If I had to sum up what most stories are about in one word, it would be “underdogs.” Ultimately we go to the movies for a chance to see the unlikely succeed, as this is a fantasy rarely realized in real life. As far as real life underdogs go, they don’t get much lower than the Canadian feature film. This is why anytime one manages to get financed, completed and then actually distributed, those of us concerned with this kind of thing watch with trepidation because we know that a Canadian film getting a second week in theatres is like an amateur boxer making it to round two against the champ. This makes Moon Point an underdog story in every sense, and while it struggles in places, it ultimately succeeds, at least on the fluffy entertainment level.

Our protagonist is Darryl, a 23 year-old underachiever with the meanest family on earth. Determined to prove he can get a date for his cousin’s wedding, Darryl sees a call for extras in a B-horror film starring his childhood crush as a chance at redemption. To do this he has to travel several towns over to a place called Moon Point, and with no other mode of transportation, Darryl literally hitches his wagon to his only friend’s electric wheelchair.  Perhaps my favourite aspect of this film is the idea of it being about the world’s slowest road trip, as it takes them days to cover what somebody with a car could have done in a couple hours. They quickly acquire the damsel in distress from the side of the road whom we know will ultimately come between them at some point.

While these three fresh faces do an acceptable job throughout the film, particularly Nick McKinlay in the lead, it’s the crazies they meet along the way that provide most of the laughs. The supporting cast is made up of an ensemble of Canadian talent whose names you likely wouldn’t recognize, (Art Hindle, Jayne Eastwood, Linda Kash, Laurie Elliott, Jessica Holmes, Christian Potenza, James Hartnett, anyone? Bueller?), their faces however have become familiar from dozens of commercials and comedy specials.

The writer commented that he was trying to capture the feeling of some of the John Hughes films he loved as a teenager, but I didn’t really get that vibe from Moon Point. The road trip aspect of it combined with the sometimes-too-broad humour reminded me more of a Farrelly brothers film, while the sugary ‘twee’ touches over-sentimentalized other parts. Needless to say there were several uneven tonal shifts, primarily caused by too much make-up/ break-up drama between the three main characters.

Unfortunately, like most real-life underdogs, this film will not overcome the odds and break into the mainstream, but at least first time distributor IndieCan is giving it a chance to be seen by some, most of whom I’m sure will get a kick out of at least a few parts, and that puts this one in the plus category of Canadian movies. It’s cuteness and romantic elements are well timed for Valentine’s Day and the holiday’s imagery is sprinkled throughout, let’s just hope Moon Point can still be seen by the time February 14^th comes around, otherwise all of the above becomes a moot point.

The Divide is a psychological thriller about post-apocalyptic survival that is often horrifying and all around nightmarish. From claustrophobia to torture, radiation sickness and murder, this movie is intentionally void of anything that makes an audience feel comfortable or at ease for longer than one or two brief moments. On this level it’s an achievement, but ultimately the story suffers from a shapeless script.

The first scene is very effective in throwing us right into the action when it opens on the tenants of a crumbling building running for their lives as the world around them collapses. Nine “lucky ones” make it into a bomb shelter before the rest are shut out by the shelter’s keeper Mickey, played by Michael Biehn. The scenario Mickey finds himself in suits his disposition about as well as most of Biehn’s characters, and he is given full reign to be his typical angry self. Aside from the fact that they all live in the same building, we never learn much about these characters’ lives prior to the nuclear attack. We do find out that Mickey is a former firefighter and it is hinted at that his wife was killed in the September 11th attacks, which presumably is supposed to give some insight as to why he maintains such a well stocked shelter.

At first it seems like it’s going to be the Mickey show, as Biehn’s is the most recognizable face in the cast and his character seems to hold all the cards. But surprisingly Mickey kind of falls by the wayside as Josh (Milo Ventimiglia) and Bobby (Michael Eklund), who start off looking like a couple guys from Jersey Shore, basically out-crazy Mickey and end up declaring themselves the resident alpha males. Shooting in chronological order with a loose script allowed the actors, who themselves had to go on an extremely scant diet, to really put themselves into the decline of these characters and get under the viewers’ skin as the last guys you’d want to be stuck in a bunker with. They’re disturbing and occasionally humourous performances were aided by some very effective hair and make-up touches. I can definitely see Saskatooner Eklund in particular having a successful career creeping people out in smaller character roles to come.

