« August 2006 | Main | October 2006 »
As with the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah in January, the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, Texas in March, the Philadelphia Film Festival in Philadelphia in April, the Tribeca Film Festival in New York in April-May, and the Toronto International Film Festival in early September, I will be attending the Hamptons International Film Festival in mid-October.
This year's festival runs from October 18-22 and is considered the premiere film festival in North America specializing in foreign films and indies. Many films have their world or North American or East Coast premieres there.
I will be posting reviews and pictures of the actors and directors I meet on my PROblog here.
Most films are premieres, and are attended by the cast & crew. They always stay afterwards for a Q&A and the audience gets a chance to sit with them and then meet them afterwards. There is occasionally a party afterwards as well.
Previous festival coverage, reviews, & pics:
Sundance
SXSW
Philly
Tribeca
More Tribeca
Toronto pre-festival info
For Toronto coverage, scroll down on my blog.
Hamptons International Film Festival site
Posted by phileysmiley at 12:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The trailer for one of my top picks, "Starter for Ten," is now up.
You can watch it HERE.
I loved the film and was hoping they would market it properly. This looks like they are pitching it as a very broad appeal romantic comedy (which it is) as opposed to a "British indie," so that should help. Great trailer.
Posted by phileysmiley at 09:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the North American premiere of "Glue" at the Toronto International Film Festival. In a phrase, it's Larry Clark meets Gus Van Sant. But I say that in only the most complimentary of terms. The camera basically follows a 15-year old as he discovers himself. He wonders about his physical development, compares himself to his buddy, and begins to explore his sexuality. The barren expanse of Patagonia is the backdrop, the music of The Violent Femmes (who donated the songs gratis) the appropriately angst-ridden soundtrack.
What makes it so different from most American films is that it's all just so natural. No judgments are made. We only observe through the lens of cinematographer Natasha Braier, as well as writer/director/producer Alexis Dos Santos, who did much of the camerawork himself. It's basically about mid-adolescence told, via voiceover, from the point of view of Lucas (Nahuel Perez Biscayart). Most amazingly, the entire film is improvised. Dos Santos held a Q&A afterward and said that he wrote virtually no dialog at all. There was a 17-page script basically outlining the action. But the three lead actors improvised from start to finish. As it turns out, all three had attended the same acting classes where they learned improv, so they were well-versed in the art and were already friends. And it shows. The chemistry between the teens evokes those awkward years as effectively as any film I've seen.
I asked Nahuel what his most difficult scene was and what was his favorite. I won't get too specific, but he most enjoyed some of the more physical aspects of the relationships he develops with his friends. He was quite honest and his matter-of-fact attitude was endearing. I met him afterward and he was polite and self-confident. When I walked up and told him what a good job he did, he thanked me with the look of a pro. He is from Argentina but speaks decent English. In spite of his young age, he has done 9 films and is something of a teen idol in South America. In the States he'd likely be one of the most sought-after young actors in the business.
If coming-of-age films have become a bit worn in the hands of Hollywood, "Glue" will serve as inspiration and provocation to American filmmakers. It's Larry Clark in Spanish. But sweet and non-judgmental. It will leave you with a smile on your face.
Posted by phileysmiley at 08:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Now that the excitement has settled down and it's possible to reflect back on the festival, a few random thoughts come to mind. I didn't say enough about a few films and said nothing about several others which were mentioned in my initial "roundup" post.
Among the indies which have distribution and will be released soon, "All the Boys Love Mandy Lane" is really a must-see. Strap yourself in quickly. The party scene incident within the first few minutes of the film was the first signal that this was not going to be your typical teen sex/romance story. You could hear the audience gasp. It's excting to me when a film takes a dark turn and that was it. It was a wild ride after that and kept me guessing all along. It has stayed in my mind and I cannot wait to see it again.
In the documentary category, "The U.S. vs. John Lennon" was actually the best of all the 30+ films I saw, although it's hard to compare documentaries to indies. But if someone asked me, "what one film is a must-see?" that would be it. I'm not certain it will have more than limited distribution, though. I know that the DVD will be out very soon, possibly before Christmas, with a soundtrack CD as a companion. Get them. You won't regret it.
The other documentary I had cited previously was "Radiant City." It was a standout for me because I studied urban planning in school, albeit a long time ago. Suburbanization is one of my favorite topics. The director follows a family of four as they describe life in their "community." I thought the kid was hilarious, as did the audience. Laughter obscured many of the lines. At that point in the week I was in the mood for something light and that was it. It may not be your cup of tea, but if you live in a suburban tract community you'll be able to relate. And the ending may shock you. It's worth seeing.
There were about ten foreign films on my list. "Chacun Sa Nuit" was one I attended late in the week. It just impressed me for its boldness. It was so un-American and un-Hollywood and that, to me, is what the best foreign films are all about. What is revealed at the end made it that much more profound for me. Films that push the sexual envelope are what art is all about and this one certainly did. Most films are so prudish. It was very controversial, and may not play outside art houses (if at all) but is as good as an example as I've seen of why American films are generally fairly tame in comparison to those who partake of foreign films on a regular basis. It's not for everyone, but if you have an open mind you'll love it.
There are a couple of other films which I have left to write a bit about. In particular, "The Dog Problem" and "End of the Line," which are on my list of indies, and "Glue" and "Nue Propriete," among the foreign films. That will round off the list.
The Woodstock Film Festival will be my next stop, in 3 weeks, mainly for 2 films: "Off the Black" and "Fierce People." A few days later I will be traveling to the Hamptons International Film Festival, which is arguably #1 in its focus on foreign films and indies. The world premiere of "Black Irish" is what I'm looking forward to more than anything. All 3 of those films have friends of mine in them so it's somewhat personal.
