In an earlier post, I talked about the Vanguard program and contrasted two films from that group.
As it turned out, I saw a third Vanguard film on Saturday. "Colossal" was similar to "Interchange" in that it attempted to combine the real and unreal worlds, but did it in a much more successful way by committing fully to both sides of the story.
Anne Hathaway is an alcoholic writer recently dumped by her boyfriend and back in her old hometown trying to rehabilitate herself. At the same time, a giant monster is destroying parts of Seoul. The plot involves tying the two stories together in a charming and frequently funny way.
One of the more pleasant surprises so far this year.
2016/09/11
2016/09/10
Two faces of Vanguard
TIFF films are organized within sub-programs, each having a particular perspective. In some cases, inclusion in a program carries certain expectations about theme or tone.
A relatively new addition to TIFF is Vanguard. Vanguard films are promoted as being slightly off the mainstream, approaching the mayhem of a Midnight Madness (many of the films are programmed by the same person, Colin Geddes).
Friday I saw two films in the Vanguard program and they were very different.
In terms of presentation, an Asian film called "Interchange" would fit the parameters of the program most effectively. A mix of horror and film noir, it's about the investigation of a series of ritualistic murders that may have a connection to an antiques dealer. There is definitely a fabulist one to it but there's a lack of attention to the real world that takes the whole film down a couple of notches. Interesting visuals but it's let don bu The screenplay.
On the other hand, "Message from the King" is much more conservative but works much more effectively within the constraints of a revenge flick. A young South African man travels to LA to find his sister. His discovery that she was killed in a particularly gruesome manner sets him on a path to avenge her death. I wasn't sure that this fit within the Vanguard category, but it worked nonetheless.
A relatively new addition to TIFF is Vanguard. Vanguard films are promoted as being slightly off the mainstream, approaching the mayhem of a Midnight Madness (many of the films are programmed by the same person, Colin Geddes).
Friday I saw two films in the Vanguard program and they were very different.
In terms of presentation, an Asian film called "Interchange" would fit the parameters of the program most effectively. A mix of horror and film noir, it's about the investigation of a series of ritualistic murders that may have a connection to an antiques dealer. There is definitely a fabulist one to it but there's a lack of attention to the real world that takes the whole film down a couple of notches. Interesting visuals but it's let don bu The screenplay.
On the other hand, "Message from the King" is much more conservative but works much more effectively within the constraints of a revenge flick. A young South African man travels to LA to find his sister. His discovery that she was killed in a particularly gruesome manner sets him on a path to avenge her death. I wasn't sure that this fit within the Vanguard category, but it worked nonetheless.
Citizen Jane: Battle for the City
Torontonians have a long association with Jane Jacobs, from her leadership in stopping the Spadina expressway project in the early '70's and subsequent work in support of a "livable" city to the walks which were set up in her name following her death.
"Citizen Jane", however, focuses on the time when the "light bulb" went off for her and set her career in motion, transforming her from a journalist working on stories about architecture to a very active participant in the debate on what makes an effective urban environment.
During the 50's and 60's, the US went through a period of embracing modernist principles of architecture and urban planning, expressed theoretically by Le Corbusier in Europe and Robert Moses in practice.
Moses was a planning czar in New York City at the time and he was an active proponent of urban renewal, mostly expressed by the replacement of so-called slum neighbourhoods with banks of bland, widely spaced high rise projects. He rarely faced any effective opposition to his plans, at least until Jacobs started to organize following a proposal to drive 5th Avenue directly through Washington Square Park. That was the beginning of a highly adversarial relationship between the two, which also led to the publication of her "Death and Life of American Cities".
The film uses a mix of archival footage, speeches and Jacobs' writing to show the polarization of the two views and proponents. Given the debates that have hit Toronto City Council in the past few years (eg the Gardiner East discussion), it's a debate that continues to this day.
"Citizen Jane", however, focuses on the time when the "light bulb" went off for her and set her career in motion, transforming her from a journalist working on stories about architecture to a very active participant in the debate on what makes an effective urban environment.
During the 50's and 60's, the US went through a period of embracing modernist principles of architecture and urban planning, expressed theoretically by Le Corbusier in Europe and Robert Moses in practice.
Moses was a planning czar in New York City at the time and he was an active proponent of urban renewal, mostly expressed by the replacement of so-called slum neighbourhoods with banks of bland, widely spaced high rise projects. He rarely faced any effective opposition to his plans, at least until Jacobs started to organize following a proposal to drive 5th Avenue directly through Washington Square Park. That was the beginning of a highly adversarial relationship between the two, which also led to the publication of her "Death and Life of American Cities".
