Fri 15 Sep 2006
Today is the first day I’m starting to drag a bit. Part of it is that my roommate and I switched beds last night (halfway through the fest), with me moving from the comfortable full-size to the rather less comfortable roll-away cot. But it’s also Day 7, and I’ve already seen 23 films in six days. That’s not an enormous number compared to some of my friends, but it’s a lot of watching. And today is one of those five-movie days that can take its toll. Still, I have two things going for me. I don’t have any screenings in the morning, and my first is one of my most anticipated of the fest.

The Devil’s Backbone was one of my favorite films of 2001, with its tale of war and brutality seeming prescient and haunting in the wake of 9/11. So when I heard that Guillermo del Toro was going to make a companion piece (“a sisters film to go with the brothers of Devil’s Backbone”), Pan’s Labyrinth moved to the must-see list. Del Toro was present and gave a wonderfully self-deprecating introduction, highlighting the fairy tale aspect of the movie.
And a fairy tale it is, though it’s also an historical drama that takes place immediately after the Spanish Civil War. A pregnant mother and her beautiful young daughter Ofelia (reminiscent of a young Natalie Portman) arrive at the home of her new husband, a senior military officer (Sergi Lopez, great as always). The daughter is an avid fan of fairy tales and thinks she’s spotted a real fairy when she notices a bug winging around. It turns out she’s right, and as we learn in the poetic voiceover, the girl is the reincarnation of a beautiful fairy princess. If she can perform three tasks, she can return to her underground kingdom “where there are no lies or pain.” There’s plenty of lies and pain in the real world, as we’re given yet another narrative incorporating soldiers abducting and torturing the oppressed. Fortunately, Lopez isn’t some exaggerated maniac, though he’s obviously the villain. And as the film goes on, he becomes Ofelia’s nemesis.
Pan’s Labyrinth is a gorgeous film to look at. The fairy tale sequences use perfectly calibrated special effects that are awesome to watch but also serve the story rather than overwhelm it. The historical scenes are lushly designed as well, and del Toro has a perfect eye for color and composition. The movie isn’t quite as strong as Devil’s Backbone, however, in part because the fantastic and historical modes never quite mesh. The fairy tale aspect doesn’t quite have the payoff that you’d expect (not like the ghost story of the earlier film), while we don’t spend enough time with the historical characters to understand their situation. They become mere abstractions: the good and the bad. And though del Toro understands how to communicate the brutality of violence, it feels more showy here and less authentic than it did in Devil’s Backbone. Don’t get me wrong. I like Pan’s Labyrinth a fair amount, but it doesn’t live up to my admittedly high hopes.
The next program actually contains two relatively short films: one by the nonagenarian Manoel de Oliveira and one by the up and coming Lisandro Alonso. I enjoyed the first, de Oliveira’s Bella toujours, quite a bit. A witty and thoughtful “sequel” to Luis Bunuel’s Belle de jour, it stars Michel Piccoli as the same character he played 40 years ago, while Bulle Ogier takes on the Catherine Deneuve role. As with many of de Oliveira’s recent works, this can get a bit talky, but the conversations about memory, love, and masochism are nice counterpoints to and amplifications of Bunuel’s fixations. Better, though, is when de Oliveira lets the camera and music do the talking. The scenes of Paris in the morning and at night are graceful. And the beautiful muted lighting reaches its apex in a stunning dinner scene by candlelight, as the two characters reflect on what has changed and what has not.

Little changes in Alonso’s Fantasma, a homage to Tsai Ming-liang’s Goodbye Dragon Inn and apparently to Alonso’s own Los Muertos (though it’s possible Alonso may also be poking fun at himself). As with the Tsai, this one features people wandering through an empty movie theater and adjacent offices, and climaxes with a few people watching a movie on screen, Los Muertos as it turns out. Unlike Goodbye Dragon Inn, which is a masterpiece, Fantasma is dull, repetitive, and lifeless. It has none of Tsai’s humor or insight into the nature of moviewatching and filmmaking. Alonso seems to think that just having people stare aimlessly is enough. Having enjoyed Los Muertos, I found this to be both disappointing and frustrating, and I hope that Alonso keeps looking for his own voice rather than mumbling someone else’s.
