So that’s it. Another great year at TIFF. I was concerned at the start that it would be disappointing but after 22 movies in 10 days, I have to admit it was another score. I still can’t stand the poor organization or the disrespect shown to the fans but the films are wonderful. So they got me again next year for sure. Best movies I saw were The Lady and Page Eight and I was disappointed by Werner Herzog and some over the top violence. Some of the big stars were in very disappointing films but some of the documentaries and smaller foreign films were excellent – yes – even the French ones. I will do a guide to the festival for any of you who are interested in sampling the festival next year. You don’t need to take a week to get something out of it but even hitting two to five will give you something to remember. More next summer. In the meantime I will update this blog with films I see during the year.
Last TIFF film for this year and the closing gala film. I saw it at noon on Sunday and both the Director David Hare and the leading actor, Bill Nighy showed up to introduce the film and do a Q and A afterwards. Quite a thrill. I am a huge Bill Nighy fan and he did not disappoint. This movie was shot in five weeks for three million dollars. Compare this to Moneyball at $47 million. The comparison? There is no comparison. Page Eight was the second best film I saw this year. Nighy plays an MI5 agent at the end of his career who is confronted with a combined intelligence/political dilemma that will certainly destroy his career if not his life. In a classic John LeCarre style the story unwinds in an intricate and enjoyable ride. This movie was made for the BBC and has already been broadcast in the UK. It deserves a theatrical release here so you can all see it. The cast includes Rachel Weisz, and Michael Gambon who are fantastic in their supporting roles. In fact the entire cast is fantastic led by Nighy who reminds me of a healthy Keith Richards. If you are trying to picture him think of Davey Jones in Pirates of the Caribbean and Slartibartfast in A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. He has been in many other films in small and supporting roles but this is a breakout for him. David Hare promises at least one sequel and the rumour is that the BBC wants a trilogy based on this character. My mouth is watering for the next film. The script – also written by David Hare – is witty and tight. I liked some of the wonderful puns that were slipped in here and there and the overall intelligence of the whole film. Highly recommended.
I kept the two big star movies for today so after George it’s off to see Brad in another target for the Academy. This one tells the story of Billy Beane the manager of the Oakland A’s baseball team in the late 90’s. Beane was a fan of sabermetrics, a statistical analysis of baseball teams and players developed by Bob James. The theory is that baseball can be analysed like a complex mathematical problem and a team can and should be built on this analysis more so than on the assessment of individual player skills and talents. Oakland was very successful under his direction despite the nay sayers who objected to his approach. Jonah Hill plays the young Yale economics grad who understands and crunches the numbers. Oakland never won a World Series using this approach but with one of the lowest salary budgets in professional sport, the team played well above their financial weight setting a modern era record for the most consecutive wins (20) in 2002. But the film is not just about baseball and statistics, it is also about Beane and his life. The ending is great and the script smart and funny. This was a very enjoyable two hours and if there is anyone who can challenge Clooney for the smooth actor title it would be Brad Pitt.
This is the major George Clooney movie at TIFF this year. I saw the Ides of March (see below) but this one stars Clooney in a major role. He plays the patriarch of a large Hawaiian family with roots going back to Hawaiian royalty. The family, as a result of its roots owns valuable property but must sell it off within seven years. The income from the sale will set up everyone (all the cousins, aunts and uncles) with a huge windfall profit so they are keen to complete the sale. While he works through this situation his wife suffers a fatal accident and is in hospital in a coma. The plot thickens as he wrestles with both these major issues. Clooney has to play the family man, a role he does not play in real life and about which he clearly has no clue. So while this movie is big budget and will get lots of Oscar attention, I am not sure George deserves to be rewarded for his role. Regardless of my opinion, Clooney is the smoothest actor on the planet and may bluff his way to a Golden Statue. I will not be terribly disappointed if he does win because while this is not a great role he has definitely done some very good work in smaller and bigger films like Good Night, and Good Luck, Syriana, and Michael Clayton to name three. The supporting cast is very good and the story rich and enjoyable despite his wife’s situation. Definitely worth the price of admission.
So I am back at work sadly and still have some updates to do including George Clooney’s latest, Moneyball and one of the best movies I saw all week – Page Eight with Bill Nighy. So more to come tonight.
Second film of the day and very different. This is an American film about the life of Sam Childers, a reformed drug addict and violent criminal, who finds God and hears the call to go to Sudan and help the people rebuild their country. While there he sees the horrors of the war and specifically the terrible toll visited on the children of that country. He is inspired to build an orphanage and works to protect and save as many children as he can. The film stars Gerard Butler of “300” fame and this combined with the title of the movie suggests on first glance if this film will not be a bit of a sensationalist rip-off of the tragic events in Africa. Fortunately it is not just the Spartans against the terrorists but a human story that has some real depth. The story is real and while Sam Childers currently in real life and in the film has no hesitation to use his expertise with guns and his willingness to do violence in order to protect the children under his care, he also has a charitable and Christian commitment that lies behind his actions. At the end of the film while the credits are run there is some real life film of the real Sam Childers. The resemblance to Gerard Butler’s portrayal is remarkable. I think the film is really pretty good, exciting, insightful and a shocking presentation of the incredible violence perpetrated against children in that part of the world.