Another cult favourite who goes to an extremely dark place for this movie is Rosanna Arquette. The traumatizing events of the first part of the story leave her with a numb stare that tells us she no longer has any use for reality. She gives herself over to the brutality of the men so completely that we lose all hope for her early on. As with most films dealing with this subject matter, the themes that emerge deal with gender, power, trust, and survival of the fittest in this microcosm of society. The result makes Lord of the Flies look like Fantasy Island.

All in all, The Divide is a successful entry into a well-tread sub-genre of horror, but it is still essentially a B movie that suffers from some technical issues and a script that by most accounts was rarely consulted while shooting. If you have the opportunity to catch it during it’s limited theatrical release, don’t write it off as unworthy, but don’t expect it to brighten your day either.

Trent Reznor and his Nine Inch statue

Of course with Spielberg releasing two films this year we got two scores from the legendary John Williams, at least one of which he’ll surely see a nomination for. Considering that critics can’t seem to find enough top 10 lists to put The Artist on, a film in which the score makes up the entire soundscape, Ludovic Bource will likely see a nomination along with many of the other artists who worked on this film.  Fincher’s The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo would have been unwatchable without the score provided by last year’s winners Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, so we should expect to see their names on the nomination list again this year. Another safe bet would be Canada’s own Howard Shore for his work on Hugo. Since James Horner and Hans Zimmer don’t seem to be in the running this year, I can only confidently predict 4/5 of the nominations (assuming Williams only gets one), that being said I’m gonna throw established composer Thomas Newman’s name out there for The Help. So what do you think, did I nail it?

Danny Elfman is another vet whom people love, but since the films he provided scores for this year (Real Steel and Restless) probably won’t show up in many other categories, his chances for recognition diminish. I don’t know why, that’s just how the Academy rolls.

The Divide is a psychological thriller about post-apocalyptic survival that is often horrifying and all around nightmarish. From claustrophobia to torture, radiation sickness and murder, the only thing comfortable about this movie was how snugly it fit into the middle of Toronto After Dark’s line-up.

In a stroke of genius on the programmers’ part, the feature was preceded by the short Blind Spot in which we see the beginnings of some kind of apocalyptic events happening outside the car window of an oblivious man trying to change a flight reservation. This short dovetailed perfectly into The Divide, which opens with the tenants of a crumbling building running for their lives as the world around them collapses. Nine “lucky ones” make it into a bomb shelter before the rest are shut out by the shelter’s keeper Mickey, played by Michael Biehn. The scenario Mickey finds himself in suits his disposition about as well as most of Biehn’s characters, and he is given full reign to be his typical angry self. Aside from the fact that they all live in the same building, we never learn much about these characters’ lives prior to the nuclear attack. We only find out that Mickey is a former firefighter whose wife may well have been killed in the September 11th attacks.

At first it seems like it’s going to be the Mickey show, as Biehn’s is the most recognizable face in the cast and his character seems to hold all the cards. But surprisingly Mickey kind of falls by the wayside as Josh (Milo Ventimiglia) and Bobby (Michael Eklund), who start off looking like a couple guys from Jersey Shore, basically out-crazy Mickey and end up declaring themselves the alpha males. Shooting in chronological order with a loose script allowed the actors, who themselves had to go on an extremely scant diet, to really put themselves into the decline of these characters and get under the viewers’ skin as the last guys you’d want to be stuck in a bunker with. They’re disturbing and occasionally humourous performances were aided by some very effective hair and make-up touches. I can definitely see Sakatooner Eklund in particular having a successful career creeping people out in smaller character roles to come.

Another cult favourite who goes to an extremely dark place for this movie is Rosanna Arquette. The traumatizing events of the first part of the story leave her with a numb stare that tells us she no longer has any use for reality. She gives herself over to the brutality of the men so completely that we lose all hope for her early on. As with most films dealing with this subject matter, the themes that emerge deal with gender, power, trust, and survival of the fittest in this microcosm of society. The resulting film makes Lord of the Flies look like Fantasy Island.

All in all, The Divide is a successful entry into a well-tread sub-genre of horror, but it is still essentially a B movie that suffers from some technical issues (the sound mix seemed unfinished) and a script that by most accounts was rarely consulted while shooting. Even though it was shot in Winnipeg, I doubt the film will see much of a theatrical run up here. If you do happen across it, don’t write it off as unworthy, but don’t expect it to brighten your day either.