Benoit Jacquot has found a voice, or a muse I should say, in Isild Le Besco, who’s starred in five of his films, including his latest, L’Intouchable. The opening shot is a startling moment as Le Besco’s character is slapped in the face by her mother. It’s Le Besco’s birthday (happy birthday, dear!), and mom decides now is the best time to tell her daughter about her illegitimate origins. Turns out Le Besco has an Indian father, a product of a fling in the South Asian subcontinent twenty some years before. Struck by this revelation and the ennui of contemporary life, Le Besco decides to head to India and find her father.
That old plot thread doesn’t hold much tension for me (your mileage may vary, of course), but Jacquot tries to spice things up formally. A conversation that takes place in one scene is played as a voiceover in another. The India sequences are shot in a documentary style, with not only a hand-held camera but bystanders actively looking at the camera. To be honest, I have no idea why Jacquot favored this sort of guerilla-syle filmmaking unless he just wanted to save some money. That wouldn’t surprise me, actually, as the entire project feels rushed and under-written. The only thing going for it is Le Besco, who’s one of the more fascinating actresses working today. As my friend Dan Sallitt pointed out, the movie feels like a documentary about Isild Le Besco, and there are certainly worse things to document.
On my way to the last movie of the day, I bump into Dan Owen, fellow TIFFer from years past who wasn’t able to come this year because of work commitments. At least that’s what he told us, but who just flew in from the UK the day before and was standing in the subway station? What a wonderful surprise that is, so Dan and I head to an Asian restaurant for a quick meal before our next movies.
My last film of this five-film day is probably the strangest movie I’ll see this festival. Opera Jawa is exactly what it’s title suggests–an Indonesian opera. But in addition to the music and singing, it’s also full of ritual dance, art installations, puppets and mannequins, costumes, and myth. And because Indonesian music uses a different tonal system than classical Western styles, the music is foreign as well. But it’s also strikingly beautiful and when combined with the highly expressive dance is able to tell a story of complexity and power. The first half of the opera focuses on the love triangle that develops between a man, his wife, and her suitor, while the latter half introduces the themes of wealth and revolution. I should point out that the opera isn’t staged in a theater but shot in scenes in a “typical” Indonesian village, so there are also ethnographic elements worked into the story on top of everything else.
As you might imagine, not everything holds together, but the high points far outnumber the low ones. I was particularly taken with many of the duets and seduction songs. Love and betrayal are such elemental themes and perfect ones to portray in dance and art. And while the film feels like it could’ve used a bit more time to make (or at least a few more takes), there are numerous moments of visual beauty. A long ribbon of red fabric is particularly well used. Director Garin Nugroho’s attempt to include almost every aspect of Indonesian society may be ambitious, but it fits with the all-encompassing nature of the project. That it succeeds much more than it fails is a grand achievement.
There’s nothing like a good film to make you forget how tired you are. Still, I’m thrilled that I don’t have a movie before 2:45pm tomorrow. Sleep and rest will be welcome.
Pan’s Labyrinth: 3.5 stars (out of five)
Belle toujours: 4 stars
Fantasma: 1.5 stars
L’Intouchable: 2.5 stars
Opera Jawa: 4 stars
7 Responses to “TIFF, Day 7”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 17th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
I’m sorry you didn’t enjoy Fantasma, but it’s unfair to consider it solely as a rip-off of Goodbye, Dragon Inn… While Tsai made a (positive, nostalgic, melodramatic) homage to the (his) past, here Alonso confronts the alienation of the present (without any dramatization of emotional relationship between characters, like Tsai did). Although as it’s only 1h long, we may assume it’s only a sketch of a film, a freestyle essay, a provocation or a statement. Anyway I agree that Los Muertos was much superior (but it was somehing else altogether).
Thanks for all your great reviews! I’ve added plenty of more films to my anticipation list.
September 18th, 2006 at 9:00 am
Thanks for the nice words, Harry. Now to Fantasma. I don’t think I said it’s a rip-off (’homage’ has a much more positive connotation), though I clearly believe it’s vastly inferior and mostly a waste of my time.
