|
 Every year, I devote an entire weekend to my local film festival, Sleeping Giant Fest. It is a showcase for feature-length narrative films, film premiers, short films, experimental films, multi-media showcases, filmmaker showcases, musical performances, and much more. This is the festival's third year, and it is my third year attending. My friends think I'm crazy for such an exhausting endeavor. This thread will be a retroactive look at what I experienced at the festival. I hope it will provide insights to films that interest you enough to seek them out for yourself. This is the schedule for the complete festival:  Stay tuned to find out what I saw and my thoughts.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 14:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:16 |
|
|
 Directed by Alison Klayman I believe Steven Bannon believes in his life's work. I don't know if he actually believes the misinformation he peddles, or his effect on the world. I can only assert that he truly believes in what he does because it is the only thing giving his life meaning. Pictures of Steve Bannon make him out to be unassuming. He's first to laugh at pictures of himself. He's overweight, he's usually unshaven, his two-collared-shirt style (which is mentioned to him regularly) makes him look like a bum, his pale broken complexion makes him look drugged, his hair is long and consistently without style. He's an ugly dude. And so it is completely disarming when he speaks. He is charismatic and charming. He travels the world and finds fans and associates who seek his approval in every single country. He's a popular guy. Even his enemies enjoy engaging him. This is not to say that the filmmakers approve of him. Alison Klayman, as she follows and documents Bannon, asks him how he can allow himself to be a destructive force to the world. She tells him he spreads hatred and vitriol, that he is a major reason countries around the world are at conflict with themselves. He laughs it all off. He reflects on morality, with comparisons to the German scientists and engineers who built the concentration camps without moral obstacles, but chooses to neglect it in favor of pursuing his current goals. He is not only intelligent, but a diligent worker. His house is full of a mess of an addled task-driven mind balancing a million projects, with stacks of books and papers on every available surface. He carries two cellphones, a blackberry and a smart phone, everywhere he goes. He carries a stack of books and folders with him everywhere. His work, however, is all-encompassing. The only family ever mentioned is his nephew, who is his personal assistant. Bannon does not have friends, saying people in his position in life don't have friends, to think of persons as friends is misguided, and he can only afford work associates.  What's fascinating about this documentary is the intangibility of truth in the moment. Bannon's whole career is built on the power of misinformation being decorated as honest truth, with an emphasis on nationalism as its defense. Bannon openly jokes that Klayman, a vocal leftist, is going to 'destroy him' in her film. He allows her and her crew to film intimate meetings with world leaders and politicians. As he peddles his latest film, Trump @War, he gleefully brags that it is nationalist propaganda, and that it's going to pave the way to more success. (Of course, it is premiered to an alt-right audience who declare it's misinformation as objective truth.) He seemingly has nothing to hide. He promises his associates that he would never take money or donations from non-Americans, that he is incredibly selective with who he receives payments from. Later, he meets with a Chinese mogul, a filthy rich man who fled to America from communism, who wants to give Bannon a ridiculous amount of money in support. Bannon laughs it off, changes the subject to something trivial, and then asks Klayman to leave the room so they can "discuss further matters in private". Klayman asks Bannon later if he accepted money from the mogul, which Bannon, without making eye contact, nonchalantly denies and changes the subject. Therein lies the hidden truth about Steve Bannon: he is his own worst enemy. Intelligence and work ethic do very little to protect him from the wake of destruction he creates for himself. His lies, half-truths, and misinformation add up against him. His associates--cronies, for lack of a better word--are more interested in dollar signs and fame rather than world change. The public--not just Americans, but all over the world-- wants his head on a silver platter. The alt-right are fair-weather friends who only like you when you're convenient to their cause. And with Bannon, the tower he built for himself is a fragile one, and it doesn't seem to be able to handle the weight of his ego or the fires that he's starting around him. And with the ever-changing landscape of American politics, he is doomed. Recommended! Letterboxd
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 15:32
|
|
|