Click to enlarge.

It’s a spider-man! It’s an iron man! No, it’s a super man! Earlier today Warner Bros. released the first image of Superman from Zack Snyder’s upcoming reboot, Man of Steel slated for a 2013 release. The image shows Henry Cavill as the titular ‘Man of Steel’ showing off the squareness of his jaw in a suit that replaces the vintage spandex look with the recycled basketball one people seem to really like these days.

But what’s happening in this photo? Clearly Superman is standing between us and a safe presumably containing something we want (The Dark Knight Rises?). His eyes and body language tell us that we’re not getting in, but so does the huge steel door. There also appears to be some damage done around the safe, but it looks as though that might have been caused by one of Superman’s trademark destructive entrances – superheroes are not known for respecting personal or public property. Does this image get you excited for the movie? Or are you already feeling a little disappointed?

So far my feelings toward this movie remain ambiguous. The Superman character has oft been criticized for being ‘too super’ and therefore less interesting than other heroes, a point which I agree with. On the other hand he is basically the first superhero and has survived because people find elements of his story quintessentially classic. I think a reboot a mere six years after Brian Singer’s entry into the franchise is forgivable since Superman Returns was utterly forgettable and only elicited excitement whenever it utilized John William’s classic theme – no word yet on whether Snyder will be using this music. While I don’t feel Snyder has really earned the ‘visionary’ title that marketers of his movies like to impress upon us, I did thoroughly enjoy Watchmen and think he did an admirable job with challenging material. Christopher Nolan’s under-defined involvement (producer and story credits) also bodes well (and certainly helps build buzz) for Man of Steel. The supporting cast boasts its own array of talent including Amy Adams, Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Michael Shannon, Kevin Costner, Julia Ormond, Laurence Fishburne and professional badass Christopher Meloni.

In the early 2000s, shortly after Singer helped kick start this superhero movie revolution and just about every popular comic announced a movie adaptation, I predicted the market would become saturated with heroes, people would lose interest and studios would lose millions. Every subsequent year Hollywood has invested more and more money into proving me wrong (that’s right, it’s personal). One has to assume next summer will represent the culmination of this movement with The Avengers, Batman’s “epic conclusion” and the Spider-Man reboot providing a 1-2-3 punch that should be a hard act for Superman to follow. It will be interesting to see how to the genre fares after these high profile entries and over a decade of non-stop superheroism. With all these superheroes flying around, I’m starting to understand why people in Metropolis get so excited when they think they see a bird or a plane.

When was the last time you saw a good Canadian film? How many Canadian films can most people even name? Maybe that’s because unlike music and television, there are no government enforced quotas for Canadian content in our movie theatres, allowing Hollywood to dominate our screens. Consequently, the phrase ‘Good Canadian Cinema’ is difficult for some people to say without a rising inflection at the end of the sentence, making it sound more like a question than something that actually exists.

Fortunately, the city’s newest rep theatre, the Toronto Underground Cinema is taking long overdue measures to remedy this. Starting this Thursday, the Underground is dedicating all 8 of its weekend screenings to great Canadian films as voted in an online survey. Strict budgets and a continuous funneling of our talent South of the border have placed odds against these films which they have overcome with style. Despite their understated yet undeniable merit and international critical praise, the average Canadian has only seen perhaps one or two of them, and they are rarely exhibited this way. With the help and support of our city’s film lovers, the Underground hopes this will become a quarterly event that could change the way we perceive our national cinema and increase interest in its potential growth.

Thursday, December 2nd

7pm – The Sweet Hereafter (Atom Egoyan, 1997)

Ian Holm and Sarah Polley lead an all star cast in Atom Egoyan`s profoundly tragic drama focusing on a small Canadian town dealing with the emotional scarring of a school bus accident that killed 20 children. Holm plays a lawyer from out of town handling the civil suits arising from the accident, but he also brings a lot of his own emotional baggage.

Click here to view the embedded video.

9:30pm - Last Night (Don McKellar, 1998)

A snapshot of the end of the world. It never says why, or how the world is ending, all we know is in a few hours it’s over. We follow a wide assortment of different people, spending their last few hours doing what they want to. Some party, some despair, some go about their business making sure everything runs smoothly right up until the end. Touching, funny, tragic, and oddly uplifting, this is a fascinating film that asks the viewer, “what would you do?”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Friday, December 3rd

6:45pm – Hard Core Logo (Bruce McDonald, 1996)

In this mockumentary, director Bruce McDonald follows washed-up punk band Hard Core Logo on their reunion tour of Western Canada. Featuring the talents of Hugh Dillon, Callum Keith Rennie and a slew of awesome music cameos, it’s hard to believe that Hard Core Logo isn’t a real documentary about a real band.

