Father Geek here... a few years ago I got a request from a guy in Rome to cover the great Venice Film Fest for us. That was the first time I had heard from Robert our current Euro-AICN editor. He covered that fest as well as others in Europe for us, then when our original Euro column editor Egdard's day job took him from us Robert stepped up and volunteered to take over the column. That was over a year ago, annnnd here we are full circle with our man in Italy covering another fine Venice Festival for us... Here's Robert...
Hi people.
I attended this morning the press conference introducing the 59th edition of the Venice Film Festival (which will occur between august, 29 and september, 8) .
I attended this morning the press conference introducing the 59th edition of the Venice Film Festival (which will occur between august, 29 and september, 8) .
The director Moritz De Hadeln (who was chief of the Berlin film Festival for 22 years) called the selection "a miracle". He was referring to the incredibly brief period (4 months) to organise everything. In fact, since the former director Alberto Barbera was removed, many candidates fought for the "throne" and when eventually De Hadeln was choosed, it was already march 2002. Reading the list of titles, it seems to me a very interesting festival, well divided between important american movies (as Road to Perdition, K-19, Full Frontal, The Hours, Frida, Blood Work) and latest works by acclamated european directors as Stephen Frears, Michel Deville, Andrej Koncalovskij, Peter Mullan and Lukas Moodysson.
In the official competition section, I'm also looking forward to Takeshi Kitano's Dolls and Michele Placido's Un viaggio chiamato amore.
An important decision made by De Hadeln was to change the second competitive section (called last year "Cinema del presente", which was seen by many critics as a less important competition) into a space dedicated to a cinema less conventional. This section is called now "controcorrente" (which can be translated as "non conformist) and we'll see there (among others) Steven Soderbergh's Full Frontal, Arturo Ripstein's La Virgen de la lujuria, Lilja 4-ever by Lukas Moodysson, Claire Denis's Vendredi Soir and Shinya Tsukamoto's A Snake of June. Out of competition, we'll be able to appreciate Liliana Cavani's Ripley's Game, Todd Haynes's Far from Heaven and John Malkovich debut Dancer Upstairs. One of the most moving moment will be probably the screening of 11' 09'' 01- September 11, a collection of shorts dedicated to the tragedy of the Twin Towers and realised by directors as Sean Penn, Oscar winner Danis Tanovic, Alejandro Inarritu, Ken Loach and Shohei Imamura.
You can see the full list of movies showed in Venice by clicking here:
Just Go To This Site
This week I have three reviews by James Bartlett. I promise, this is the last time I'm inserting opinions about MR, while I find (as I told you latest week) much interesting to know something more about films not released in many european countries as Austin Powers in Goldmember and MIB2.
Minority Report
d. Steven Spielberg
Tom Cruise, Colin Farrell, Samantha Morton, Max Von Sydow
"Everybody Runs" is the tagline for this film that is based on a Philip K Dick short story and combines the billion dollar talents of Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg.
We are well into the future here and crime no longer exists - in Washington DC anyway - thanks to Precrime, a scheme invented by Lamar Burgess (|Max Von Sydow) and headed by supercop John Anderton (Tom Cruise.)
Precrime uses "Pre Cogs," three ethereal psychic beings that can foresee murders before they happen - murders that Anderton and his team then prevent, sending the "murderer" to a lobotomised hell.
Precrime is about to go national when Danny Witwer (Colin Farrell) is sent in to find any glitches. Anderton assures him that there have never been any glitches, but these are famous last words when the PreCogs predict Anderton himself will commit murder in less than 48 hours.
Now Anderton is on the run and must try to prove his innocence - by finding the glitch that, of course, does exist: sometimes the PreCogs disagree on what happens, but as long as two agree (a majority,) the "Minority Report" is erased forever - or is it?
Anderton must now find his own Minority Report, which is stored inside Agatha (Samantha Morton) the most sensitive of the PreCogs. To do this he must get to her - and if he takes her from the system, crime will go un pre-seen and murders will happen again; a scenario Burgess does not need just before they go public.
Minority Report promised much as a film project - a futuristic chase actioner helmed by Spielberg and starring Tom Cruise, arguably two of the biggest names in film.
Unfortunately, it falls way short for several reasons.
Firstly, the grey/sepia tint that is put on the film looks bad and really distracts from the film - I kept wondering if it was deliberate or a fault on the print. It is a technique Spielberg has used before - Schindlers' List, Saving Private Ryan - but here it just jars and looks out of place. Worse still, it makes the action hard to see.
Secondly, there are enormous plot holes - for example: Cruise has his eyes removed to avoid the retina scans that are all over the city, but then walks around without even a cap or glasses to disguise himself - and still drives around in his car.
As for the super precrime police force, they wobble around on jetpacks and despite their amazing technology lose Anderton in a crowd of people just because they are all holding umbrellas in the rain.
