catch on, right? Wrong! We see them approached by several attendees, after their bogus demonstration, seeking their business cards.

Another segment shows them at an energy conference in Calgary, Alberta. Now we see Andy as an Exxon rep as he introduces a new biofuel made of Vivoleum-which is supposedly made from the flesh of deceased humans. To illustrate, they pass out the foul smelling candles made of the new substance to the audience. Part of the stunt is stand-up comedian Reggie Watts playing an Exxon janitor who, in a hilarious video presentation, has decided to end his life and donate his body to the project.

They next travel to the Katrina stricken community of New Orleans as they expose the disgusting goings-on by HUD as they "work" to rebuild the damaged region. We see Andy, posing as HUD rep Rene Oswin, announcing that, instead of tearing down untouched public housing, they would actually rebuild for the purpose of bringing back its displaced citizens-much to the chagrin of the independent contractors (and even a noticeably perplexed Mayor Nagin who was present at the news conference). Again, the question was raised as to whether this was more a cruel hoax on the residents than on the government that was there to protect and help them recover.

A final segment shows them preparing to print and distribute a bogus New York Times that proudly declares on its front page "All the news we hope to print". Its headline in bold print: "Iraq War Ends". We see them and their volunteers handing out for free over 100,000 copies to the populace on the streets of New York-who can only hope the news they're reading is true.

One of the more humorous touches were interviews the film makers interspersed throughout with corporate talking heads who are unknowingly being blue screened with outrageous back-drops. And hovering over all of this is the "evil" Milton Friedman (who they labeled "The Guru of Greed"), the Nobel Prize winner who championed free-market economics (who died in 2006).

How effective all this is in the grand scheme of things is left up to the viewer. For me, it was a hoot just watching their intended targets deal with the absurdities of their own actions. We can only hope and pray that a new kind of revolution can be realized to truly institute global change suggested by the antics of The Yes Men.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the Q&A, the first question was the most obvious: how were these guys not sued out the Yin Yang or even thrown in jail for their shenanigans. Mike calmly stated that none of what they did was actually illegal-especially compared to what these corporations were doing which , in most instances, were so much more morally criminal. When asked about an update on the end result of the New Orleans Lafitte Housing Project, Mike revealed that HUD moved the residents back in for 3 months, only to move them out and tear it down. Unbelievable. Mike announced that, after many screenings at festivals around the country including its premier at Sundance, this was his last public appearance promoting the film.

Concluding the Q&A, an auction was held to benefit the Maryland Chapter of the Physicians for a National Health Care Program, an organization of over 15,000 physicians, medical students and health professionals who support single-payer national health insurance. Representing the group was Margaret Flowers M.D who was present to explain their national "improved Medicare for all" campaign and the Maryland state single payer bill. To raise money a couple of "Reggie Candles" were auctioned off by Mike (he said they were the last of the lot) and several copies of their New York Times special edition were made available for purchase.

The film is now available on DVD.

Yes Man Mike Bonnano

Producer Jennifer Lopez, Margaret Flowers M.D, & dir. Mike Bonnano

Post-AA Ramblings

Wednesday March 10, 2010

THE SHOW (**)
Overall, Weak with a capital "W"! I'll never get those 3 1/2+ hours back!! From the opening number (in the past this was THE highlight of the AA's) with a lame Neil Patrick Harris, to the botched "In Memoriam" segment (unconscionably leaving out 3 standout deceased stars: Henry Gibson, Bea Arthur, & Farrah Fawcet, who was previously ignored when she unfortunately died on the same day as Michael Jackson), to lack of inclusion of the nominated songs (even though none were even remotely memorable), to the inclusion of a head-scratching interpretive dance number to the Best Score nominees, to the utter lack of a surprise winner, to the lame acceptance speeches, to the . . . well-you get the picture.

