Boy this fella is having a blast up in Chicago. Once again, I have to say, if you even begin to hear about a film festival in your neck of the woods, go. It's that simple. Sure there are a few problems here and there, but it's your civic duty as a movie geek to get out there and be a cinematic sponge for a week or two. It'll inspire ya. Well, here's the latest report...

Albert Acisuan back again with five more reviews from the Chicago Film Fest.

My filmic Tuesday began at about 5:00 when I left school. I had just been through two hours of mind-crushing boredom, killing time with little more than homework to do - and time never goes by fast when you want it to.

So I got on the bus, testing the route I planned to use for my Mad Dash Wednesday (see below) and was at the theater by 5:30. Of course "Wind with the Gone" wasn't until 6:30, so I picked up a ticket and went outside to wander for a while.

I decided to just go straight down Michigan Avenue, figuring that I would eventually come to something interesting, and it turned out to be the Water Tower Place. I had just enough time to discover that the McDonald's there was closed for renovations before I had to head back.

At the theater, I met my math teacher, who was there for the same film. We talked for a little bit before we separated in the theater, my teacher going to a seat on the left about two-thirds of the way back while I went to the third row center seat I'd picked out at Unlucky Monkey.

Anyway,

WIND WITH THE GONE

The Plot: After screening thousands of times in theaters all over the world, having reels mixed up, scenes lost, scenes flipped or threaded backwards, movies come to die in a one-screen theater in a small town in Argentina. All this weirdness has begun to affect the minds of the villagers, and nothing there is quite as it should be.

This film just didn't distinguish itself for me. There's nothing wrong with it; it's just unremarkable. There are only a few really original moments; the remainder is pretty standard. Character growth is claimed by the narration, but I never saw it portrayed by the actors - and the melancholy resolution felt like it went against the mood of the film.

The cinematography is real pretty, but it wasn't special - it's just like a hundred other films with equally pretty cinematography.

This isn't to say the film is bad through and through; the beginning is fun, at least. The villagers' speech and behavior is wonderfully bizarre until it gets old, and the scenes of butchered films - and the villagers' confused attempts to make their own - are hilarious. There are some equally enjoyable scenes with the town's other "industries," but all in all, they weren't enough to save the film.

For the record, my teacher loved it.

On Wednesday came what I have christened my "Mad Dash." After school, I had 30 minutes to cover the mile-plus to the Cineplex, and only the bus to do it. I got to the stop in good time - 4 blocks in just a couple minutes - and the bus came right away. Of course, once I got down to Michigan Avenue, the traffic quickly became horrendous and, to make things worse, we got stuck behind another bus! I finally got out and went the last 6 blocks or so on foot. I beat the bus to my stop.

Anyway, I made it with almost 5 minutes to spare, got my ticket, and went into the theater, where my preferred third row center seat was already taken. And the seats to the left and right. It seems they were together. I took the fourth row center seat, just a bit farther from the screen than I like.

FIBER OPTICS

The Plot: I'm not really sure. It's a political thriller, and I know it involves an assassination and the subsequent investigation.

When I watched this film, I didn't get it. I didn't understand the plot (I admit, I started nodding off for a bit in the middle, more due to fatigue from a tiring day than the film being boring) and a lot of the good ideas were so subtly inserted that I didn't catch them.

The director (Francisco Athie) came out for a question-and-answer session at the end, though, and that combined with some of my later thoughts have made me realize that this film had some fantastic ideas.

The cinematography is nicely original. I saw the surveillance motif at the beginning (wondering why it seemed to disappear towards the end, because I really liked the style) but what I didn't catch originally was the tie-in with the title: Many scenes were lit using fiber optics.

But what is most interesting is the look at the intersection between religion and technology. After the film, Athie explained that high technology is rare among ordinary people in Mexico; for many people, it is more of an abstract, faraway thing not involved in their daily lives. "Fiber Optics" connects that idea to the idea of God, and puts forth technology as a new religion - a new God. It's quite subtle, though; these things are not expressed in words, but rather in things like technological intervention taking the place of divine.

After Fiber Optics, I didn't see a festival screening until Saturday. Thursday and Friday just aren't good days for me, I suppose.

No trouble getting to the screening; althougn I had planned to leave an hour and a half before the film, I wound up leaving with it only about an hour away, but I still made it there half an hour early. I took my seat (I got the good one this time) and flipped through the festival program until the film began.

FELICE...FELICE...

Plot: A man returns to Japan after many years to search out his former trophy wife.

This was a beautiful film. I loved the music and camerawork, and it was very well written and performed.

Reading the program blurb over after the show, I realized that many of the characters were real people, and the many old photographs weaved into the narrative are actually their work. They're seamlessly integrated; the filmmakers did a fantastic job. It all works so well that you expect it to be a complete invention; working within the constraints of reality is far harder.

Felice's journey through Japan is done in a series of locations, nicely varied and skillfully photographed. It's amazing that they were able to recreate Japan so beautifully in Amsterdam, of all places.

The ending is lovely; they don't fall into the trap of a happy ending, and all the characters involved are portrayed with fantastic realism. Finally, there is a wonderful end to the narration that has been driving the film; a final commentary on the art of photography.