Click here to view the embedded video.

9pm – Pontypool (Bruce McDonald, 2008)

Pontypool is the story of disgraced shock jock Grant Mazzy who, on his first day on the job in the small Ontario town of Pontypool, has to contend with what appears to be a large scale viral outbreak happening directly outside the building. Director McDonald creates an intense claustrophobic experience while creating a sprawling vision of the world outside Grant’s broadcast booth using the scariest things at his disposal: simple words and sounds.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Actors Stephen McHattie and Lisa Houle, as well as the author Tony Burgess, will be in attendance for a Q&A following the screening.

Saturday, December 4th

7pm - Porky’s (Bob Clark, 1981)

The classic Bob Clark sex comedy that all others would be forever judged against. Essentially nothing more than a really horny version of Happy Days, Porky’s focuses on the exploits of a dive bar and the young Florida teens who spend their summer just trying to get laid. Porky’s really does establish the template for this type of movie quite well.

Click here to view the embedded video.

9pm – Cube (Vincenzo Natali, 1997)

A group of people find themselves trapped inside a maze seemingly made up of cubes with devious traps and puzzles at every turn. There is no escape unless they can all figure out where they are and why they are there. Dizzyingly brilliant, Cube is a cerebral horror film that is made so very rarely and has rarely been done better.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Screenwriter André Bijelic will be in attendance for this screening.

Sunday, December 5th

7pm – Naked Lunch (David Cronenberg, 1991)

When you pair a text from William S. Burroughs with director David Cronenberg, you know you are in for one heck of an experience, whether you can stomach it or not. A drugged out writer (loosely based on Burroughs himself) watches his typewriter turn into a cockroach and in a fit of paranoia becomes embroiled in intrigue of an Islamic African town. Not for the squeamish, but then again, what Cronenberg is?

Click here to view the embedded video.

9:30pm – Kids in the Hall: Brain Candy (Kelly Makin, 1996)

The groundbreaking sketch comedy troupe comes to the big screen in this tale of a new pharmaceutical that makes everyone happier than they have ever been, despite a few unfortunate side effects. The line between profiting and the greater good is skewed to a hilarious degree.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Good Canadian Cinema is sure to be an awesome weekend of film, be sure to check it out.
For more info visit the official Facebook event page.

As much as I always loved the first Fubar movie, I never once asked myself “why are we not seeing the further adventures of Terry and Dean?”  Perhaps that’s because I remember reading about a poorly received book they released 5 or 6 years ago (which I imagine was similar to the Beavis and Butthead ones I enjoyed when I was 12) and the subsequent promotional tour around Canadian university campuses. Does anyone else remember this? Probably not. So I was very skeptical when I found out they were premiering the sequel at this year’s festival.  To mix metaphors, I thought they were returning to the well to milk a dead cow. Fortunately there was enough water left in the well to keep the cow alive and ready to be milked for our viewing pleasure once again!

It’s not a perfect follow-up, but we all know how rarely that happens (Slap Shot 2: breaking the ice went about 10 feet wide of the goal). I appreciated it for the ways it was different from the first film, and could have done without the ways it was similar.  With Farrel out of the picture (R.I.P.) , they’ve done away with most of the  mockumentary techniques utilized in the first film, but director Michael Dowse holds onto a couple of them like someone easing himself into walking on his own by shedding one crutch at at time.  I understand that these actors improvise a lot, so they’re going to stick with the handheld camera and jump cutting, but there are still three or four instances when a character (I think almost always Terry) talks to the camera. Why? Who are they talking to?  Are Terry and Dean still being documented?  It’s an odd balance that I’m sure most people won’t even notice. Not only has the first film already acclimatized most viewers to this motif, but so has the popularity of shows like The Office and Trailer Park Boys.*

Fubar II delivers the expected laughs,  but I wasn’t expecting to get as involved in the story as I did.  The movie opens with an eviction party where we see the notorious Tron (who had settled down with his old lady in the first movie) has returned to his old partying ways as the boys demolish the house.  Tron has also come into some money by working the oil fields of Fort McMurray.  Terry and Dean follow him to make their fortune and despite finding some prosperity, it’s not quite the snabba cash they thought it would be.  I don’t want to give too much away, but the film also includes a love triangle, a suicide pact, a trip to the West Edmonton mall and a surprisingly sentimental, Christmassy third act.  There was clearly a well thought-out script in place while shooting, which again made me wonder why the director still stuck so closely to the mockumenatry aesthetic.