THE PLUSES
-Generally I liked the 2 host comedy team of Martin & Baldwin. Maybe they stood out more because of the utter lack of interest the rest of the show provided (see above). Most of the humor brought smiles, if not outright guffaws (although the running gag with Clooney got a little tiresome). I just wanted more of this than was provided as it was too sparsely interspersed throughout. The funniest gag was when Martin took out an aerosol can & sprayed dead the floating "souls" from "Avatar". And the best play on words was when Martin pointed out Helen Mirren saying "there is that damn Helen Mirren" instead of Dame HM. And, Ben Stiller's "Na'vi" takeoff was humorous as well but the original nixed idea (see my Pre-AA Ramblings below) involving a pregnant Baron Sacha-Cohen Na'vi would have been funnier. The best laugh out loud bit was a prerecorded take on "Paranormal Activity" showing the 2 hosts sleeping in bed the night before the show with time lapse video recording the hilarious goings-on.
-I liked how The Academy honored the Best Actors with a chorus of previous winners honoring the nominees for the 2nd year running. However, it comes too late near the end and, I'm afraid too many people missed it by that time.
-For the most part, I loved the results. A great night for the Independents with "The Hurt Locker" & "Precious" leading the way leaving "Avatar" practically in the dust to scrape up 3 minor awards. I would have liked to have seen Jason Reitman & Sheldon Turner win the Best Adapted Screenplay for "Up in the Air" (however it was nice honoring an African-American, Geoffrey Fletcher, for the first time), & anyone besides Bullock (the first actor in history to win a Razzie and an AA the same year!), but, for the most part, agreed with the predicted winners. It seemed odd that no great surprise winner came out of the major awards, though, as is usually the case.

AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME- -MAYBE
A suggestion to shorten the thing by eliminating the categories no one cares about such as the technical awards and awards to smaller film categories such as short films & documentaries seems, on the surface, a logical way to go. Except the awardees seem to bring out the most unexpected and entertaining parts of the show. For example, what happened when Roger Ross Williams had just started his acceptance speech for the Documentary Short "Music by Prudence" when he was sabotaged by, we later found out, the disgruntled Producer. (I loved "The Daily Show's" Jon Stewart's line that she looked like the lady who runs the snack bar at his synagogue's Purim festival.) Without this "what the hell was that" moment the whole thing would have justly earned a 1-1 1/2 star rating! So, until the producers put on a halfway entertaining show, I'd be hesitant to entirely eliminate these awards.

MOST DISAPPOINTING ACCEPTANCE SPEECH
Most of the speeches were, for the most part, weak & unemotional. However, what really disappointed me was the lack of a passionate, moving speech from "The Cove" recipients. Maybe it was due to the lack of time (the producers were really holding to that 45 second max time limit). The only meaningful moment was the unfurled sign Ric O'Barry tried to get on the air which asked viewers to text "dolphin" with a text number (44144) underneath. The second it appeared the cameras cut away. Oh well-nice try. (But I did read online that O'Barry has received over 50,000 texts and that the important doc will be a series on Animal Planet.)

2ND MOST DISAPPOINTING ACCEPTANCE SPEECH
Mo'Nigue. She showed much more raw emotions at The Golden Globes. She actually seemed angry at the AA podium. Maybe she listened to all the predictions and was more prepared to deliver the speech. However, she did make Baltimore proud.

THE DUDE WOULD BE PROUD
Is it me, or is Jeff Bridges slowly dissolving into The Dude, the character he portrayed in the Coens' "The Big Lebowski"??

THE TRIBUTES
The tribute to horror films was interesting but no great shakes. The other one honoring John Hughes, who died last year, was notable by having the members of The Brat pack there which added to the poignancy. However, neither tribute stood out as particularly memorable as others from past shows had been.

AN AWARD SHOW THAT GETS BETTER EACH YEAR
The Independent Spirit Awards on IFC the Friday before the AA's. Although this year's host, Eddie Izzard, was horrid, the 25th version lasted just a tad over 2 hours. And it's worth watching if only for the acceptance speeches-especially when you realize the audience/recipients sit at tables holding numerous liquor bottles. You catch my drift on this! The atmosphere is more laid back and full of surprises (the F-word was heard on numerous occasions sans bleep).

MY FERVENT HOPES FOR NEXT YEAR'S SHOW
Bring back the music &, for heaven's sake, find a way to shorten the dame, er, damn thing!!!

Pre-AA Rambling Thoughts

Saturday March 6, 2007

It's that time of the year again where who wears what on the Red Carpet is as meaningful as who wins an award. The show is like a train wreck where you just can't take your eyes off of it, even though you know the show is interminably long and drawn out and even though most of the awards cover categories you could care less about. That won't stop it from being one of the most watched events on the planet. That being said, here are several tidbits to impart, which may or may not be known, followed by my predictions of who will win and who should win, in my humble opinion.

-For the first time since 1943, the Best Picture list grows back to 10. Why? Well the prevailing theory is the uproar created last year from the Best Picture omission of a film that not only was clearly one of the 5 best in 2009, it, arguably, should have won: "The Dark Knight". So now we have a watered down list that includes such "standouts" as (ugh!) "The Blind Side". Somehow, the expansion diminishes the overall significance of the award. But at least it doesn't eliminate a great film because of numbers. It just increases the likelihood of including a mediocre film.