After the film, I realized that I no longer had my umbrella. This was a Bad Thing, as it was raining heavily outside. After a quick search, I discovered it at the ticket-taker's desk, where some very nice person had found it and turned it in.

So then, umbrella in hand, I went to the Music Box as fast as I could - sprinting a lot of the way - and I got there barely in time for "Flying Saucer Rock and Roll," also known as comedy shorts. I like shorts, if you haven't figured that out yet. Well, it sold out. While I was in line. With only three or four people ahead of me. If I hadn't lost my umbrella, I would have made it.

Well, it turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as I decided instead to go home for a bite to eat (Man can not live on popcorn alone) and I returned downtown just barely in time for "Stuart Bliss." As usual when I'm just barely on time, my fave third row center seat was taken, but this time my alternate fourth row center seat was taken. I wound up in the third row, about three seats left of center.

The film was preceded by a short, "Le Bombe Au Chocolat," which was capably done, and carried a nice message, but it was just a bit too silly for me.

STUART BLISS.

(HARRY NOTE: I really want to see this based on this description)

The Plot: A man starts believing in conspiracy theories and end-of-the-world mayhem, and it drives him insane.

This is really something. One part black humor, two parts psychological drama, the whole thing has an air of "Well, that's silly... isn't it?" It's only at the end of the film that Stuart is proved right or wrong; until then, we just have to wonder.

I was genuinely frightened; Stuart's theories are all too believable, and the evidence he finds - circumstantial as it may be - is unbelievably convincing. There's one fabulous scene where Stuart jumps at the sight of his reflection. I've seen hundreds of "Ha ha! It's only Sally!" scenes, but the sound and camerawork worked beautifully. The scene scared the shit out of me, and I didn't feel relieved in the least when it turned out to be nothing.

Even more extroardinary, though, is that the film was made for under $75,000. Less than an episode of Power Rangers. Wow. Let me tell you, Harry, film is getting closer and closer to being a truly democratic medium. When a couple schmoes with a camera can put together something like Stuart Bliss, it really gives you hope for the future.

The film was followed by a Q&A session with both director Neil Grieve and star Michael Zelnicker. It was less serious than a lot of the other Q&As, and there were some real funny moments. ("So, is the world coming to an end?" "Only Stuart knows.")

I thought about trying to get to "The Entire History of the Louisiana Purchase" but I knew I'd never make it, so I went home for the day.

Sunday I got up, showered, ate breakfast, and was on my way to the Music Box for the "World of Animation." 16 shorts from the edge of the animated world. My sister came with me, but she was without a ticket. I had picked one up the previous day, wisely as it came out, because when we got there, the show was sold out. I got a ticket for "Blue Moon," showing later in the day, and went in. My sister headed home.

The second row just-left-of-center seat I prefer in Music Box 2 (It's a tiny theater, with a tiny screen) was still empty, so I sat in it and watched the theater fill to the brim.

WORLD OF ANIMATION

Info-Love

Cute. The animation is pretty terrible, but the story is amusing. It was just, I think, a bit too close to South Park for my taste.

Paganini's Dream

This one was just weird. It had absolutely no semblance of a plot - at least none that I could see - and the stop-motion was not too great.

The Dirt Inside

The animation style was nice, but it was a bit too "dirty" for my taste. It had a bland, brown-and-black look that I didn't like. The story was also kind of weak, and it didn't get to me in the way it was obviously trying to.

Staircasemountain

Actually not bad, although the ending seemed a bit trite to me. It didn't seem satisfying after the entire film (5 minutes, but still) building up.

Call Me Fishmael

(HARRY NOTE: I love this short, it's very very good. Be sure to see it if you get a chance!)

This was absolutely hilarious. Totally silly, and very endearing. The short live-action sequence at the end is priceless.

Keep in a Dry Place and Away From Children

Weird. But entertainingly so. The animation was not entirely terrible, and the story was pleasantly illogical.

Arkanum

This was kind of funny, if hard to understand. The stop-motion work was very impressive, especially the swinging door.

Organ Cranker

Kind of interesting, but it never really grabbed me. The character designs were nice, though.

Crossroads

The animation technique was very interesting. The story and imagery, on the other hand, were pretty confused.

Silence

I liked the way it took a new spin on the Holocaust - it examined the psychological aftereffects rather than the thing itself. It also did a nice job of associating animation styles with events - so that there are a couple of places involving horrifying flashes of different styles.

Transit

I loved it. The epic scope, the backwards storytelling, and the connecting scenes were wonderful.

The Queen's Monastery

The story was okay, but the animation got to me. The watercolor images flickered like crazy, and it was very distracting.

Bingo

This was CGI, done by Alias/Wavefront. They'll probably be using it to show off the capabilities of their software. So, it has fantastic particle systems, superb hair, and the most realistic skin I've seen yet. The whole thing was really spectacular. The story was original and a lot of fun, but it was the animation that stood out.

Well, that's it for this installment. Next time: Even more shorts, a film that changes every time it's screened, and my thoughts on the award winners (assuming I've seen any of them.)