The film uses a mix of archival footage, speeches and Jacobs' writing to show the polarization of the two views and proponents. Given the debates that have hit Toronto City Council in the past few years (eg the Gardiner East discussion), it's a debate that continues to this day.
2016/09/09
Free Fire
Over the past few years, director Ben Wheatley has been a pretty reliable bet for films. Although he plays in many genres ("Kill List" was a mix of crime thriller and horror; "Sightseers" a (literally) bloody romp through the English countryside; and "A Field in England" a magic mushroom-fuelled trip though Medieval England to name just three), his films have been linked by a ready, frequently blackly comic wit and a willingness to subvert the conventions of whichever genre he is playing in.
"Free Fire" changes the playground again by moving the setting to a warehouse on the docks of Boston in the 1970's and the cast representing and groups of gun-runners, IRA sympathizers and a couple of wild cards. The film has a fairly short set-up before the main action, which consists of a lot of weapons and munitions put in play in ways both devastating and ineffective in equal measure. And it's very funny.
This is probably the best ensemble casts that Wheatley has been able to bring together for a project and he puts them through their paces. Cillian Murphy, Brie Larson, Michael Smiley and Armie Hammer create recognizable characters quickly and through the mayhem that is the bulk of the film.
Special credit goes to Wheatley and his wife Amy Jump, who collaborated on the writing of the screenplay and the editing. Given the chaos in the confines of the warehouse, the film never loses a sense of place and the characters within it -- the editing is critical to maintaining this for the viewer.
A fun way to start day 2 of TIFF.
"Free Fire" changes the playground again by moving the setting to a warehouse on the docks of Boston in the 1970's and the cast representing and groups of gun-runners, IRA sympathizers and a couple of wild cards. The film has a fairly short set-up before the main action, which consists of a lot of weapons and munitions put in play in ways both devastating and ineffective in equal measure. And it's very funny.
This is probably the best ensemble casts that Wheatley has been able to bring together for a project and he puts them through their paces. Cillian Murphy, Brie Larson, Michael Smiley and Armie Hammer create recognizable characters quickly and through the mayhem that is the bulk of the film.
Special credit goes to Wheatley and his wife Amy Jump, who collaborated on the writing of the screenplay and the editing. Given the chaos in the confines of the warehouse, the film never loses a sense of place and the characters within it -- the editing is critical to maintaining this for the viewer.
A fun way to start day 2 of TIFF.
Be prepared
Standing outside the Isabel Bader theatre on Charles Street around 5:30 pm. A woman in a car was waiting for traffic to clear and rolled down her window.
"What film are you waiting for?"
"All Governments Lie"
"is it a doc?"
"Yes"
"Who directed it?"
"I don't remember. I didn't know they'd be a quiz"
"There's always a quiz..."
Didn't have the heart to tell her that I went to a film this morning and I couldn't remember what it was about or why I picked it!
And it's only day 2...
"What film are you waiting for?"
"All Governments Lie"
"is it a doc?"
"Yes"
"Who directed it?"
"I don't remember. I didn't know they'd be a quiz"
"There's always a quiz..."
Didn't have the heart to tell her that I went to a film this morning and I couldn't remember what it was about or why I picked it!
And it's only day 2...
The Box Office
When TIFF announced that they were changing their box office earlier this summer, I was curious about what benefits we would see. When the Ticketmaster logo appeared at the top of the screen, my thoughts also turned to what we would lose or what the cost would be (my experience with Ticketmaster as a vendor of event tickets has been mixed and I try to avoid using them where possible).
On the plus side, we now have the option of either printing the tickets at home or sending a ticket to our smartphone. Gone are the days of lining up at the box office to collect a stack of paper tickets. That's definitely been a plus.
Unfortunately, the procedures in place are designed for the person who has purchased a small number of tickets, not the 45-50 that I normally get each year. As with many processes that have introduced self-serve options, the labour has been transferred to the individual and not terribly efficiently.
We've already seen the classic Ticketmaster "sting" of service charges, although TIFF has waived some of them for members this year. But it's the addition of another recent feature of the Ticketmaster experience that I think will result in the greatest cost to patrons.
TIFF has introduced "demand-based" pricing this year, which means that films that are popular are charged at a higher rate. As a member purchasing tickets in advance, my per-film cost is $20, although it is possible to reduce that cost slightly once TIFF starts up (each day, the festival promotes films that have a lot of seats available at a sale price. The base price for one-time purchasers is $25, although tickets for galas is charged at a pretty hefty premium.