If you followed my reviews last year you will know that I took it out on French films. I generally am not fan and have never been but this year may turn me around. I have already reviewed several very good French films including Le Havre, Rebellion and The Cardboard Village but the best by far was The First Man based on the final and unfinished novel of Albert Camus. Now you need to take into account that I have a doctorate in philosophy and that my focus was 20th century continental philosophy (you know… all those existentialists: like Sartre and Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty) but of course like many who did Arts and Science in the 60’s it was Albert Camus that we all read and loved. Camus’s great novel L’Etranger, was the ultimate nihilistic, anti-establishment, atheistic existentialist bible but, it was also his first novel and as he aged he matured and humanized and his latter novels like The Fall and this final one reveal a depth and intelligence about the human condition not equalled by many. This film is a wonderful recreation of the story. It tells the story of a man returning to Algeria, the home of his birth to learn more about his origins. Camus was born in Algeria himself at a time when North Africa and Algeria in particular were French colonies. So this is somewhat autobiographical. The protagonist in the novel and the film lost his father in World War I and in fact never knew him. The film uses flash backs to tell the story and moves between the past and present gently and intelligently. The acting is excellent and the insight into the colonial mind and situation is provided with sensitivity but does not pull its punches. I really loved this movie although it may not get the attention or distribution it deserves. A lovely film from the work of a great writer and philosopher.
Last film of the day and potentially the best was Habemus Papem (We have a Pope). We were lucky to have the director Nanni Moretti present who also acted in the film. Moretti is known for his comic and satiric take on Italian society and institutions and this time took on the Catholic Church and the Papacy. There was apparently much anxiety in Italy when it was revealed what his project was but the outcome was not as bad as many feared. This is a comic and satiric film but is not vitriolic or anti-catholic per se. Instead it is the fictional story of the selection of a new Pope who is reluctant to take his role. This is revealed to all just as the newly elected Pope is himself about to be revealed to the world. With a scream he retreats from the balcony and goes into hiding. All is put on hold as the Cardinals and the papal bureaucracy work to convince the new Pope to accept his place. Talk about a constitutional crisis! What to do when God’s elected bishop refuses to take the job on. There is no precedent and no way to go back. What follows is a very witty and whimsical trip including the hiring of Italy’s top psychoanalyst (played by Moretti himself) to treat the new Pope. One of the funniest scenes of the movie is the first session of the psychoanalytic intervention in which the psychiatrist and his patient begin to delve into his childhood issues and relationship with his mother with the entire College of Cardinals watching in a circle around them. Sadly the film ends with a whimper. Very disappointing and it spoiled the whole movie for me. Not sure I can recommend this to you but Moretti is not without talent and maybe if you just turn it off at the climax you will leave with a good impression.
This one was introduced and hosted by Piers Handling who clearly worships the director but who also clearly had no idea what the film was about. I don’t want to say bad things about Handling (well… sometimes I do). He is clearly good at running a festival at least in terms of attracting good films but he himself is not the best at understanding the films he has selected. Sadly he was a bit of an embarrassment in the Q and A until he silenced himself after being put down by the director and let the audience ask some questions.
Second movie of the day was Trespass, a home invasion thriller starring Nick Cage and Nicole Kidman. I was attracted to this by the fact that it was a Joel Schumacher although I could as easily said Nick Cage or Nicole Kidman. All of them are really good when they are good but can be really bad too. Sadly this film leans toward the latter category. The script was totally bizarre with twist after twist until it became completely absurd. A home invasion film has the potential to be totally thrilling and chilling but this one was eventually just silly. It’s been awhile since I saw it last but the home invasion film that really made the grade and has yet to be equalled is Wait Until Dark. I still remember people clinging to the ceiling of the theatre the first time they saw Alan Arkin’s key scene. I won’t tell you what it is if you haven’t seen it. Just don’t waste your time on Trespass and go get a copy of Wait Until Dark and sweat it out with Audrey Hepburn.
Hands up all those who know and live Michael Lonsdale. Who some of you may ask? I think he is one of the more underrated actors with a long and distinguished career going back to the 60’s. He starred in Is Paris Burning and The Bride Wore Black in the early 60’s but his breakout movie was The Day of the Jackal in 1973 in which he played the French inspector who tracks down and kills Edward Fox as the assassin. Last year he starred in Of Gods and Men a wonderful French film about a small group of monks in an Algerian village and this year he is an elderly priest in another French film about illegal immigrants. He is a French actor of English descent and is fluent in both French and English making him a very versatile resource. A brilliant character actor who deserves recognition from The Academy but sadly will likely never get it. This small movie is about a priest whose church has been deconsecrated leaving him with no congregation or purpose. He fears he is losing his faith and with it all the meaning in his life which has until then been dedicated to the poor community he has served. Shortly after the church is shuttered and locked it is invaded by a small group of illegal African immigrants who are being hunted by the police. The old priest gives them sanctuary and hides them despite the fact that they may also harbour terrorists. An interesting theme this year is the number of European films dealing with illegal immigration and the moral challenge it poses for countries like Italy and France specifically. From Le Havre, which takes a light but still humane angle on the theme, to this more serious film, the moral and personal implications of this increasingly difficult challenge are explored intelligently. This issue will continue to grow in the coming years due to climate change and what is really the beginning of an enormous human migration. We can expect to see more on this topic in documentaries and dramas in the years to come. We must all pay attention and not trivialize this issue. The film makes a powerful statement about this.