Posted by phileysmiley at 10:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the world premiere of "The Abandoned" at the Toronto International Film Festival. This was part of the "Midnight Madness" series which is held at the Ryerson Auditorium, the largest venue of the festival, with 1200 seats. Not only does it boast a colossal screen, but it also has a 16-speaker sound system that surrounds the hall and leaves goosebumps in its wake. How appropriate is it, then, that films in which the music and sound effects play almost as large a role as the characters themselves are seen here at midnight -- horror films. First, a disclaimer: I have a weakness for scary movies. In fact, a favorite genre of mine may be the psychological thriller with a touch of fright thrown in. "Jacob's Ladder," "Donnie Darko," and "The Butterfly Effect," for example, all fit the above description and include a time shift element to them. "The Abandoned" is all that and more. Director Nacho Cerdà has crafted a ghost story that manipulates space and time.
An American woman receives a mysterious message. She is summoned to the office of a lawyer who informs her that she has inherited the family property in Russia. She accepts, if only in an effort to find out what happened to her as a child, when she was separated from her parents about whom she knows very little. She is searching for answers to age-old questions -- Who am I? Where did I come from? How did I get here? We accompany her on this journey, and it takes us to a place that is as terrifying as any I've seen onscreen.
Much of the story is told through the clever use of light and sound, as are most good horror films. The settings are dark and claustrophobic with an appropriately foreboding score. Most of all, the visual and sound effects tell the story almost as much as the dialog. With a tip of the hat to "Duel," "Jaws," and "Jeepers Creepers," the suspense and tension in the hall was made absolutely terrifying by the mind-boggling level of sound here, and I hope that future audiences will have a similar experience.
Make no mistake about it -- this is a great story. It would elicit screams around the campfire simply told from the written page. And what a long, strange trip it was for the filmmakers. As was pointed out in the Q&A after the screening, this film took 8 long years to go from the page to the screen. Some of the sequences are just so frightening and unpredictable that I found myself with open mouth for much of the film -- can you say jaw-dropping? I saw a number of horror films at this year's festival, but none as original as this. I even hesitate to call it a horror film. Most scary movies end with some type of resolution -- the monster dies, the villain is vanquished, evil is defeated. With "The Abandoned," we walk out of the theater stupefied, trying to put all the pieces together, marvelling at Cerdà's achievement.
Posted by phileysmiley at 10:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Director Paul Verhoeven and Carice van Houten (Rachel/Ellis) introduced the film and took to the stage afterward for a spirited Q&A session. Verhoeven was quite passionate about his film and did not hesitate to discuss the experience of making it. I asked him what was the most difficult scene to shoot. He explained that anytime action involving aircraft is required, it places great demands on the entire cast and crew. The timing has to be just right. Multiple takes are required and one can only imagine the logistics involved. Similarly, Verhoeven discussed the problems inherent in shooting on water. There are a number of scenes on and around boats. But the most difficult scene, as well as the most taxing on Ms. van Houten, involved a very large bucket. That's all I can really say without spoiling it, so you'll just have to see it. But you'll know when you do. In spite of the difficulties, both seemed to have had fun making it. After all, with a story as heavy as this one, something has to break the mood.
Click the thumbnails to enlarge pictures
Director Paul Verhoeven and Carice van Houten (Rachel/Ellis)
Posted by phileysmiley at 06:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the North American premiere of "Black Book" at the Toronto International Film Festival. Although my main interest lies in independent film, and I did see many indies as well as foreign films and documentaries in Toronto, I also saw a few of the "Gala" selections. Of those "big movies" on my list, the one which impressed me the most was this Dutch production from Paul Verhoeven. Set in Nazi-occupied Holland during World War II, the film centers around a young Jewish woman named Rachel, who changes her name (and hair, and personality, and more) to Ellis and enters an odyssey of determination and sheer luck in an effort to survive what would otherwise be certain death.
Make no mistake about it: this is an epic in the true sense of the word. The visuals are stunning. Everything about the production from the sound to the effects to the score says "big budget." The story is chock full of more twists and turns than just about any film I've seen in this genre. And just when you think that, perhaps, Verhoeven is beginning to stretch the bounds of credulity, you realize (at the end credits, if not before) that "Black Book" is based on fact.
Most of all, the film's power is due to the magnificent acting of Carice van Houten. Her Rachel/Ellis is a character so unique, so original, that it holds up against the great heroines of contemporary cinema. Combine her marvelous performance with a wonderful story and superb production values and you end up with a thrill ride from start to finish. "Black Book" left me breathless.
Posted by phileysmiley at 05:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the world premiere of "The U.S. vs. John Lennon" at the Toronto International Film Festival. There were a number of documentaries on the program this year, and I attended a handful of them. This was, by far, the best. In addition to those present onstage for the introduction and the Q&A were many other notable figures in the audience, including Michael Moore, who had helped support the film. He received a standing ovation as he entered the room and another after being introduced, as did Yoko Ono. The film itself received two standing ovations, one as the film ended and another after the credits rolled. Yoko received another as she rose to the stage for the Q&A and another after the session was over. Altogether I counted about 8 standing ovations, more than any other film I have ever seen at any festival (or anywhere else for that matter). In fact, not one of the other 30 films I saw received a single standing ovation. They are rare at festivals and this one was chock full of them, and deservedly so.
As I stated in an earlier blog entry, while I do appreciate documentaries (docs), I don't put them in the same category as foreign films, indies, or the "galas" which I attended. That said, if all lumped together as one, "The U.S. vs. John Lennon" moved me more than any other film I saw.
Yoko took to the stage for a Q&A afterward, along with co-Director/Writer/Producers David Leaf and John Scheinfeld.