I was hoping you could elaborate (or point me to a place you’ve already elaborated) on how you think Alonso confronts the alienation of the present. Is it just because people walk around aimlessly without interacting? And if it’s a freestyle essay, provocation, or statement, what exactly is it trying to say, besides the fact that few people will come to a movie like Los Muertos and even fewer will enjoy it? I gave this movie a long benefit of the doubt, but by the 40-minute mark, the only way I could pass the time was thinking of all the things I liked about Goodbye, Dragon Inn. So I’m interested what you (and Darren Hughes, who’s posted a positive blurb) found to like.
September 18th, 2006 at 1:20 pm
I know, I should have used big air quotes around “rip-off”, it was “sarcastic” (in good spirit). What I got from your review is you seem to subordinate Fantasma to GDI because the filmic reference (only formal), but the point of the film is contradictory. But I don’t blame you, aimless long takes requires a personal engagement. Although you say you liked Los Muertos and I was wondering what could distinguish their respective “boredom”…
Fantasma is definitely more abstract and allegorical, there is no embedded narration at all (as slim as it was in Los Muertos), and what we could make of it has little immediate importance. That’s why I like to think of it as a poetical reflexion.
Alonso establishes an hypothetical confrontation of 2 (cultural) worlds in Argentina : urban/rural, and by means of analogy to cinema : artfilm (Los Muertos)/ mainstream (labyrinthine multiplex). And if the characters in Fantasma do not communicate (which is coherent with their habits in the countryside), it is less significant than the fact the world outside (Buenos Aires) remains oblivious of their presence.
So Alonso takes Tsai’s complacent nostalgia one step further by criticizing today’s industry and today’s audience, because the ghosts that haunt the theatre are alive and contemporean (playing themselves) unlike Tsai’s ghosts.
Actually I reviewed this one too, so you could check my impressions, maybe clearer than my comment here.
I’d like to hear Darren’s take too.
October 4th, 2006 at 10:37 am
I’m afraid I don’t have much at all to say about Fantasma. In my quick, In a Nutshell post, I listed it as a “Solid Film,” which was my designation for movies that I felt could be recommended for some reason or another. In the case of Fantasma, I felt the film was an interesting formal experience and intertextual experiment. As a huge fan of Tsai, I found it instructive to see what another talented director could make of what is essentially the exact same content Tsai had used earlier.
I don’t recall giving Fantasma a positive blurb, but if I spoke somewhat highly of it in Toronto, I’ll blame Girish’s infectious enthusiasm.
Actually, by the end of the film, I felt incredibly frustrated. I doubt I’ll be able to defend the use of this word, but whereas Tsai, even at his most provocative and transgressive, always imbues his films with wit and compassion, Alonso’s felt “misanthropic” to me. I found the tone really unsettling.
Also, my favorite part of Fantasma was the opening section with the noise guitar soundtrack. I would have been perfectly content to sit and listen in the dark for another twenty minutes.
October 9th, 2006 at 7:47 am
thanks for your thoughts Darren.
I thought that it was the form that was borrowed from Goodbye, Dragon Inn, Alonso developped his own content…
I felt frustrated too, maybe because it was too short, or too evasive… although the “misanthropy” didn’t hit me, not that it would bother me. You think he doesn’t like his protagonists or that he shows too much that the world around them is hopeless? It might be a philosophical position that he takes for contrasting purpose.
Sorry about the petty bickering J Robert. I respect your impressions of the film, I just wanted to engage in a comparative debate.
I hope you will post the rest of your reviews from Toronto. I’m looking forward.
October 9th, 2006 at 8:42 am
Harry,
I’m sorry I haven’t responded, and I certainly don’t consider your comments (or Darren’s) petty bickering. I should’ve warned you right after TIFF that I might be incommunicado for a few weeks. The last two weeks of September and first two of October are by far my busiest weeks of the year. In the last three weeks, I’ve graded 80 college papers, watched 20 movies for Chicago’s film festival, wrote 15 reviews–all in addition to my normal workload of tutoring and college teaching. I had hoped to work up a response to you before this, but I’ve barely had a chance to breathe. Things should slow down after this week, though, and then I’ll get back to blogging as well as reading your blog. Thanks for your patience and thoughtful comments.
October 9th, 2006 at 1:31 pm
Oh I didn’t know, I was worried about you. Don’t mind my impatience
And keep up the good work!