-The Academy members were asked to rank the 10 BP nominees. Therefore, the voting for this category is no longer a one-to-one vote affair. That also means that, with 10 nominees, a movie, theoretically, could win with 11% of the overall vote. If a movie gets 51% or more of the vote (unlikely), of course, the contest is over. If not, here is how things get interesting:

The auditors at PricewaterhouseCoopers will divide the movies into 10 piles. The movie with the fewest No. 1 votes is eliminated, and that pile's No. 2 votes go to the remaining corresponding films. If a majority isn't reached with those No. 2 votes, the process repeats, eliminating the next-lowest pile, whose votes are then redistributed. The process continues until one film has a majority vote. Until that time, if a ballot's No. 2 choice has been eliminated, the auditors go to No. 3 and then as far down the ballot as necessary. Got that?! Now, although the new system ensures some consensus, it raises the possibility that a movie with more No. 2 and No. 3 votes could beat the film with the most first-place ballots. I say go back to the old system.

-There was talk of a bit involving controversial comedian Sacha Baron & Ben Stiller spoofing Cameron's "Avatar" in which Sacha appeared as a pregnant (with James' love child) blue-skinned Na'vi. Stiller would be present to translate. However, the bit was nixed after the producer didn't think thin-skinned Cameron would happily go along with the satire.

-Onstage will be a Swarovski crystal curtain that is worth about $5 million.

-The roster of presenters have been expanded from the usual 40-50 to, ready?, 70! I wouldn't plan on seeing the whole show and arriving to work on time on Monday.

-So pull up your chair, plop up your tootsies, & grab some popcorn. The envelope, please. . .

BEST PICTURE
What will win: "Avatar"
What should win: TIE: "Avatar" & "The Hurt Locker".
What should never have been included in this or any other list with "BEST" attached to the title: "The Blind Side"
I've struggled for weeks with this category. As much as I admired THL, I just can't believe that "Avatar", 4 years in the making, using technology that will change the look of films forever, earning over a billion dollars worldwide (and still counting), will not take home the biggie. That being said, THL is the complete film: great script, great story, great acting, great, great, great! A truly unforgettable film that still gives me chills when I think about it. A perfect film that has everything. A small independent film that, to this date has earned less than 13 million dollars, and yet is the odds-on favorite to claim the big one. So many folks didn't see this gem because it takes place during the Iraq war. What a pity. Maybe if it wins, the public will finally wake up because, for the most part, they have ignored a masterpiece in film making. I was lucky enough to see it months before its release when Jed Dietz scored a major coup selecting it as the closing night film at last year's Maryland Film Festival-complete with a Q&A with Kathyrn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal! I'm rooting for both films but my heart lies with the independent little film that could, and should. As for the remaining 7 films (please exclude "The Blind Side"), each is worthy of inclusion on the list and should be seen at some point by each of you who missed it in the theater. But "The Hurt Locker" & "Avatar" stand head and shoulders above the rest.

BEST DIRECTOR
Who will win: Kathyrn Bigelow
Who should win: Kathyrn Bigelow
This one was easier to predict. There is no question that "Avatar" is an amazing achievement for James Cameron. His vision and effort has produced a ground-breaking product that will change the look of cinema from here on out. However, Kathryn, as mention above, has directed a film that is perfect in every way imaginable. Besides the fact that she deserves it, I also feel that the Academy is very keen on history and would love to honor a female in this category for the first time in 4 previous tries. (For the record, a female, Loveleen Tandan, was co-director in last year's winning "Slumdog Millionaire", but was curiously left off the BEST DIRECTOR ballot. The Academy says it can only honor one name but, yes, there was the exception when the Coen brothers were listed and won for "No Country for Old Men".) So, I'm thinking, especially if they honor "Avatar" with BP, this would be perfect symmetry by recognizing THL by having Kathyrn winning for BD. Also, do you think that the voting academy is ignoring this?: What a hoot having the 2 ex's win the 2 top awards! Should be interesting.

BEST LEADING ACTOR
Who will win: Jeff Bridges
Who should win: George Clooney
This is mortal lock #1a (for mortal lock #1 see below). Just mail it to him. Although Bridges fit this role like a pair of old shoes and was completely convincing, I loved the nuances Clooney brought to his role. I did predict he would win when I wrote my review for "Up in the Air" but am willing to concede that Bridges will win. Being a talented actor who has never won, the Academy is ripe for giving him an award for his fine acting as a down-and-out boozing country singer.