Click the thumbnails to enlarge pictures
Top row, 1st picture, left to right: Host, Yoko Ono, David Leaf, John Scheinfeld
Posted by phileysmiley at 09:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Click the thumbnails to enlarge pictures
Director Tom Vaughan with cast members James McAvoy (Brian Jackson), Rebecca Hall (Rebecca Epstein), Dominic Cooper (Spencer)
Posted by phileysmiley at 08:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Click the thumbnails to enlarge pictures
Top row, left to right: Director Jonathan Levine, Edwin Hodge (Bird), Luke Grimes (Jake), Aaron Himelstein (Red)
Bottom row, left to right: Melissa Price (Marlin), Whitney Able (Chloe), Michael Welch (Emmett), cast
Posted by phileysmiley at 07:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the world premiere of "Citizen Duane" at the Toronto International Film Festival. It was nothing like I'd imagined. Even the Festival Guide doesn't do it justice -- "Duane's family has a history of tilting at windmills..." Yes, it's a coming-of-age story. Yes, it has an endearing protagonist in Duane Balfour (Douglas Smith). Comic relief is ably provided by Devon Bostick as Duane's little brother Maurie, in a film that's already riotously funny, which is quite a task in itself. It also has a political message, and morals abound. But mostly it's real -- it's funny, it's poignant, it's meaningful on so many levels -- and isn't that what life is all about? This is a film that refuses to allow itself to be pigeonholed, and that is a triumph of Michael Mabbott, directing a script and story co-penned by Robert DeLeskie and Jonathan Sobol.
It was also intensely personal for me. Duane has a huge record collection (yes, vinyl), as did (do) I. I was deeply involved in politics growing up, which is central to the story. I even have a degree in geology, which plays a role as well (trust me, it all makes sense). "Needle drop" is a term used by filmmakers to describe songs placed on the soundtrack from other artists. In this film, the term is used literally -- we see the needle drop on a record, Canadian artists, and that surprisingly includes classics like Barry McGuire's 1968 political anthem "Eve of Destruction." That one gave me goosebumps. "You tell me over and over and over again, my friend...ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction..."
The film carries its weight largely on the shoulders of young Douglas Smith, known mostly to US audiences from "Sleepover" and HBO's "Big Love." He's stunning, sharp, and witty as a teen perhaps too big for his britches, on a mission to save his small town from its own ignorance. But this is no conventional Hollywood dramatic comedy. No, this film has more twists and turns than just about any film of the 30 I'd seen in Toronto. It is a thoughtful film, sometimes hilarious, sometimes sad, and one which I believe will expose the talented Douglas Smith to a wider theatrical audience. He has a bright future on the big screen, and his tackling of this complex role is nothing less than a show of pure talent.
Please do not let this little gem slip off your radar. Watch for it, and be prepared to set your expectations of a "typical teen comedy" to rest. "Citizen Duane" is different, and it will stay with you long after you leave the theatre.
Posted by phileysmiley at 04:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the world premiere of "Starter for Ten" at the Toronto International Film Festival. First things first. Just as director Tom Vaughan did in introducing the film, let's get the explanation of the title out of the way. The plot centers around a group of university students competing on "University Challenge," a popular UK quiz show in which the host begins by announcing, "Starter for Ten..." The American equivalent would be, "I'll take Famous Armadillos for 20, Alex." Now that we're set in place, let's get set in time.
This is a period piece -- 1985, to be exact. And make no mistake about it -- the filmmakers went all out to recreate the mid-80's -- sets, costumes, hair and, most importantly (for this writer, anyway) the music. And oh, what great songs. That had me from the word "go." Finally, we need a protagonist. One who is captivating enough to command 90 minutes of our time. And this is, perhaps, the crowning achievement of this film. His name is James McAvoy, and he had no less than three films screening in Toronto this year. Talk about prolific. Though a bit older than the character Brian Jackson, he's convincing as a teenager off to discover himself and of what he is capable, in school, life, and affairs of the heart. He wins us over because he commands the screen and the script, and has the eyes of innocence and vulnerability with which we can all identify. He is everyman -- every boy/man -- and no doubt we see our own coming-of-age through his eyes. Throw all those elements together with a compelling love story and you have a formula for success. I asked McAvoy after the screening what his most difficult scene was. Without giving anything away, I'll just say that he becomes emotional at times, and quite convincingly. He told me that he had to keep reminding himself that it was Brian who was sad, not James. That's powerful stuff. This is a sweet, moving film which left me wanting more. I'll take "Starter for Ten," and I think you will, too.
Posted by phileysmiley at 03:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I went to the world premiere of "Citizen Duane" at the Toronto Film Festival last week. It was one of my favorite films (I saw over 30) and I plan to write some comments as soon as I can.
This Canadian entry stars Douglas Smith as Duane Balfour, a teenager on a mission to save his small town from its own ignorance. Michael Mabbott directed, in a story co-written by Robert DeLeskie and Jonathan Sobol.
In the meantime, I wanted to post some pictures I took at the Q&A after the screening.
This is Devon Bostick with the director and writer. Devon plays Maurie Balfour, the younger brother of the protagonist Duane Balfour. He provides some of the film's biggest laughs. I had a chance to talk to Devon afterwards and he was very down-to-earth and a bit shy. Really nice guy. He's only 14 but has appeared in 24 films, TV movies, and TV shows.
Click the thumbnails to enlarge pictures
Posted by phileysmiley at 12:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the world premiere of "Cashback" at the Toronto International Film Festival. I walked out in a daze. I had a feeling I'd seen something special, that moment when you have to pause to take a breath and reflect on what you've experienced. I still had about 20 films to go at the time, and "Cashback" raised the bar and became the benchmark against which all the others would have to be compared. As it turned out, nothing came close. Of the 30 plus films I saw that week, "Cashback" tops the list.
Literally built around the short film of the same name which screened at festivals in 2004, triple threat writer/director/producer Sean Ellis did something ingenious. Rather than take his 20 minute piece and expand it to fill 90 minutes, he created a new Act One and Act Three to bookend a reworking of the original short in the center. And he pulled it off with a tour de force of light and sound. The result is an eerie, compelling twist on the classic Outer Limits episode where time stops while the protagonist weaves in and out of the frozen characters in another dimension. It may sound like sci-fi, but this is a sweet romantic comedy whose storyline is among the most original I've ever seen onscreen. The concept is brilliant and the result magnificent.
The look is lush, cinematography by Angus Hudson breathtaking, and "Cashback" features an appropriately sweet score. They combine to give this low budget project a big movie feel, destined for the wide audience it deserves.