That scene epitomised the biggest problem with the film in my eyes - we are supposed to be nearly 60 years in the future with all sorts of gadgets and visual special effects, yet the people still walk around in clothes from today.
Sure, the video ads that call your name and the audio newspapers do look good and are plausible, but whilst there are ultra-modern houses and cars, others seem to live in rundown wooden country shacks by the sea. Why the huge difference in lifetsyles?
Finally, we have the problem of the Spielberg Effect - the insistence on tagging on the sap-happy endings, stretching out the films to always at least half an hour too long and ramming home visual and dialogue points so obviously that it soon becomes wearing. I am assuming he was aiming this at a more mature audience (though it is only rated a 12) so why do we have to have so much expositional and story telling in the dialogue?
In some ways Spielberg is a victim of his own success; he as made so many good films - or films that have made so much money - that no-one can turn to him and say: "Steven, this needs to be changed to work better".
It would have been a cracker of a film if Anderton has been accused in the first scene and taken Agatha on the run as he tried to clear his name - thereby justifying the "Everybody Runs" promise that is never really delivered.
For the true definitive versions of SciFi on film, it is still Bladerunner (again a Philip K Dick short story) and Kubrick's 2001 (a collaborator of Spielberg, who takes influences from him in Minority Report several times.) Come to think of it, this would have been a better film if Ridley Scott or Kubrick had directed it.
Austin Powers in Goldmember
d. Jay Roach
Mike Myers, Beyonce Knowles, Michael Caine
The third film in this hugely successful series, "Goldmember" sees Dr Evil (Mike Myers) going back in time to the 1970's to enrol the help of Goldmember (Myers,) a brilliant scientist/disco roller skater who hatched a plan that involves a lazerbeam drawing a gold meteorite to the earth, thus melting the polar ice caps and destroying the world. As ever, Dr Evil wants squillions in ransom and Goldmember wants the gold, as that precious metal is his "thing" - literally.
Austin Powers (Myers) is sent back to the 70's, then back to the present - bringing Foxy Cleopatra (Beyonce Knowles) with him - to catch Goldmember and foil Dr Evil's plan. This time though, there is the extra incentive for Austin to succeed - Dr Evil has his father Nigel Powers (Michael Caine) as hostage. However, Austin has all sorts of father issues - and is going to learn more about his family than he can imagine.
Can he save the world and reconcile his family at the same time?
Myers has been amazing in successfully British comedy staples to a worldwide audience - his nods and parodies to the genre must confuse but obviously amuse cinemagoers in other countries: yes, Fat Bastard (Myers) does make an appearance.
But this time Austin has gone too far and the film is over-indulgent to Myers undoubted talents. There are touches of genius here, but also a compulsion to over-egg the pudding over and over again, losing the comedy impact and slowing the pace of the story.
Sure, it's all total tomfoolery, but Goldmember lacks the pace of the previous films and is just not that funny. Caine chews the scenery and enjoys his turn as Mr Powers Senior, but the new character of Goldmember (a Dutchman) really does not hook us in and all Dr Evil's previous henchmen - Number 2 etc - are just barely present, with the sole exception of Mini-Me.
It is difficult to see this series being able to stretch to another film - it has become to self-knowing and in love with itself - witness the number of cameos: Tom Cruise, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kevin Spacey, Danny DeVito, Nathan Lane, Steven Spielberg, Quincy Jones, John Travolta etc.
Whatever, it will be fascinating to see what Myers does next.
Men In Black 2
d. Barry Sonnenfeld
Tommy Lee Jones, Will Smith, Lara Flynn Boyle
Back In Black - Mr Smith and Mr Jones return to fight the alien scum of the earth.
There is a good setup for this long-awaited sequel - an alien species led by Serleena (Lara Flynn Boyle) a Medusa/snake creature metamorphosed into an underwear model (as you do) needs to find The Light - a case that J (Tommy Lee Jones) was involved in years ago when he was one of the Men In Black.
So Smith (Will Smith) has to retrieve Jones from his current job as a postman and make him remember his former MIB career - and most importantly, where he hid the The Light - which is exactly what Serleena and her alien henchmen need to do as well.
MIB2 lacks the punch and excitement of the first film. I was expecting all-out action, but instead it was a mish-mash of themes that didn't gel together enough to be entertaining or even particularly exciting.
The idea of giving Smith a love interest - and finding out about J's lost love - was a good idea, but a film about nasty space aliens intent on taking over the earth cannot really be a love story and an action story.
MIB2 tries to be both and comes up short on both accounts - even the aliens and special effects are pretty weak and underused and the style of the first film is sadly lacking too. There are some funny lines and moments, but over all it was a big disappointment.
James Bartlett