BEST LEADING ACTRESS
Who will win: Sandra Bullock
Who should win: Anyone but Sandra Bullock
Get the salt & pepper ready! OK. I'm prepared to eat my words. The ground swell is too big. The Tsunami is approaching. The academy is ready to bestow this award on one of their favorites. Bullock is this year's Julia Roberts. UGH!!! The word is that her biggest competition is Meryl, whose performance in "Julie & Julia" makes whatever charm that film has. Streep is clearly Bullock's biggest threat to overtake her. But Meryl has been nominated & won so many times before that you just know that the Academy members are just itching to give this one to Bullock (even though you can always count on a colorful acceptance speech from Streep!). My personal choice would be newcomer Carey Mulligan who is crucial for making "An Education" so wonderful. But, alas, Carey is this year's version of Sally Hawkins, who made last year's "Happy Go Lucky" so special. There is plenty of time for her to win awards so what better time to honor (UGH! again). . . oh, I just can't say it!!

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Who will win: Christoph Waltz
Who should win: Christoph Waltz
Waltz's rookie performance as a ruthless Nazi officer in Tarentino's "Inglorious Basterds" is a true gem and might have been worthy of a Best Actor nod in the ensemble film. He gives a truly memorable performance as a Nazi who is as cold and calculating as any Nazi you've ever seen on screen. I can't see anyone else touching this statuette. However, the Academy is known for at least one surprise a year and this category might be it-but I doubt it.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Who will win: Mo'Nique
Who should win: Mo'Nique
This year's Heath Ledger (meaning MORTAL LOCK #1) goes to another performance for the ages. In one of the greatest films of the year, is one of THE greatest performances ever and, for me, is right up there with my all time favorite female performance: Emily Watson in Lars von Trier's masterpiece "Breaking the Waves". The Baltimore born comedian (!) delivers a tour-DE-force and her role as the abusive mother of overweight "Precious" is so real & mind-boggling powerful you'll wonder if she actually lived the role. Mail her The Oscar.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE FILM
Who will win: "Up"
Who should win: "Up"
Another no contest. A film that is so good it is included in the Best Picture category (and probably would have even if the list was 5 films), in a year when there were great animated films, this one should bring home the bacon for the marvelously talented Pixar group. I wouldn't mind "Fantastic Mr. Fox" winning, but concede that "Up" is the best of the best.

BEST FOREIGN FILM
Who will win: "The White Ribbon"
Who should win: "Sin Nombre"
I know. I know. "Sin Nombre" isn't even nominated. For whatever reason, this great film didn't make the list. This category as well as Best Documentary drives me up a wall considering the omissions the Academy makes year after year. All I can say is if you have never seen it, by all means "run" to your nearest NETFLIX and rent it.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Who will win: "The Hurt Locker"
Who should win: "The Hurt Locker"
Mark Boal has written a script that is as realistic as the film and fits the action as perfectly as any other on the list. Although the other nominees are worthy, they just can't hold a light to this screenplay in a film that will win multiple awards.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Who will win: "Up in the Air"
Who should win: "Up in the Air"
This is a tough one. I was torn between this one, "An Education", & "Precious". However, being as I correctly predicted the 6 noms for UITA in my review last November, I believe The Academy will bestow one award their way and this one could be it. A terrific film with a screenplay that perfectly reflects today's trying economic times, I'm hoping it gets at least one major award and its best chance is this category.


BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Who will win: The Cove
Who should win: The Cove
Practically a slam dunk is this riveting expose on the Japanese who have been slaughtering thousands of dolphins each year and selling the prized ones to water parks for mucho bucks. Ric O'Barry, who trained the "Flipper" dolphins in the early 60's, realized the inhumanity of enslaving these mammals when Cathy, the #1 Flipper, committed suicide in his arms. His crusade to end the prisoning of these creatures for our benefit and to simultaneously expose the Japanese is what this amazing doc is all about. What makes this one even more a mortal lock to win is last week's Sea World disaster when the 40 year old trainer was killed by an Orca killer whale. The Academy members love to honor films that involve inhumane issues, as well as those that affect the planet (can you say "An Inconvenient Truth"?). The question is whether they voted before or after the incident last week. No matter. This film should be seen by anyone who cares about the fragility of life on the planet. I heard Ric say last week on ABC's "Nightline" that he's hoping the film wins because the #1 viewed show in Japan is, you guessed it, The Academy Awards. Keep that in mind when the award is accepted. Should be one of the more interesting speeches tomorrow night!

Feel free to share your comments and let me know how your predictions turned out.