Most of all, I believe "Cashback" is the vehicle which will introduce newcomer Sean Biggerstaff (Oliver Wood of "Harry Potter") to the world. His star turn in this film as protagonist Ben Willis left me speechless. The camera loves him, and he is onscreen virtually from opening to closing credits. This film is his to make or break. It rests on his shoulders, and he owns the material.
As they say, you'll laugh, you'll cry, and I walked out with a tear in my eye and a smile on my face. And no other film I saw at the Toronto Film Festival did that to me. "Cashback" is a sweet little masterpiece.
Posted by phileysmiley at 04:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I went to a screening of "Alex Rider: Operation Stormbreaker" and had the chance to meet Alex Pettyfer. I asked him some questions during the Q&A and chatted with him afterwards. He was very gracious, generous, and polite, and stayed around to sign autographs, kiss girls, etc. He is so poised and mature for his age. I was quite impressed. Sorry that in the one of him and me my eyes are closed -- blame the photographer.
Also a big thank you to Kirsty at Alex-Pettyfer.co.uk for posting my pics! Go check out the site. It's awesome.
Here are some pics:
Posted by phileysmiley at 03:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attended the world premiere of "All the Boys Love Mandy Lane" at the Toronto Film Festival. From that night on, I couldn't stop talking about it. This film is a gem in so many ways. Young first time director Jonathan Levine has crafted a brilliant twist on the "old school" teen slasher flick. With a script by Jacob Forman, who clearly has a passion for the genre, Levine assembled a frighteningly talented cast of young actors who made these characters so real that it seemed improvised. As it turned out, much of it was, as pointed out in the Q&A which followed the screening. When they partied, they partied. And it results in a natural, carefree ensemble performance that makes this film what it is -- pure fun.
The production values belie the film's meager budget (500K?). For example, the effective use of neutral film stock, under-processed at times, gives segments of the film a home movie look a la "Blair Witch." The selective use of slow-mo and freeze-frame add to the "big movie" feel of this little indie. As with all good horror films, Levine infuses the film with an appropriately foreboding score. And as an added bonus, the soundtrack features 80's classics which enhance the "old school" feel, especially if you're "old" enough to have been "in school" then. There's plenty of blood and gore here, of course, but tongue is also firmly planted in cheek.
File these names under "people to watch": Michael Welch, Aaron Himelstein, Luke Grimes, and Edwin Hodge. Amber Heard is Mandy Lane (she also shines in "Alpha Dog"). Anson Mount rounds out the cast and is a familiar face to many. Many of the cast were present at the screening, also seeing it for the first time along with the audience. Those I chatted up afterward were humble and gracious, and worthy of all the attention this film deserves. I don't consider myself a horror fan, but of the 30 plus films I saw, this is among the cream of the crop. Or should I say cream of the chop. Put "All the Boys Love Mandy Lane" at the top of your list.
Posted by phileysmiley at 02:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I attend film festivals for one main reason -- to see films. But that isn't as plain as it seems. See, to me, there are "movies" and then there are "films." Or, more precisely, indies. I am an indie lover. I like "small" films, which often are low budget, though not necessarily, and play film festivals in hopes of getting "picked up" or "acquired" for distribution. These are films that aren't yet guaranteed to be shown in theaters. I can comment on them and root for their success. It gives a sense of investment and loyalty and passion. Of course, that's not the main reason I see them. It only describes what they are. I see them because, in my opinion, they are usually better than anything else out there. But that's another story for another time. Indies are my passion.
That's why movies like "All the King's Men," Steve Zaillian's epic based on the powerful Louisiana politician Huey Long, was not a draw for me. But I did see it anyway, because even though it will be in theaters soon, it is destined to be one of the five nominated films for Best Picture and may even win. And I always like to have seen them all, so as long as it was showing, why not. Also, when else can one ask questions of the director after the screening? So I did attend a few. Let's call them "Galas."
I also saw several documentaries. I do enjoy docs, and there were some gems. I did rate and rank them as well, but they were not the focus of my interest either.
My passion is indies, and I saw a bunch. I can separate them into two main categories: foreign (I'll call them "Foreign") and English-speaking (I'll call them "Indies"). Generally, foreign films are very different in tone and production values, and rarely play outside of a few art houses in a handful of cities. So it's the English-speaking indies which are at the center of my love of film and why I attend festivals.
So here are the four categories in which I place my titles: Galas, Docs, Foreign, and Indies. I rated each film on a scale of 1 to 5. Here I will list only the films which I rated a 5 out of 5.
Here is, in my opinion, the cream of the crop of the 2006 Toronto International Film Festival:
GALAS
DOCS
The U.S. vs. John Lennon
Radiant City
FOREIGN
Chacun Sa Nuit
Glue
Nue Propriete
And finally....
INDIES
Cashback
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane
Starter for Ten
The Dog Problem
Citizen Duane
Fay Grim
The Abandoned
End of the Line
So that's the overall roundup. I'll be providing links to each film (as I did with black Book) ASAP.
Posted by phileysmiley at 11:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Your intrepid film fan has returned from the 2006 Toronto International Film Festival. Or as I could call it, "The Agony & The Ecstacy & The Odyssey." Or something like that. Actually, there wasn't much agony -- mostly ecstacy (no, not that kind, although it was an element in many of the films). In the end, I managed to see more than 30 films, mostly world premieres. In almost all cases the director, cast, and crew were present, and often seeing it for the very first time as well. They usually introduced the film and held a Q&A afterwards. Nothing can compare to sitting in a theater, watching a film, while the people onscreen are sitting with you. It's quite surreal. The director may have spent 7 years of his life on this film, and for 7 years thought, "here is where they will applaud," and as that moment happens onscreen you applaud, and he is sitting next to you, and you know he is thinking "yesssss!!!!!!!" It's something that only happens at film festivals and is one reason they are so exciting. And as if that wasn't enough, you often get to meet the actors and director afterwards and chat about their performances and what it took to make the film.
