Day 1: September 7

BORAT FILM SABOTAGED!

Kazakhstani television star/hand model blames "Jews".

Borat Rallies the Crowd

Ryerson Theatre, Toronto
Shocking audience members and 20th century fox executives alike, a kabal of "Jews, women and Gypsies" hijacked tonight's premiere of Borat: Cultural Learning of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Khazakhstan for nefarious reasons not yet made public.

While hefty left-wing fiction filmmaker Michael Moore entertained the crowd, Borat's enemies got the better of his film by successfully postponing it until tomorrow evening, or the second coming of the messiah, whichever comes first.

Yeah... complete meltdown. We all felt for Colin et. al., and the crowd was on a total high when the projector choked and died. During the hour or so they tweaked to try and fix it, we did get some entertainment, including an incredibly lame "mentalist" act who seems to travel with his toys. Nothing like prop comedy in a crowded theatre I say...

Dignitaries such as successful reality TV host Ben Mulroney and (un)successful reality TV host George Stroumboulopoulos were on hand for the showing, along with a number of other prominent stars, a slew of media outlets, etc. It's a real shame that the screening went down so poorly, but the entrance alone made for one of the highlights of any MM year.

The previous hours were spent trying to stay awake, despite the fact that this is but day one. Seems I'm getting old and jaded as the fests tick by, day one and I'm already a wreck...

High Five!	Oh Khanada!
Michael Moore & Larry Charles
Ali-G Superfan The Women Before the Horse
WA WA WEE WAHHH!

When The Levees Broke: A Requiem In Four Acts
Directed by: Spike Lee

Grade: B+

Spike Lee (with the help, according to the credits, of a number of NYU Film school interns) has crafted a lengthy, quite compelling look at Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. Mixing news footage with talking-head interviews with survivors and those in power, this "Film Document" does an admirable job of detailing many of the key elements that made the disaster of Katrina far more powerful than simply the storm that hit.

The structure follows four acts, acts that do tend to blend into one another rather than creating cut and dry chapters differing from one another. The length of the film allows for contradictory accounts and recollections to butt against one another, with certain urban myths/theories such as the potential deliberate bombing of the levees given due course. Even Kayne West's "George Bush doesn't like Black people" remark is given ample reflection. The length also, unfortunately, adds a sense of repetition that reduces in part the effectiveness of certain sequences.

With the events only a year old, there is both a freshness and lack of resolution to the entire proceedings, with many interviews taking place when the anger is still at a boiling point. This is both a strength and weakness of the film, as it lacks an inevitable perspective that will come as time goes on, while at the same time conveying poignantly the anger and frustration felt by all of those participating.

Certain scenes seem to be overly obtrusive and blunt, certain points are literally battered over the viewers heads (the repetition of certain lines, for example, becomes a little too stylistically "cute" for my liking), but the general sense is of a well rounded anthology of a particular time in American history. For those that were glued to the 24 hour news stations (myself included) much of the first half will be familiar, with familiar footage played over and over throughout the hours. The second half, that concentrates more fitfully on those introduced in the first along with a look at the greater history of New Orleans, is thus all the more satisfying. For those that haven't seen the footage from the convention center, or of the bodies floating and dramatic helicopter rescues, the film will surely be a revelation.

Regardless of this TV film's merit as a festival film (noting that HBO documentaries are better than most films screened at the fest), When the Levees Broke provides an extraordinarily detailed look at this event, and its worth is sure to be felt increasingly as the memories fade and the anger softens with time and distance.

Mon Meilleur Ami (My Best Friend)
Directed by: Patrice Leconte

Grade: B

This is perhaps what passes for puff-piece, light-comedic adult films in France, which is saying something quite positive about contemporary French pop cinema. A man (Daniel Auteuil) finds out that he actually has no friends (only acquaintances and colleagues) and sets out to find a friend in order to settle a bet with his co-worker (the radiant Julie Gayet).

The plot ends up having enough holes to drive a taxi through, but for some reason it all works so well. It's a difficult thing, reflecting upon friendship between two men as they express their feelings without it seeming maudlin. Most buddy movies, for example, don't concern themselves with the nature of buddies, they just take friendship for granted. This film does the opposite, creating a buddy film where the entire pursuit is for that closeness of friendship two men can share, a closeness that's at once secure and tacit.

The direction is deft, performances fine, and the finale a fun time, but it all seems to be an admixture of heavy reflection upon trust and a light, silly troll through a mid-life friendship crisis. It certainly does not take a genius to see where the script is going some ten minutes into the flick, but, again, that didn't seem to detract from the film. In the end, it was an enjoyable, light film to kick off the morning. Discussions about an English language remake (it bears the same tone as another French-to-Hollywood transplant, Three Men and a Baby) may be happening as I type...