 Di Qiu Zui Hou De Ye Wan Written & Directed by Bi Gan Luo Hongwu returns to Kaili, the hometown from which he fled 12 years earlier. As memories of an enigmatic and beautiful woman resurface - a woman he loved and whom he has never been able to forget - Luo Hongwu begins his search for her. Past and present, reality and dream interweave in Bi Gan's stunningly beautiful and highly innovative film noir. "Bi Gan is preoccupied with film’s potential to both materialize mental space and convey physical sensation. His cinematic ambitions are further crystallized, to say the least, in Long Day’s Journey Into Night, a noir-tinged film about a solitary man (Jue Huang) haunted by loss and regret, told in two parts: the first an achronological mosaic, the second a nocturnal dream. Again centering around his native province of Guizhou in southwest China, the director has created a film like nothing you’ve seen before. Co-starring Chinese superstars Sylvia Chang and Wei Tang, the film features an hour-long, gravity-defying 3D sequence shot, which plunges its protagonist—and us—through a labyrinthine cityscape."  "The TV says dreams are lost memories." Due to the fractured nature of this film's narrative, it is especially difficult to write about it. This film is divided into two parts, which we will, for clarity, refer to as Reality and Dream. When considering the film as a whole, it is most reminiscent of Kar-Wai Wong's Chungking Express. Chungking Express is two completely separate stories, linked by themes, motifs and symbols that reveal a cohesive pattern. Both parts of Long Day's Journey Into Night tells the same narrative twice, a somewhat simplified telling of the shifting identity of a missing woman like in Hitchcock's Vertigo, through different moments and plots, also linked through motifs and symbols that slowly reveal a cohesive pattern. Reality 'Reality' is a misnomer. This is a fractured story told through loosely link vignettes. Like a neo-noir rehasing of Scorsese's After Hours, it follows a man searching for a woman over the course of an evening. Structurally, it's feels more like Bergman's Persona, especially it's tone poem tarantula intro, or David Lynch's INLAND EMPIRE, where the narrative is built from small chunks cobbled together. Ironically, it all follows a dream-logic, bending to the narrator's stream-of-consciousness as he recalls a story of love and loss. Many of the scenes feel like memories for the character(s), or his/their imaginings. Scenes bleed together through soft transitions and subtle editing. The only concrete idea we are bound to is that our main character--a detective or a criminal?--has lost a woman he claims to love, he is looking for her, and has either found her or her doppelganger. The film's pacing is slow, and is especially interested in long takes that would make Tarkovsky salivate, including a heartbroken person eating an apple, a couple lighting a cigarette, woman walking in a tunnel in the rain, and a a karaoke performance. There is a constant threat of danger and violence bubbling under the surface, but the suspense is propagated by a concentrated effort of anti-action, similar to Lynne Ramsay's You Were Never Really Here or Jonathan Glazer's Under The Skin, where (literally) we always cut away before the glass falls and breaks. Every shot is beautiful, colorful, mesmerizing, and fascinating, which honestly is the biggest motivator to continue the film's constant teasing of its obtuse story. Our main character, Luo Hongwu (though names aren't referenced very often), exhausted and confused by his quest, decides to take in a movie at a local theater. He puts on 3D glasses (a prompt for audiences to do the same), leans his head against a pillar, and falls asleep, plunging us into The Dream the 2nd half of the film, a 59 minute dream sequence filmed in 3D, which is (almost impossibly) one long take. The dream begins in a dark tunnel. Luo Hongwu is confused and lost, completely aware he was just asleep in a movie theater. We follow him from the tunnel to a village where a singing competition is taking place, where he meets a woman in a pool hall who looks like the woman he is searching for. The story, continuing it's narrative irony, and due to being a single take, is completely linear. The camera work here, following Luo through the colorful streets, feels like long winding camera shots from Dario Argento's Tenebre. Much of this segment follows Luo and the woman talking, which, oddly enough, feels most like Linklater's Before Sunrise. This is probably the greatest 3D film I have ever seen. The depth absolutely compliments the cinematography (especially the lighting, which becomes tangible in this dream-world), the colors and this bizarre world. Stories, especially those told through film, television and songs, are of great importance. The woman being searched for is said to be an amazing story-teller. Dreams are discussed by the characters in relation to television and film. We are told early on that films are lies. And yet, the key to unlocking this story, is told through film. I can't say I fully understand everything this film is trying to deliver. It's certainly more interested in it's emotional resonance rather than literal story and plot. It's the type of heady confusion intended to upset and isolate the audience, kind of like the effect of Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow (though not nearly as dense, of course). Before the dream sequence, I had to leave the theater to get a coffee, because it's plodding pace (intentionally) lulls you into a sleepy state. I am sincere when I say it feels like Tarkovsky's methodical pacing was the goal. Despite it's obtuse storytelling and it's depressing themes of loss and sadness, it is incredibly rewarding by the end, once it's patterns emerge, despite there being no real resolution, at least on the first watch. Recommended!, preferably in theaters, or at least with the 3D format intact. Letterboxd Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Apr 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 16:41