In almost every Q&A the topic of how long it took to make the film came up. I would say that the average was 5-7 years. A few took up to 10 years from start to finish, and the least was 4. Generally, it would be 1-3 years writing, 2-4 years raising funds, a year of pre-production, and a year of shooting and post-production. I heard over and over again how these filmmakers had spent 5-7 years of their lives on their films and that we were the first to see it. It's amazing sitting and watching a film, with the director and crew and cast present, and it's the very first time it's been seen (even by them) after 5-7 years of work. I can't imagine what that's like. Many of them scrounged up the funds from friends and family.
Then there is the basic conundrum: you need money to get the "names" but you need names to get the money (and other names). For example, director X could not get money or stars to make their film until actor Y read the script and loved it. Once he signed on, money flowed in. As soon as Y signed on, they got money, actor Z, more money, more names. Then the cycle works. But you have to start the cycle, and that's the hard part. I hear that over and over again at all the Q&As at all the festivals I have attended.
So the day you see a film you are witnessing the result of many years of work by many people. That's why I take the process of rating and reviewing films so seriously. I will summarize my favorites in the next blog entry.
Posted by phileysmiley at 11:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Microsoft has finally taken all the wraps off of Windows Vista RC1, and today began offering the public a downloadable version, or the opportunity to order it on DVD (see Public Download Vista RC1 Now Available!.) Microsoft had previously stated that this release would be available to 5 million users worldwide, and in emails today they already have warned that download times may be slow due to a huge response.
When Microsoft released Windows Vista Beta 2 in June, they had to throttle back their servers because of the high demand (see Vista Downloads Overwhelm Internet), and they are expecting an even higher demand for RC1. While many testers have reported that Vista RC1 is much better in terms of stability and overall function, there are still numerous issues with hardware drivers that can cause system crashes or even make installation impossible.
On the positive side, many features are now fully functional, and things like Media Center, which needed a lot of work in the Beta 2 release, have greatly improved. With the time until release getting shorter, Microsoft is hoping that this wide public release will help identify any last minute major issues before they finalize the release code. Although there are still many small issues, many of these will probably not be addressed until after Vista is released due to the possibility of small code changes causing bigger problems.
Microsoft is walking a fine line between delivering Vista on time, and delivering a quality product, and the next few weeks of development are probably the most critical. It is expected that official Beta testers will probably see a few more interim builds to help identify last minute bugs, and Microsoft is hoping to get a lot of feedback from the public CPP testers who are currently downloading and installing RC1.
Posted by jrfree1 at 07:19 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
No, I didn't disappear into Lake Ontario. The reason I haven't posted a blog entry since Friday afternoon is because the action has been nonstop. I'm totally in festival mode now. I just spent almost 48 hours straight with little food or sleep. But that's what it's all about. If you spend much time in bed or having meals, you're not seeing films, and that's why you come here. Health be damned.
After my last blog entry Friday afternoon, I went to my first 2 films: 7 Ans (7 Years), from France, and Suburban Mayhem, an Australian entry. I got back pretty late and only slept a few hours before getting up early Saturday morning to go to the box office to try to get tickets to a couple of films that were not on my list. Then I had a little bit of time to come back to my room, an hour, to take a nap. Then the marathon really began.
I watched movies for 12 hours straight, from 3 PM to 3 AM. I saw 4 films in a row: The U.S. vs. John Lennon, Love and Other Disasters, End of the Line, and All the Boys Love Mandy Lane. Each film takes about 3 hours because that includes waiting on line for about an hour before each screening, the film, the Q&A afterwards, and then travel time to the next one to do it all again. So that was 4 films in a row, including 3 world premieres. Those are the ones where you actually get to sit with the cast & crew, and they are literally seeing it for the first time also, sometimes not having even seen most of the scenes when they were shot so they have no idea how the film even turns out. Then they do a Q&A afterwards and then you get to meet them. That's really what makes festivals so exciting, and so far that's happened at every film.
After getting in at 3 AM Saturday night, I had to get up early this morning to go see 2 films: Alex Rider: Operation Stormbreaker and Citizen Duane. Then I made the decision not to try to find another film to fill a gap I had from not getting a film so I could come back to the room and rejuvenate. So I just had my first real meal since Wednesday. And I finally have chance for a short update.
There were a couple of near-crises, being stuck for an hour in gridlock trying to go one mile and almost missing a film (that happened twice). But I've been pretty lucky overall, especially with my choice of films. I'll come back and post some feedback on the films
Posted by phileysmiley at 10:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
After the posting of Windows Vista retail pricing by Amazon.com (see the article HERE), and the recent public disclosure of pricing by Microsoft, there have been a lot of questions regarding whether or not Windows Vista is worth the price. A lot of this will depend on how we relate value, and comparing the prices of other items which are commonly bought. We also have to examine what exactly we get when we purchase Windows Vista.
In addition to being an operating system which provides a platform to run many of the most popular software titles, Windows Vista also includes a multitude of its own built in applications. With integrated cd/dvd burning, a full featured media center and stand alone media player, a great new backup program, a movie maker, a number of entertaining games, and built in speech recognition software, Windows Vista includes many great stand alone applications. Of course there are third party apps that do the same and sometimes much more, but for the most part, the ones that come as part of the package will get the job done for the average user.
Value has to do with comparisons, and when you compare the price of Windows Vista with some other commonly used and popular software titles, it gives a little better picture of where Vista sits in the pricing game. Since Amazon.com first posted the Windows Vista prices, I used some of their other software prices as a comparison:
Adobe Photoshop CS2: $589.99 USD
Macromedia Flash PRO: $696.07 USD
Corel Draw X3: $249.99 USD
Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred: $164.99 USD
Beyond TV 4 Media Bundle: $92.99
Norton Save and Restore: $67.95 USD
Considering that the price of some stand-alone software titles are far above what Windows Vista will cost, and then looking at the comparative costs of software which has comparative features that are included in Vista (granted some of them offer more features, but the ones in Vista will work for most users), the final price of Windows Vista actually seems like a bargain. Of course, there is the question that many users have who are considering upgrading from Windows XP - why upgrade when what I have already does the job?"While it's true that many of the great underlying features of Windows Vista will not be seen until applications that take advantage of them are released, upgrading will provide better security, more functionality for basic Windows tasks, and hopefully, better stability.