The Wind that Shakes the Barley
Directed by: Ken Loach

Grade: A

Lots of my favourite war films (Full Metal Jacket, Saving Private Ryan, etc.) start with a tremendous flourish, lots of ambivalence and confusion that eventually settles down into a somewhat traditional playing out of war film thematics. Loach's film about Northern Ireland plays in exactly the opposite way. The first hour is so stark, so black-and-white that the Brit "bad guys" are so wooden and predictably evil they could be Nazis in a 50s serial. Englishment blindly brutalize the protagonists without provocation, smashing bones with giddy abandon. Just when this onslaught of us-versus-them is at its highest point, chinks begin to form. Reference is made to the hell some of these soldiers survived in the Great War, and disagreements begin to arise amongst the Irish. Black and White begins it process towards grey.

The tone of the film becomes even more challenging (and beguiling) as a treaty is signed with the British overlords. The transition from guerilla to soldier is a fractious one, and it is here that the moral ambiguity of the film truly gains its complexity.

The last half of the film presents in a shockingly honest way the complexity of this transition. The performances are shattering, made all the more harrowing by the situations the characters find themselves in. Without ruining the ending, the film is absolutely unflinching, and what starts as a simple, adolescent tale of brotherhood and rebellion turns into a very adult, very real examination of the political and moral decisions driving nationalist organizations. Exceptional, intelligent, accessible, and poetic (in a good way!) it's a film from the master Loach that's not to be missed.

After the Wedding
Directed by: Sussanne Bier

Grade: B-

Another Danish family drama, this one involving a Billionaire, his wife and family, and an idealistic teacher of orphans living in the slums of Bombay. Plot-wise, this is a predictable mish mash of tragic situations, deceit, powerplays and reconciliation. The film's actors, however, bring such raw, powerful performances that the story limitations are for the most part forgotten about.

Some of the scenes are downright devastating, as the various characters come to terms with their own choices. It's not nearly as spectacular of other contemporary Danish films, but the craft and acting bring it above the genre in which it slips.

King and the Clown
Directed by: Lee Jun-ik

Grade: C-

Admittedly, this was my first Korean clown-and-king epic with a dash of gay subtext, but King and Clown is, to my mind at least, a baffling mess of a film. There are moments of great beauty and fun, with acrobat scenes shot with aplomb, beautiful colours and costumes floating across the screen. At other times, it's an arch, melodramatic mess not even worthy of daytime soaps. The trick, I guess, is for that not to get you down.

The story is apparently derived from the true tale of a mad, brutal king, circa 1500 AD, who invited a bunch of jesters into his court despite the fact that they were known to break the rules and taunt the ruler himself. The first hour of the film, building up the jesters to enter the court, picking up ragtag side characters as the march to Seoul takes place was quite enjoyable, and the acrobatics were quite impressive.

Underlying this main plot is the fact that the two (male) protagonists do a girl/guy schtick, and the "girl" in the act is quite striking an fair, often bartered out to help pay the bills. The fairness of the character is so fine that even the King falls for him, scandalizing the court even more than the jesting of the King, ministers, and other officials and members of the court.

That much was straightforward - where the film totally goes out to left field is where a non-sexual, non-physical love triangle (and various other forms of betrayal) cumulating with the slitting of wrists (and surreal resurrection), some operatic fight scenes, a bunch of tame sexual exploits and other related hanky panky. The programme guide extolls the fact that this was the biggest hit in Korean history, and I can't help but feel that this fact a) shows there may be more depth in the flick than I'm giving it credit for, or, more likely, b) this is the same type that flocked to Titanic for the sense of soft seduction in a period setting.

The book also ties the homoerotic elements to last year's big success, citing the label of "Korea's Brokeback Mountain" given to the film. Frankly, this is just insulting to the fine Brokeback (is there a new rule that all future films that take place outdoors and have a hint of homoeroticism be compared to that flick?). As the film collapses to its messy, ridiculous conclusion I was left with a strong feeling of a lost opportunity, a potentially enlightening epic coated with enough schmaltz to make it almost camp.

Ten Canoes
Directed by: Rolf DeHeer

Grade: A-

Ten Canoes is a deep, flowing tale, elegiac in its pacing, beautifully shot. The narrator begins with "A long time ago, in a place far, far away...", then cracks into laughter, saying it's not "your story, but my story...", a different, but just as good tale handed down from his ancestors.

The story flows with deliberate patience, different branches of the story "like the trees" finding their own pace. There's no moral per se, but there is a sense of deep wisdom as the story unfolds.

The narration was in English, but the dialogue was entirely in the native language(s) of the Aboriginal actors. There is a strong verisimilitude in the production, documentary in its rawness, the naked bodies of the actors taken for granted as being as natural as the landscapes. After a while, certain words and phrases of the aboriginal language could be discerned, and the story flowed richly without the need for subtitles. Surprisingly, the lack of subtitles that I found to be a challenging and exciting part of the experience was infact an accident of print shipments. Regardless of this accident of print management, the film remained entirely comprehensible, forcing the viewer to pay careful attention to extratextual gestures and physical cues, helped in turn by the laconic, omniscient narration that runs throughout.

A remarkable film, made all the more enjoyable by this happy subtitling accident at the screening.