The acting was solid, these guys have clearly immersed themselves in the characters many times before, but the real breakaway performance in the movie was Terra Hazelton as Terry ‘s love interest Trish.  It’s rare to see someone who can do something that’s funny, dramatic and believable all at once.  This is her first film role but I think that her’s is a face we’ll get used to.  Andy Sparacino as Tron is also given a lot more to do this time around and does it admirably, especially considering he is also without any non-Fubar related film credits.

Fortunately for Paul Spence (Dean) and Dave Lawrence (Terry), their schtick has aged as well as they have. It’s been almost a decade since the first film, but their ship has not sailed yet.  The jokes don’t taste stale and it doesn’t feel like we’re watching the guys from Anvil, Wayne’s World, or Bob and Doug Mackenzie try to recapture their youth.  They avoid having too many “Give’rs” and replaced them with new potential catchphrases like “life is deadly.”   As writers they have matured, and despite occasionally recycling a used idea or joke, they’ve managed to take these characters to a place that is interesting and realistic and most importantly, kept us laughing.

*Despite the Trailer Park Boys airing their first season a year before the first Fubar movie came out, I can’t help but feel like the Fubar films kind of bookended the TPB phenomenon.  Although Alberta is a long way from Nova Scotia, you can’t deny the similarities.  Ricky, Julian and Bubbles say they’ve left the Sunnyvale trailer park for good, but I think they should meet up with Terry and Dean in Toronto for the party to end all parties.

One need only watch the film’s trailer to get a sense of the beauty and craftsmanship present within The Illusionist. It is even more pleasing to the eye than Silvain Chomet’s massively successful first feature, The Triplets of Belleville, although the story is not as engaging. Based on an unproduced script by renowned writer, director, actor, and mime Jacques Tati (1907-1982), the tale centers on a magician whose tricks are no longer sought after in the age of television and rock and roll. Chomet based the look of the magician on Tati himself, which works well within the story since his ordinary appearance is constantly upstaged by the fantastic looking characters around him who are contributing to the end of his era.

It has often been said that the purest and most difficult style of filmmaking is one that does not rely on dialogue or exposition to tell the story, but does so solely through moving images. As with Triplets, Chomet does this once again by having characters that rarely speak and deliver mostly grunts and other barely audible sounds when they do.  Their personalities come from their exaggerated faces and physicality, which represent the most impressive accomplishments of Chomet and his animation team.  For example, the effeminate and jovial way that the famous rock musicians carry themselves evokes laughter every time.

This speechless style of filmmaking is also the most difficult because it often will come at the detriment of audience involvement. As endearing as these characters are, there is a bit of a disconnect created by never hearing them speak, it can be very difficult to sustain a 90 minute story this way. I’m not the first to admit that I had trouble staying awake during this film, which is not to say it was boring or bad in any way, but that it is not the kind of story that has you sitting on the edge of your seat wondering what happens next. The predominantly visual experience has a very relaxing effect which is enhanced by an almost aimless narrative (and by seeing it after a late night working and an early morning screening of Snabba Cash). Though to be fair, I should not criticize the cohesiveness of a film that I drifted off once or twice while watching, but until I see it again I’ll consider it one of those ‘chicken or egg’ conundrums.

Much of the film concentrates on the relationship formed between the magician and the young woman who takes care of his current lodgings (where he is relegated to sleeping on the couch). It is mostly due to the age difference that we never view this as a romantic relationship. She enjoys his slight-of-hand and he seems to have taken a liking to her as well, and we’re made to assume they are fulfilling some kind of father/ daughter relationship that was lacking in their lives before meeting. The film is actually dedicated to Tati’s daughter whom the constantly preoccupied filmmaker always regretted not having a better relationship with. Ultimately I found we didn’t really know enough about these characters and their history, nor did they have enough scenes together for us to fully understand and care about their relationship.