"An Education" **** (100 minutes)

Sunday January 31, 2010

Dutch director Lone Scherfig's two films (2002's "Italian for Beginners" & 2004's "Wilbur Wants to Kill Himself") have both been critically acclaimed. Her third entry even more so. She was the screenwriter for the 2 earlier efforts but now enlists the talents of equally acclaimed Nick Horby who scribed 2000's "High Fidelity" & 2002's "About a Boy". Together, they have produced one of my favorite films of the past year.

The story, based on a memoir by British journalist Lynn Barber, concerns 16 year old Jenny (in a phenomenal debut by Carey Mulligan), a musically talented and academically bright schoolgirl who is on a steady course for "an education" at Oxford. Although this course of action seems more to please her middle class parents (ably played by Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour), she is dutifully following their wishes by excelling in school-all the while dreaming about the exciting possibilities the world can offer besides her current mundane scholastic voyage.

Then, she meets charming, well-to-do, 35ish David (played by the always competent Peter Sarsgaard who hits all the right notes) who one day offers her a ride home while standing on a corner holding her cello in a driving rain. After convincing her that he has no alternative motives (this is taking place in the more trusting times of the early 60's), the die is cast as he slowly and methodically alters her predetermined course from one of unexceptional everyday existence to one of excitement and intrigue-an education of worldly existence.

There are 2 adults in her life, namely her parents, who, like Jenny, also fall for the charms of her suitor and quickly reverse course for their daughter-not recognizing the pitfalls their relationship pose. They see her comfortably taken care of for the rest of her life and begin to dismiss what an education at Oxford might have afforded.

Luckily, there are 2 other adults in Jenny's sphere who see her relationship for what it is and who recognize the talents Jenny is ready to hastily throw away: her English teacher (Olivia Williams) and her headmistress (the great Emma Thompson is a small but effective role) who try to impart to Jenny a different kind of education.

Through most of the film, Alfred Molina comes across as a naive bloke and gives basically a one-note performance. That is, until the end when he confronts his daughter with a brilliantly moving speech that had me moved to tears. And look for last year's Best Actress nominee Sally Hawkins ("Happy Go Lucky") who appears for a very brief pivotal scene near the end.

As pointed out above, the title of the film has multiple connotations. And, even though that, on the surface, this is a story of an older man possibly praying on a teenage girl, don't let that deter you in visiting a film that is brilliant in its writing, acting & execution. I absolutely loved this film!

Jenny (Carry Mulligan) & David (Peter Sarsgaard)
share an intimate moment

Jenny's parents Jack (Alfred Molina) & Majorie (Cara
Seymour) (l) about to go out to dinner with Jenny & David (r)

"Precious: Based on the Novel PUSH by Sapphire" **** (109 minutes)

Saturday January 2, 2010

Last year, Heath Ledger gave one of the most memorable performances ever by a male actor in Christopher Nolan's brilliant, "The Dark Knight". As predicted, his posthumous Supporting Academy Award was merely a formality. This year's version, by a female, will undoubtedly be handed over to Mo'Nique on March 7th as her performance as the mother of her abused child, Claireece "Precious" Jones, is another one for the ages.

The independent film, directed & produced by Lee Daniels has been racking up award after award after initially receiving 3 major Sundance Awards when it debuted there last January: the Dramatic Grand Jury Prize, Dramatic Audience Award, & Dramatic Special Jury Prize for Acting to Mo'Nique. One of the most powerful American films I have ever seen, this is a tragic story that, in the end, actually sends a message of hope & possibility in the face of life defined by total despair.

Precious (newcomer Gabourey Sidibe in a touchingly realistic performance) is an overweight abused teenager; impregnated for a 2nd time after being raped again by her father. Threatened and further vocally & physically abused by mom, who treats her child more like a servant, Precious faces continual abuse at school. The only people who seem to care and understand her pain are her teacher (in a wonderfully nuanced performance by Paula Patton) and social worker (a virtually unrecognizable Mariah Carrey who delivers a magnificent performance that will have people forget "Glitter"-if they were unfortunate enough to see it) who work to bring some semblance of beauty and meaning into the life of this child.

As bleak and unfathomable as this all seems, director Daniels and first time screenwriter Damien Paul inject enough fantasy & humor to give a necessary lift to this powerful raw emotional story. And as I pointed out, there is a clear discernible light at the end of this dark tunnel which Precious is traversing so that, at the end, you will walk out of the theater realizing that you have witnessed one of the great films of this or any year.

Precious (Gabourey Sidibe) is comforted by teacher Ms Rain (Paula Patton)

Mary (Mo'Nique)