While it remains to be seen how good the final product will actually be, and there are certainly still some bugs to be worked out, the potential for Windows Vista is great. Of course there is the hardware upgrade factor in cost to consider, but then again, it is not only Windows Vista that will require the better hardware, but many of the new software titles which will be released, and of course many of the new games.
Posted by jrfree1 at 10:09 AM | Comments (0)
Once I got used to the rumble of cars and trucks on the highway outside my window I was able to fall asleep for a few hours. Oh, it's not the 401 Highway. It's the 2, or the Gardiner Expressway, or the Queensway. No, it's not that I'm not sure which it is, it's actually all three. They give their roads several names here, so you can't get lost. Up bright and early, I popped on the Weather Channel to see how to properly dress myself for the day. It was 16° going up to 26°. Hmm..oh yes, they speak Celsius here. Fortunately, my alarm clock switches back and forth, and since it was 70°F in the room and that translated to 20°, I realized that I was glad I brought shorts. I headed into downtown Toronto to pick up my ticket package and goodie bag. I discovered that there's no easy way to get into the center of the city other than traveling local streets for miles. A 6 mile drive took about a half hour, even with my talking map. But at least I'm prepared for the 10 days to come.
First stop, the Manulife Center, location of the main box office. The building also houses a shoppng mall, offices, and an 8-screen multiplex which is "one" of the festival venues. There's also a nice big garage underneath, which would be my staging area for the festival. One thing I learned -- ATMs in hotels do not give cash to Americans. ATMs in malls do. So I finally got same Canadian dollars. The lines were beginning to form outside the box office, mostly populated by locals looking to purchase individual screening tickets. I was only exchanging a voucher for a package. I was instructed to wait in line. When I finally made it into the room, I was told that the vouchers were only being accepted at the College Park box office, a "10 minute walk" away. Ha. So I headed back out towards the other box office. By the way, that would only be the first of what would be many mixups on the part of the festival staff. Granted, this is a huge undertaking and it's just the first full day. Still, nobody seemed to have a clue where to send me. And what I was not prepared for was heat and humidity. It's like midsummer here. I was sweating buckets. When did they move Toronto to Florida? Maybe that's what all the rumbling was overnight. They were moving it. But I can't complain -- it could have been cold and rainy. So the "ten minute" (more like a half hour) walk wasn't too bad.
I arrived at the College Park box office. This is in another shopping mall with offices. I entered the huge complex and was directed to the box office on the northeast side of the building. Which wasn't there. No, it was on the southeast side, which is quite a ways away. Off I went. I finally found the correct line for picking up ticket packages. But by the time I got to the table, the bags were gone. I can do without the "goodies," but the bag is essential. Fortunately, the same room housed the store, and I was able to buy a bag. Hmm...coincidence? I think not. But the machine wouldn't accept any of my cards. The helpful clerk asked, "American, right?" What happened to "Visa, good the world over?" After trying various methods for about 10 minutes, the helpful clerks finally realized that they could accept cash. Aha! That I have. Nope. It didn't work. It seems the system knows when an American is standing there. Maybe it's some sort of radio waves we give off. The cashier broke down in tears. No seriously, she did. A manager finally came over and figured out how to do it. Turns out she was charging me for the wrong bag. Then she accidentally gave me $20 too much in change. But I'm an honest guy and gave it back.
While waiting, I learned about the subway system here and figured out all the logistics: where I'd park, how to get from theatre to theatre, and what my route would be each day. Things are starting to fall into place. I then had to go across the hall to another room to exchange some vouchers for films I was supposed to see that they had oversold. I actually had no films scheduled for today because of that. So I waited in another line. But by the time I got to the counter, the show which had been sold out and then was un-sold out and had tickets available had now sold out again. I left the room, threw some darts at the big board, and went back in line and eventually got tickets to two films tonight. Yay! I'm going to the movies!
The only thing I needed was the parking pass which would allow me to use the Manulife garage all week so I wouldn't have to deal with driving around downtown all day. The folks up at Manulife had told me that I could get the pass down at College Park when I picked up my tickets. Well...nuh uh. "We don't have them here. You have to go back to Manulife." Okay, so after starting at Manulife and being sent to instead to College Park to get my tickets and pass, I now had to go back to Manulife and get the pass that I could have gotten earlier. No biggie, right? "You have to wait in line again for that," the helpful festival staffer told me. "How long is the wait ?" I asked. "Oh, only about 45 minutes." Okay now, I can deal with errors on the part of staffers on the first day of a monster logistical nightmare, but no way am I waiting on line another 45 minutes because they sent me to the wrong place. Well, I won't tell you what transpired after that because it will get someone fired. But I got my pass.
So the process of heading into town to pick up my package and come back to the hotel only took about 5 hours. But, hey, I'm ready to see some films!
I must say, Toronto is beautiful. People are courteous and yield to pedestrians, and nobody honks their horns. Where I come from, you score points based on how many people you run down. There is a lot of construction going on and the buildings are a wonderful mix of old and new. It's definitely a friendly place. I had lunch in a courtyard behind the College Park building, which is really a big park with a sculpture garden, lots of nice places to sit, and a huge fountain which doubles as a skating rink in the winter. There appeared to be lots of kids sitting around having classes. That's when I made the connection that it's called College Park for a reason. It sits on the edge of the University of Toronto campus. I didn't want to leave, but with 4 hours to kill before my first film, it seemed like as good a time as any to post to the blog.
My first film is at 6:45 at the Varsity, which is one of the theatres at the Manulife Center. The next is at 10:00 at the Bader Theatre, which is just a few blocks away. So I got lucky with logistics tonight and I won't need the subway.