One thing missing from this film that added so much to Triplets is memorable music. Of course there is music present in The Illusionist, in fact Chomet himself provides the score, but it does not play the same kind of central role that it did in his first film. Apart from musical performances, The Illusionist does delight us by depicting many other forms of performance, such as dancing, flying trapeze artists, and of course, magic.

As I review my review, I notice that have been very critical about certain points of this film, so I want to reiterate that this a true piece of art well worth seeing. Using a gorgeous, labour intensive yet almost antiquated method of animation feels like a very appropriate way to pay homage to both Tati and the kind of performer that does not really exist anymore as represented by the magician. This film has been over five years in the making, and the results are stunning. Look for a limited release around Christmas time.

It is with a combined sense of shame and excitement when I admit that I had only seen one Frederick Wiseman film in its entirety prior to screening his latest gem, Boxing Gym.  Shame because I could name a dozen titles of his recommended by as many people, and excitement because this film has motivated me to finally donate some time to the observational cinema of this true auteur.

Wiseman is known for documenting the normal, everyday operations of familiar public institutions. He will go in with a very small crew and shoot thousands of feet of film (still 16mm!!) over several weeks so that his subjects appear to become very comfortable and almost forget the camera’s presence. This is where the joy of the films lie, as it is rare to watch people interact so naturally onscreen that it delivers an almost voyeuristic thrill. Extensive use of a zoom lens is employed to help keep the camera person at a respectful distance, yet they still manage to record clear audio of conversations taking place in loud, busy spaces. With almost 40 feature documentaries under his belt, Wiseman has clearly established an effective method which helps him to paint the most truthful picture possible. Many will tell you that it’s impossible to put a camera on people without changing them and would prefer I use the word ‘convincing’ instead of ‘truthful,’ but I challenge them to name someone who comes closer to making this a possibility without exploiting or tricking the subject.

I like to view Wiseman’s work as near perfect little time capsules. High School (1968) felt like the closest I’ll ever come to seeing what high school was really like for my parents.  Even though Boxing Gym was only filmed a couple years ago, it feels like the gym has changed very little in the last thirty. From the outside Lord’s Gym doesn’t appear to be much more than a garage, and on the inside the walls are papered with old posters and boxing paraphernalia. The owner walks around with a large cordless phone on his belt and I doubt owns nor has much use for a cell phone. Many of the gym’s training methods depicted appear to be of his own low-tech invention, such as learning rhythm by bouncing a sledgehammer off a tire repeatedly (which ends up being surprisingly hypnotic to watch).   Although the film never gets into this, I think one of the reasons it was made was because this is the kind of old-school, grass roots facility that we see less and less of these days.

Wiseman finds art in the everyday and beauty in the casual relationships and sense of community created by the gym. It attracts people from all walks of life, from young kids to senior citizens and everyone in between. Even babies are permitted to come with parents who can’t get a sitter while they work out. It seems like people are there to socialize or bond over the sport as much as they are to learn it.  It doesn’t concentrate on any one boxer or show any big fights or events, as it’s more about the various people who find themselves drawn to the space and its unique atmosphere. I think in a very subtle, almost subliminal way, Wiseman does romanticize his subject, as it’s hard not to fall in love with this Lord’s Gym and tell yourself would join were it not all the way down in Texas.

At first I was surprised when I noticed people walking out of the movie several times throughout the screening. Then I realized these were most likely people who had never seen a Wiseman film before and didn’t know what to expect. You need to be in the proper mindset to just sit back and let the film wash over you without looking for too much meaning or narrative. I’ll admit that one of the things that appealed to me about this film versus his others was a running length nearly half of what he usually ends up with, but now armed with a better understanding of his work, I think I’m ready to tackle Basic Training, Juvenile Court, Meat, and Domestic Violence, to name just a few.

Peep World

If anyone read my TIFF picks and bought a ticket to Peep World based on my speculation that it was worth your while, I would like to take this opportunity  to apologize. Shortly after I posted that I was notified by a friend who had seen the film that my choice was misdirected and that the movie was “abysmal.” While I wouldn’t choose a word so harsh to describe a film that did make me laugh a few times, most of it felt like a lesson in how not to write a screenplay.

Lesson #1: Narration is a must. Within the first couple of minutes, we hear Lewis Black as the narrator tell us a bit about the extremely volatile family we are about to spend some time with. While he’s talking about the flawed characters, what he’s really telling us is that this is going to be a flawed film with voice over attempting to fill in the gaps.