I was standing in line with a woman who purchased single tickets last week and one film started at $42 (I don't remember the title, but it was a film with studio backing and would likely have a theatrical or VOD release somewhere down the line). Add Ticketmaster's fees and the price for a ticket moves towards $50.
We've seen the impact of demand-based pricing in the concert arena, with the exorbitant rates charged for Tragically Hip tickets this summer. Some would argue that this is capitalist system working as it was designed to, but the end result is that it will discourage people from purchasing tickets to films at TIFF and reducing its cachet as a "people's film festival". The impact on students and seniors in particular makes the change in box office a negative change overall.
On the plus side, we now have the option of either printing the tickets at home or sending a ticket to our smartphone. Gone are the days of lining up at the box office to collect a stack of paper tickets. That's definitely been a plus.
Unfortunately, the procedures in place are designed for the person who has purchased a small number of tickets, not the 45-50 that I normally get each year. As with many processes that have introduced self-serve options, the labour has been transferred to the individual and not terribly efficiently.
We've already seen the classic Ticketmaster "sting" of service charges, although TIFF has waived some of them for members this year. But it's the addition of another recent feature of the Ticketmaster experience that I think will result in the greatest cost to patrons.
TIFF has introduced "demand-based" pricing this year, which means that films that are popular are charged at a higher rate. As a member purchasing tickets in advance, my per-film cost is $20, although it is possible to reduce that cost slightly once TIFF starts up (each day, the festival promotes films that have a lot of seats available at a sale price. The base price for one-time purchasers is $25, although tickets for galas is charged at a pretty hefty premium.
I was standing in line with a woman who purchased single tickets last week and one film started at $42 (I don't remember the title, but it was a film with studio backing and would likely have a theatrical or VOD release somewhere down the line). Add Ticketmaster's fees and the price for a ticket moves towards $50.
We've seen the impact of demand-based pricing in the concert arena, with the exorbitant rates charged for Tragically Hip tickets this summer. Some would argue that this is capitalist system working as it was designed to, but the end result is that it will discourage people from purchasing tickets to films at TIFF and reducing its cachet as a "people's film festival". The impact on students and seniors in particular makes the change in box office a negative change overall.
2016/09/08
Toni Erdmann
TIFF 2016 began for me this evening with Maren Ade's "Toni Erdmann", a film about the reunion and emotional collision between a driven German management consultant and her slightly anarchistic father.
It's a comedy founded mostly on the discomfort of the relationship between the two and the impact, mostly on the daughter, of that relationship. Although parts of it are quite funny, overall I don't think it worked very well. It required a suspension of disbelief around the ease with which her father is able to insinuate himself in her life, even in the foreign city of Bucharest, where she is working to develop a plan to outsource the maintenance of oil rigs in the area which I was not able to provide. I also found that it didn't establish the relationship very well between the two, so the emotional payoff later on just doesn't have the strength that it needs.
It's a comedy founded mostly on the discomfort of the relationship between the two and the impact, mostly on the daughter, of that relationship. Although parts of it are quite funny, overall I don't think it worked very well. It required a suspension of disbelief around the ease with which her father is able to insinuate himself in her life, even in the foreign city of Bucharest, where she is working to develop a plan to outsource the maintenance of oil rigs in the area which I was not able to provide. I also found that it didn't establish the relationship very well between the two, so the emotional payoff later on just doesn't have the strength that it needs.
2016/09/04
Reload
four days from now, I will be about halfway through film #1 of TIFF2016, "Toni Erdmann". For now, the film's have been selected and booked and, technology willing, my iPhone will be full of barcode admissions to this year's box of treasures.
So, where are we now? A brief summary
So, where are we now? A brief summary
- TIFF is a little smaller this year, with 296 films on the schedule (the past few years had somewhere in the mid-300's). They've also dropped back the number of screenings to two per film rather than three for many of the titles.
- TIFF overlaps with the Venice and Telluride festivals. They seem to have been scooped by one or the other two to a greater extent this year. From where I will be sitting, this won't have a big impact for me (the films which are the focus are not the ones I generally pick), but this must be a bit of a discomfort for the Festival. Bragging rights can be important!
- TIFF also shifted their box office software to one managed by Ticketmaster, just before the system was opened for this year's festival. There have been a number of irritating but not fatal glitches (see my earlier comment about technology being willing). We'll see how things go as we dive into the cinematic pool on Thursday.
I will again try to document what I've seen and heard over the next couple of weeks. Keep watching this space as the fun starts in a few short days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)