I'll be seeing 7 Ans (7 Years), a French entry in the Discovery category, followed by Suburban Mayhem, a film from Australia that's part of the Vanguard series.
Although I have 4 films scheduled for tomorrow, the first isn't until 3:30 PM so I should have time later tonight or early tomorrow to report on them. Hopefully my blogs from here on will be about the films. Of course, color commentary may be tossed in depending on what I encounter (or who). Stay tuned!
Posted by phileysmiley at 02:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hello from Toronto! Or should I say bonjour! Hehe. I knew that because I have Bonjour.com bookmarked. Okay, well, not really. Well, I mean I do have it bookmarked but I didn't need it to know how to say hello. No, really. So tonight is opening night of the 2006 Toronto International Film Festival, or TIFF. Since I'm pretty wiped out after ten hours of driving, I'll just post some initial observations as I settle into my room here overlooking beautiful Lake Ontario. Well, actually I overlook the 401 Highway, but the Lake is somewhere on the other side. I think.
1) 500+ miles is a long drive. It amounted to about ten hours including a half dozen stops. I started with half a tank of gas and had to fill it up twice along the way. Which begs the question, why would I subject myself to such a thing? Well, you need to know that I have been traveling a lot. I have been on 21 planes in the last year. I counted. It seemed like it might not be a bad idea to drive this time. I wouldn't have to worry about how many bags to take or which ones would be best to carry on, check, etc. And I could take all the hair gel I wanted. I couldn't wait to get to Canada.
2) Do not drive 80 MPH in a 65 zone when you're the only one on the road on a completely deserted stretch of interstate and you're just ten miles from the border. New York State Troopers don't like that. That speeding ticket was America's way of saying, "so long sucka, have fun north of the border where they have no speed limit and you can drive as fast as you want."
3) There is no speed limit in Canada. You can drive as fast as you want. It's true. There are signs by the side of the road that say "Maximum 110km/hr." I'm not sure why they're there. Maybe they were surplus signs leftover from the post-World War II years when they used to have a speed limit. I think the minimum you have to drive in order to avoid getting run off the road is 120. It took me awhile to figure that out, as cars went whizzing by me. I think I was eventually cruising along in the slow lane at about 140. I drove about 200 miles on the 401 Highway West along Lake Ontario and never saw one cop. Maybe they don't have them here? Or they're all on horseback and they can't go 120km/hr anyway.
4) The lady in my talking map did not start talking French as I crossed the border. I was worried about that. Oh, I have this snazzy new GPS navigation system in my car that talks. I guess I should have explained that.
5) Ladies who work in gas stations in the middle of Nowhere, Ontario are very nice. They even let you pump gas without paying. Well actually, the pump rejected all my cards. "Is it American?" she asked. "They reject them, I don't know why. Just pump it and pay me afterwards." That would never happen in Philadelphia.
6) I don't know how liters convert to gallons and US dollars to Canadian as I'm standing at the pump filling up, so I can't tell you how good the gas prices are here. Maybe they're good, maybe they're not.
7) A lady in your car telling you where to turn is an awesome thing to have when you're in a strange country and you've been driving for ten hours and have no clue where you are or where you're going. She took me right to the hotel entrance. She even helped me get back to the road if I made a wrong turn. Although I never did that.
8) If you find a card in your room saying "have this bottle with our compliments" and there's no bottle there, it's very likely that the maid was extra thirsty. Make sure you make good on that.
9) If the desktop is so new and slippery that your nice new wireless laptop mouse won't work on it, a t-shirt works just fine.
Well, I guess that's it for now. Oh, did I mention that there is a film festival going on? Yes, that's why I'm here. And tomorrow morning I'll be at the box office bright and early to hand over my "pickup voucher" and get the package of tickets waiting for me.
Oh, and I almost had my ticket pickup voucher confiscated at the border. When I presented the voucher to document why I was entering Canada, the customs agent said, "hey, if I keep this does that mean I get to pickup your tickets?" I said, "sure, if you feel like seeing 30 films in the next ten days." The lady in my car laughed and he handed it back and told me to enjoy my stay. At least I think that's what he said. I'll have to check Bonjour.com.
Posted by phileysmiley at 10:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
As with the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah in January, the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, Texas in March, the Philadelphia Film Festival in Philadelphia in April, and the Tribeca Film Festival in New York in April-May, I will be attending the Toronto International Film Festival in September.
This year's festival runs from September 7-16 and is considered the premiere film festival in the Western hemisphere, 2nd only to Cannes. Many films have their world or North American premieres there.
I will be posting reviews and pictures of the actors and directors I meet. Most films are premieres, and are attended by the cast & crew. They always stay afterwards for a Q&A and the audience gets a chance to sit with them and then meet them afterwards. There is occasionally a party afterwards as well.
Previous festival coverage, reviews, & pics:
Sundance
SXSW
Philly
Tribeca
Tribeca
Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) Official Site
Official Poster - 800x600
Official Poster - 1024x768
Posted by phileysmiley at 06:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Many have touched upon another aspect of vinyl records vs cds, and that is the sound quality. I didn't even get into that, but I surely can. For 18 years I was a radio DJ and record producer, and spent many long hours in recording studios recording and mixing music both analog and digital. I think I know something about it.
To put it simply, sound is a wave. Vinyl records capture that wave exactly as it is was first created. It is an exact copy. Digital recordings, on the other hand, do not do this. They only copy small bits of the wave as it travels, almost like one of those "fill in the dots" drawings. When the "sampling" of that wave is then reproduced, the brain hears only the bits and fills in the blanks.
This makes a big difference in sound quality. Because waves are not perfect. They bounce. Parts of the wave are reflected onto other parts. Some of the earlier parts of a wave "carry over" onto others. You don't get that with digital recordings.