Lesson # 2 Include lots of expository dialogue. The many emotional outbursts throughout the film consist of characters simply yelling how they feel or what they’re thinking instead of acting out their feelings in a more interesting and relatable way. I’m no psychiatrist, but I think if a real family were ever this is this upfront and blunt with one another, they would be the most functional family ever.

Lesson # 3 Change up the tone as much as possible. The film switches too fast and too frequently between broad humour and family melodrama. It’s difficult to follow an overlong scene about an unwanted erection at a book reading with a domestic dispute over a husband’s proclivity towards porno booths and expect viewers to take the ladder seriously. Many movies can be both funny and tragic, but it takes some skill and finesse to blend them properly, see Little Miss Sunshine for an outstanding example of this. Peep World would have benefited greatly by lowering its dramatic aspirations and concentrating more on the comedic strength of the cast.

Lesson #4  Do not have a protagonist that the audience can sympathize with. This film has no protagonist and all of the sympathetic characters are there only as spouses or partners to the immediate family members and thus remain in the film’s periphery. Part of sympathizing with a character is understanding his or her motives within the context of the story. The biggest conflict the story attempts to focus on is a very successful book the youngest sibling has written that happens to be a tell-all portrait of the family, what it’s actually about we are told almost nothing. We know that he writes about his sister as an unsuccessful artist, one brother’s struggles with drugs and another’s secret porn habits, but how can a book about such common, minor offenses be so popular and controversial? I guess one could call the book a ‘McGuffin’, but this isn’t Pulp Fiction and unlike the briefcase, the actual contents of the book will not be pondered post-viewing because the audience won’t care about any of the characters who have had their courses changed by it.

Lesson #5 . If you can’t think of an ending, fade out. While I suppose one or two things kind of get resolved, the film ends abruptly by Lewis Black telling us what happens.

Easy Money (Snabba Cash) is easy viewing for anyone who likes a good crime story that examines the relationship between gangs, drugs and big business. Set in Stockholm where organized crime is still relatively young, the film follows three very different protagonists who all become vested in one big drug shipment. Jorge is a recently escaped convict and lifelong member of a Latino gang who helps organize the deal so that he can flee the country for South America. Mrado is muscle for the Serbians who gets betrayed by his own and decides intercepting Jorge’s deal is the best way to provide for his young daughter’s future. If the film has a main character for the audience to identify with, it’s J.W. who drives a cab to put himself through business school and maintain an appearance comparable to that of his extremely wealthy friends. His contacts at the cab company, money laundering knowledge and overwhelming desire for wealth all lead him into waters way over his head.

The director originally wanted to cast non-actors, perhaps to add to the ‘social realism’, but fortunately he didn’t hold onto that notion because these actors embody the roles perfectly and have the kind of performance training that doesn’t draw attention to itself. They may not have lead lives very similar to their characters’, but they almost look as though they could have. Matias Hedin as Jorge was sent to ‘ghetto bootcamp’ for five weeks to help get into character, which seems to have paid off. Dragomir Mrsic as Mrado looks like a buff, scary Serbian version of Danny McBride with eyes that make you think he has stories you would never dare ask him to share, no matter how curious they make you. Joel Kinnaman who plays J.W. has the hardest part to play as his character is the one with the largest arc. With his looks and talent, I can easily imagine Kinnaman making his way into Hollywood movies should he desire to take that path.

The film is based on a very successful Swedish novel inspired by situations the author encountered while working as a criminal lawyer. I’m sure much of the film’s merit lies with this source material, but director Daniel Espinosa has done his part as well. He seems to have a good understanding of the tools and conventions the genre provides while concentrating on how alliances are made in these situations and how flimsy they become when things start to go wrong. He makes many conscious stylistic choices, most of which work well. He decided to give the film a very overexposed aesthetic, where any sunlight always looks like the kind angels descend from. I think he pushes it too far in some scenes where the whites are too white and would cause me adjust the colour settings on my TV had I been watching it at home.

Anyone going into this film who knows anything about the crime genre knows that the title is most likely meant to be ironic. Anytime you have characters going after easy money or one big score, things never work out as planned. The Hollywood Production Code which has been considered outdated ever since Bonnie and Clyde had their way with the law on screen, stated that films should never appear to sympathize with criminal acts. The opposite is much more common today, where filmmakers will go great lengths to make you like the criminals by making them charming, family oriented or motivated by noble causes. Despite throwing out almost every aspect of the Production Code long ago and often reveling in going against it, filmmakers still rarely allow their characters to successfully execute any get rich quick schemes, because as we all know, crime does not pay. Perhaps one day Bonnie and Clyde will live happily ever after with their loot, but for now, as far as movies are concerned, there is no such thing as “snabba cash”.