|
|
|
 Directed by John Chester This is basically a documentary version of a Harvest Moon game. A lovely couple, John and Molly, disenchanted with their Los Angeles yuppiedom, leave the big city to create a big farm. The cynicism is necessary to frame this film. This is, genuinely, a lovely story. I love it when people get tired of the big city and pursue simplicity. It's a wonderful dream, but it is sadly hampered by the financial reality that it is difficult to achieve. John is an excellent wild-life photographer who has filmed for some of the best documentarians working in film and television. Molly is an excellent chef who designs diets to feed the 1%. While their living situation is modest compared to their employers, they are, in every way, well-to-do. I don't disclose this to besmirch their efforts, which are inspiring, but to assure any viewers ready to watch this for notes on how to change their lives, that this is not the story of an every-person, but of someone using their privilege for something good, something bigger than themselves*. The film itself is gorgeous. Chester is sure to capture the farm life--the plants, the landscape, the animals--in absolute beauty. Some of the footage is mind-boggling and almost feels artificial. How did Chester manage to get his camera for this moment? The answer is simple, of course: the film takes place over almost a decade, and he was a professional who maintained his career and equipment while still in the farm life. The pacing is quick and pleasant. Even the hardest moments, which should have great gravity, are softened to keep this film light and breezy. John's narration also contributes to this feeling, with thoughts about the greater whole, and trying to do what's right with the least amount of destruction. There are moments where John's thoughts about the universe's grandeur and how we're insignificant specks on this planet are so saccharine my eyes rolled, but the optimism seems to be the biggest agenda here. This film's counterpart would be the recent Eating Animals, narrated by Natalie Portman, based off of the non-fiction book by Jonathan Safran Foer, which follows four farmers and their methods of survival against the Purdue Farms monopoly that has destroyed farming. They are similarly beautiful films to look at, and both are optimistic, but Eating Animals only gets there after it's broken the audience down to tears. It's a painful film that earns it's optimism. Biggest Little Farm pulls those punches, and instead only wants us to look at the positive side and strive towards solutions.  Emma the pig with her partner Greasy the chicken There is sadness. John and Molly's mentor, Alan York, an eccentric 'genius' who designed the farm as an experiment in biodiversity, died of cancer early in the project. John and Molly joke that he left them at the absolute wrong time. He leaves the film too early, too, because he is the most exciting person in the story. Partially a crackpot, partially an insane optimist, but entirely charming, Alan is the whole mastermind behind the farm (while John and Molly run it and the investors pay for it). It is his goals that I found the most interesting about the film. His ideas are what I want explored and discussed, because it is his belief in biodiversity that the film has any meaning, goal, and actual truths that can be used beyond the film. And yet, strangely enough, only John and Molly are listed on the Letterboxd and imdb pages for the film. I did enjoy the film, overall. I think it's message of farming and biodiversity is necessary right now, even if it's just to shine light that humanity makes mistakes for the greater world when we make decisions based on greed. I wish I could quit my job and go start my own farm with hundreds of different plants and animal breeds, managing over time to get the many disparate parts to work together as a whole, but that's an obscene goal for the average person with average income. But hopefully this inspires investors to know that there is hope with returning farming to an industry of that supports the individuals and not corporations, that business like Apricot Farms can exist and thrive successfully and improve their communities. Recommended! Letterboxd *Like a movie and book deal
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
What was the Jonas Mekas program?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