Another major difference between analog and digital recording is that tape recording is "dirty." For example, bass sounds "bleed" onto other parts of the tape. As the reel winds around, "pieces" of the magnetic recording "wipe off" onto other pieces. What does this do? Well, it does the same thing that happens when an orchestra plays in a concert hall. Sounds bounce off the ceiling, walls, chairs, people. That gives a "fullness" to the sound, or "warmth," The music is fuzzy, not pure. And that's really the way we hear sound. We hear echoes. We hear reverberation. Digital recording virtually eliminates that warmth and fuzziness. Now, you can put some of that back digitally, but it's not the same as hearing it naturally.
The bottom line is this: a vinyl recording is an exact reproduction of the sound and always will be, The sound does not degrade over time, as long as you keep the needle and record in good shape. CDs, however, do degrade over time, something that the industry doesn't want people to know.
And as far as the argument that it dosn't matter because the ear can't tell the difference? Try listening to the same song live, then recorded onto a vinyl record, then recorded on a CD. Most people who really appreciate music will be able to tell the difference.
A recent study was done that tested people after listening to CDs for hours vs the same songs on vinyl for hours. The ones who listened to the CDs were more tired. They could not perform simple tasks as well. What it is now believed is that the act of the brain having to fill in the blanks, as it were, causes it to tire out over time more quickly. People who listened to the analog recordings were more relaxed and had lower heart rates and blood pressure than the ones who listened to CDs. Just something else to think about.
Posted by phileysmiley at 06:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Bob Dylan said he does his best to fight technology, but it's a losing battle. "Even these songs probably sounded ten times better in the studio when we recorded 'em. CDs are small. There's no stature to it."
I think I know what he means.
"Back in the day," when vinyl albums were the rule, you would go to a record store. There would be these huge bins filled with 12" records. They are similar to the ones used today for CDs, but obviously much larger in size. You needed two hands to pick one up and hold it, and the cover art was often literally "art." Famous artists of the day would create covers, and some artists who did cover art became famous simply because they were good at it. They were sought after by other musicians. Who designed the cover was almost as important as the music inside, for some people. Covers themselves were framed and hung on walls.
There was also a back side to these albums. They were so large that all sorts of pictures and information could be put on them. Then there were "foldout" covers. Some bands were known for putting out albums that opened up into 3 or even 4 parts. Often there were posters inside that you could hang on your walls.
The packaging itself was something you looked forward to seeing. Many of us who grew up in that era can attest to sitting for hours and poring over every part of the cover. We would stare at the front, looking for clues to what the artist intended. Some covers were embossed in 3-D or had cutouts that had other things hidden under them. The backs often contained thousands of words that you could sit and read, and you didn't need a magnifying glass. And if it was a tri-fold cover or more, you could sit and look at the pictures inside, read the notes, etc. I can remember sitting and looking at a cover for the entire 45 minutes or so that it took to play both sides of the record.
Everyone tried to take good care of them, of course, but there was also something about you if your cover became worn that said "this guy really loves this music." Sort of like how a book you read over and over becomes worn. That doesn't happen with plastic CD cases. People could often tell what your favorite bands were by how worn the album covers were.
Then there is the record itelf. 12" in size. A foot. It was big, and you had to be careful not to scratch it. CDs can be scratched, of course, but a record is much more delicate than a CD, and if you let them sit in the heat they became warped and ruined very easily. It didn't take much to have one get warped.
The more you played it the more people knew it. You tried to take good care of it, of course, but invariably it developed little clicks and pops over time. It was almost like a badge of honor, like having a scar from a barfight. You couldn't just toss them around like CDs. And you couldn't make one at home. You couldn't duplicate it. If you wanted another one, or your friend did, you'd have to go buy one. There was no such thing as a "blank," and the only way to get one was to get the whole package, cover and all. That made it much more valuable, in a way, because each one was one-of-a-kind.
I think that's what Dylan meant when he said that CDs have no "stature."
Posted by phileysmiley at 06:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
In a move that caught most Beta Testers by surprise, Microsoft released Windows Vista RC1 Build 5600 to TAP and Tech Beta testers via Microsoft Connect earlier today (for details, see HERE), with promises for the public release to follow soon. I just installed this latest build on 2 of my home systems, and both installations went easily, and quickly. One at 21 minutes, the other at 24 minutes. With the exception of a Creative Audigy 2 ZS card, and an eHome Wonder TV tuner, all drivers installed during setup.
After downloading the latest Creative Vista Beta drivers, I was pleased to find that my Audigy 2 card works well, without the crackling and hissing found in some earlier builds (although this may not be the case for everyone - see Answers: Creative Drivers & Vista). My TV card also installed, and the Media Center setup was much easier and quicker than in Beta 2. The first thing I noticed once Vista had assessed my system performance (after giving me a much better rating than in Beta 2) was a better responsiveness in the Start Menu and Windows Explorer as compared to earlier builds. The user interface has undergone a number of changes since Beta 2, and there are many new icons and graphics.
Although Windows Vista Build 5536 was just released a week ago, there are a number of bug fixes apparent in this build, most noticeably for me was that my RAID drivers loaded properly. This is looking more like a build that I can easily run as a main OS, with full media capabilities, and much less intrusive UAC prompts. Many of the features which were not fully working in Beta 2 have been completed, and I really like the new UDF support which allows you to easily drag and drop files onto a writeable DVD, or even save files directly to DVD R/Rw's from any program within Vista.
With the most recent Beta release of Virtual Server (see Download Virtual Server 2005 R2 SP1 - Beta 2), users now have the ability to mount the VHD images which are created by Windows Vista CompletePC Backup utility. All in all, Vista RC1 seems to be the best release of Windows Vista by far, and although there are sure to still be some bugs to find, it looks as if Microsoft has been listening and working hard to iron out all the bugs submitted by Beta Testers.
Posted by jrfree1 at 08:36 PM | Comments (0)
Powered by Movable Type 3.2. Valid XHTML too, and we got an RSS Feed.
PROnetworks Blog is a fully owned subsidiary of the Hawaiian Style Organization LLC