The film has already had a very successful domestic release and was actually the highest grossing Swedish film of 2009.  There are two sequels in the works as well as an English version with Zac Efron attached to star. With all of this hype it will likely see some kind of distribution in North America, but I doubt it will seen in many theatres here outside the festival circuit, if any. Despite being comparable to last year’s A Prophet in style, subject, and the amount of languages spoken by the characters, it doesn’t quite reach the same quality.

Fubar II

Michael Dowse, Canada

I’m surprised that I am the first to mention this long awaited Canadian sequel which I have on good authority does not disappoint. This movie kicks off Midnight Madness tonight, giving people time to shotgun a few pilsners before reuniting with Terry, Dean and Tron—Word has it that the right bar to party after Fubar tonight is Wrong Bar.

See the trailer here.
More info here.

See the rest of Noah’s TIFF 2010 Picks after the jump.

The Illusionist

Sylvain Chomet, UK

Anybody who saw 2003’s Triplettes of Belleville knows that it achieved a style rarely seen these days. Sylvain Chomet follows that up with another hand drawn creation, the story of which is based on an unproduced Jacques Tati script. This one is not to be missed.

See the trailer here.
More info here.

Real to Reel

This program always has an excellent selection of non-fiction films. These four look more than promising.

Boxing Gym

Frederick Wiseman, USA

Frederick Wiseman, the man who has directed nearly forty feature documentaries over the last 50 years does not seem to be slowing down. He’s let us be a fly on the wall in High School, Juvenile Court, Basic Training and now takes us into Boxing Gym. Perhaps inspired by his subject, Wiseman trimmed down this feature to about half his usual running length of three hours.

See the trailer here.
More info here.

Tabloid

Errol Morris, USA

I can only describe the write-up for this film in the festival program as ‘titillating.’  You don’t have to have seen Errol Morris’s films to know that he is one of the most respected documentary filmmakers working today.

More info here.

How to Start Your Own Country

Jody Shapiro, Canada

Here we have a Canadian-made documentary that examines several communities around the world who identify themselves as sovereign nations, even if those around them usually do not. 90% of a good documentary is finding the right subject, and this one already has my interest.

More info here.

Armadillo

Janus Metz, Denmark

A controversial war doc from Denmark that did very well at Cannes certainly sounds worth a gander to me. This is one of those titles that you may not see distributed in North America for a long time to come, if ever.

See the trailer here.
More info here.

Peep World

Barry Blaustein, USA

This is likely the only film in the ‘Gala’ series that I’ll be seeing. To be honest, I know very little about it, but seeing Michael C. Hall, Rainn Wilson, Sarah Silverman and Steven Tobolowsky play members of a dysfunctional family is definitely worth a shot.

More info here.

Easy Money (Snabba Cash)

Daniel Espinosa, Sweden

I’m not sure why I have a good feeling about this one. Maybe it’s because I like the crime genre or because it seems like there’s a lot of good stuff coming out of Sweden these days. The title in its native tongue is printed as ‘Snabba Cash’ which I think could be adopted into Canadian slang (meaning ‘easy money’) if this movie ever gets big here. “I think I’m going to join a medical testing group. They basically pay you to sign a waiver and swallow some pills, it’s total snabba cash.”

See the trailer here.
More info here.

Lapland Odyssey

Dome Karukoski, Finland

Described as the “not-too-distant cousin of Fubar and Harold and Kumar,” I feel as though this Finnish/English/Swedish/Russian co-production may be another of those ‘see it while you can’ festival opportunities. I’m quite curious to see what antics these young slackers living in Finland’s far North can get up to.

See the trailer here.
More info here.

Short Cuts Canada

Living History directed by Isaac Cravit

The obvious stepping stone for any young Canadian filmmaker hoping to get into the business is getting a short film into TIFF.  As an aspiring filmmaker myself, I look forward to seeing where the bar has been set. I’ve actually never attended one of their short programs before, so I can only imagine the excitement and nerves that must be buzzing about with so many people exhibiting their work in such a high profile event for the first time.

More info here.