  The Open-Ended Educational Film From the Sleeping Giant program: The late 60s and early 70s were not only a magical time for naturalism in feature films and documentaries; the low-budget, less-linear, against-the-grain, often dark realism of New Hollywood, cinema verité and the avant garde—also worked its way into the rarefied theater of the classroom. Coinciding with progressive developments in education and psychology, adolescent educational films of the social guidance variety were no longer solely comprised of stagey set-ups with clear, moralistic directives. In the era of feminism, civil rights and the anti-war movement, educational films were also breaking away from the patriarchal narrative with ambiguous, irresolute plots featuring discontent children and their complex emotions and contradictory behaviors. This nondidactic openness was meant to spark thought, discussion and presumably in many cases, intense feelings among their captive, impressionable audiences. Less infamous than the gore and emotional manipulation of driver’s ed films and less campy than dated mid-century lessons on topics like hygiene or manners, these films are tucked away in their own strange section of our cinematic library, and also perhaps in the deeper chambers of many adults’ psyches. The faded and scratched marvels you’ll watch today are just a few examples of what remains one of cinema’s curious, earnest and uniquely beautiful phenomena. – Brittany Gravely Special thanks to Liz Coffey, Tim Massett, Mark Johnson, John Quackenbush and the Harvard Film Archive. Each of the following films are original 16mm prints provided by the Harvard Film Archive or from personal collections of those mentioned above, except for Silent Snow, Secret Snow, which was on 35mm. As such, half of these films are so obscure, I had to personally put in their information on Letterboxd. The films are printed here in the order they were shown.  The Fur Coat Club (1973, dir. Joan Micklin Silver, 18 min.) - Letterboxd Two young girls with a passion for touching fur coats become locked inside a furrier's shop after hours when two burglars break in. It's mostly a silent film, with the only dialogue delivered like the adults in a Charlie Brown cartoon (also delivered by adults in the context of the story). It largely feels like an Our Gang / Little Rascals short. At first it seems like a cautionary tale about talking to strangers, as the two little girls run amock trying to pet the fur coats of unsuspecting adults around them. They mostly rub up against women, but there's a bizarre gag where one of the girls runs up and starts rubbing the furred rear of a woman bent over a water fountain, only for them to turn and reveal that it is in fact an African American pimp, who high fives the little girl for her admiration of his style. The hijinks continue until the girls sneak into a furrier's shop, where they are accidentally locked in the fur safe. Their fear materializes with hallucinations of the furs coming to life and attacking the girls, in what is a creative and disturbing sequence. The story ends with an ironic twist--two burglars break into the safe, freeing the girls and leading to their own arrest. The girls are no longer interest in furs, but they have a long career of anarchic joy ahead of them. The educational discussion from this must have been frustrating for the teacher. While basic morality is shown--Don't Talk To Strangers, Rules/Structure Is In Place For Your Protection, that kinda stuff--the lesson is conflicted. The girls are ultimately heroes for their anarchic rule breaking! Recommended! The Lost Puppy (1968-70?, dir. George H. McQuilkin, 13 min.) - Letterboxd A young girl is left alone while her mother goes to work. When she realizes her dog has escaped the yard, she decides to go on her own and find the puppy herself. The little girl in this short film seems to be five or six years old. She is left alone by her mother. She goes to a park all alone, looking for her puppy. She talks to a man who offers to take her in his car to find her puppy, which she declines. She goes to a bus yard where she finds the puppy. The entire thing is rather bizarre and frightening, as it all feels very real. In this film, the girl succeeds in rescuing her dog and getting home safe, and it's up to her to decide if she tells her mother she broke the rules. Again, must have been a head-ache for the teacher to lead discussion, but it is visually impressive. The Bike (1968-69, dir. George H. McQuilkin, 13 min.) - Letterboxd Two boys steal their neighbor's brand-new bike for a joyride to a nearby park. One of the boys crashes the bike, ruining it. They must repair it and return it before the boy gets home, and possibly tell him the truth. This one was a stand-out, and made me take note about George McQuilkin. Of the films, this one has a bit of a following, with Harvard Film Archive having some details about the film on record. The cinematography is wonderful, especially some shots of the kids riding bikes through a tunnel, their shadows outlined against the outside foliage. The story is much more intriguing. Of course the theft is going to occur, but the open-ended discussion is about whether or not our main character--a toothless redhead boy--is going to tell the truth. His ne'er-do-well counterpart, a blonde sleepy-eyed boy, goads him into recklessness with threats like "I won't be your friend anymore". They have a back-and-forth about who is to blame based on intention. It's a wonderful little short film, one I wish I could easily share here with everyone. Highly Recommended! The Boy Who Liked Deer (1975, dir. Barbara Loden, 18 min.) - Letterboxd | YouTube Jason, along with two friends, is a vandal at his school. His destruction is getting a lot of attention. When he is alone, he is a sensitive child who volunteers his time at a petting zoo with deer. He will soon learn that his destructive actions have equally destructive consequences. This was a film project for Barbara Loden five years after her independent feature-length film Wanda was released. This film carries the same emotional weight while teaching a powerful tale about human empathy. It's also the most well-known film among this batch. Highly Recommended! I Walk Away In The Rain (1968, dirs. David Gleissman & Don G. Williams, 11 min.)Letterboxd A popular and gifted teenager draws concern from his teacher when she discovers that he doesn’t care about education, has no plans for the future, and methodically does the bare minimum to pass his classes. What's most interesting about this film is how it's 'morality' would most appeal to an educational format, or a work environment, but appeals less to an individual. The main character isn't interested in knowledge or facts or societal structure, but instead likes his creative pursuits, going out on a boat, or spending time with friends. He enjoys the immediate present, and his teachers think he's a fool. Barely anything is known about the filmmakers and the production behind this short. Meh. Silent Snow, Secret Snow (1966, dir. Gene Kearney, 17 min.) Letterboxd | YouTube Alienation, angst, and schizophrenia are powerful themes addressed by Kearney in this forgotten educational film about a boy obsessed with snow. Absolutely unnerving and strange. Feels like a bad drug trip. I couldn't really tell if we were to assume the main character is actually mentally unwell, or if parents inability to understand their children is harmful to them. Would probably scare kids. I think it'd be a fun pre-show for a Christmas horror movie like Christmas Evil. Recommended!  Some supplemental reading materials were handed out after the film: copies of two of the hand-outs that were used in the classroom to promote discussion about the films. When I get home, I will make copies and edit them into this post. Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Apr 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:What was the Jonas Mekas program? A showcase of six of his films, all projected from 16mm prints. (Stay tuned)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
I want to hear more on The Image Book, because it feels like it's one that I've heard lots of people talk of seeing, but not many people talk about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:16 |
|
|
Sorry for the delay, I've been busy! dir. Werner Herzog & André Singer Rising from a farm boy to become President of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev brought about changes that helped end the Cold War, toppled the USSR, enabled the reunification of Germany and transformed the world forever. I don't know much about Gorbachev, Ronald Reagan, and the Cold War, making this film a huge risk for boredom. I trust Herzog's filmmaking sensibilities enough to blindly jump into any project he works on. Luckily for me, this is a wonderful introduction to a fascinating figurehead who revolutionized the modern world. Herzog is upfront about being a vocal fan of Gorbachev. He has read all of his writings, and books about him. It makes the interviews fascinating, because Herzog will prompt Gorbachev with a statement, and Gorbachev picks it right up and tells a complimentary story. For instance, Herzog begins the first interview by saying with dry wit, “The first German you met wanted to kill you.” Gorbachev thinks about this and spreads a small smile before correcting Herzog with an anecdote about growing up with German neighbors who were excellent at making sweets and candies. "I thought that only the most wonderful people could make such delicious sweets," says Gorbachev (though I'm paraphrasing, of course). The interviews (three, I believe) proceed in this fashion. The pacing is conversational, ranging from many topics like world history, Gorbachev's personal history (marked with success and tragedy), politics, and even the mundane, like Gorbachev's love of sweets, or his intense interest in the people of the world.  Of course, Gorbachev has had plenty of time to become biased in his own history. He takes time to dispel American rumors that have been propagandized and how it's shaped our arrogant and incorrect view of other countries. He defends choices he's made, he laments other choices he's made, but it's all told with a genuine geniality that it's hard to be cynical. Ronald Reagan, for instance, is a pretty easy target for dislike, but Gorbachev is respectful in his telling of their interactions. What caught me off guard is the optimism throughout. Herzog's affinity towards Gorbachev is infectious, and Gorbachev himself has strong hopes for the world. He is certain that--despite the problems we face--the human race has accomplished so much, and we are constantly working towards being a better world, that he is happy in accepting even the smallest of victories while inspiring others to work hard at fixing our problems. Quite unusual for dour ol' Herzog, but refreshing, even if it isn't his greatest documentary. Highly Recommended! Letterboxd
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 16:17
|
|