Reg Hartt’s idiosyncratic Cineforum is shutting its doors after 16 years. I’ve seen the posters all over town for more than a decade, but never once got to go.
According to this Globe and Mail article, Hartt’s landlord is selling the house, where he has rented space since 1990, but Hartt has indicated he may reopen somewhere else in the future.
There are events going on December 23 and 25, if you can make it. It’s a shame I was never able to experience any of the weirdness on offer, but I’m hopeful this unique local microcinema will be resurrected in the near future.
UPDATE: No one can tell you about Cineforum more eloquently than Reg Hartt himself. I’m determined to try to get there in the next week or so. Anyone up for an excursion between Christmas and New Year’s?
Tagged as:
microcinema
Well, because someone actually had to watch them, the Onion AV Club has helpfully assembled their list of the Worst Films of 2008. I’m happy to report that I haven’t seen any of the 17 turkeys on this list, but it was interesting that they cover the gamut from redneck comedy to serious indie art films. Thanks, AV Club, for saving me many wasted hours and dollars. Although I must admit that the reviews do make me a tiny bit curious to see just how bad some of these are.
In a bold move, the Toronto Film Critics Association has awarded their Best Picture award for 2008 to Kelly Reichardt’s Wendy and Lucy (review). In addition, they’ve honoured Michelle Williams’ performance with the Best Actress award. Personally, I’m delighted and hope this will draw some attention to this small but devastating film, which has screened only at TIFF so far. They also lavished three awards on Jonathan Demme’s Rachel Getting Married, another left-field choice. I’ll be surprised if this list of awards isn’t closer to the Independent Spirit winners than the Oscars or Golden Globes, but I am happy that some neglected work is getting a little attention. The full list of awards follows:
BEST PICTURE
“Wendy and Lucy” (Mongrel Media) (review)
Runners-up:
“Rachel Getting Married” (Mongrel Media)
“WALL*E” (Disney/Pixar)
BEST PERFORMANCE, MALE
Mickey Rourke, “The Wrestler” (Alliance)
Runners-up:
Sean Penn, “Milk” (Alliance)
Jean-Claude Van Damme, “JCVD” (Peace Arch)
BEST PERFORMANCE, FEMALE
Michelle Williams, “Wendy and Lucy” (review)
Runners-up:
Anne Hathaway, “Rachel Getting Married“
Meryl Streep, “Doubt” (Maple) (review)
BEST SUPPORTING PERFORMANCE, MALE
Heath Ledger, “The Dark Knight” (Warner Bros)
Runners-up:
Josh Brolin, “Milk“
Robert Downey, Jr, “Tropic Thunder” (Paramount)
Philip Seymour Hoffman, “Doubt” (review)
BEST SUPPORTING PERFORMANCE, FEMALE
Rosemarie DeWitt, “Rachel Getting Married”
Runners-up:
Penelope Cruz, “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” (Fox Searchlight)
Viola Davis, “Doubt” (review)
BEST DIRECTOR
Jonathan Demme, “Rachel Getting Married”
Runners-up:
Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire” (Fox Searchlight)
Andrew Stanton, “WALL*E”
BEST SCREENPLAY
Jenny Lumet, “Rachel Getting Married”
Runners-up:
John Patrick Shanley, “Doubt” (Maple) (review)
Peter Morgan, “Frost/Nixon” (Universal)
BEST FIRST FEATURE
“Ballast”, directed by Lance Hammer (KinoSmith)
Runners-up:
“The Band’s Visit”, directed by Eran Kolirin (Mongrel Media) (review)
“Frozen River”, directed by Courtney Hunt (Mongrel Media)
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE
“WALL*E” (Disney/Pixar)
Runners-up:
“Kung-Fu Panda” (DreamWorks Animaton)
“Persepolis” (Mongrel Media) (review)
“Waltz with Bashir” (E1 Films) (review)
BEST FOREIGN-LANGUAGE FILM
“Let the Right One In” (Mongrel Media)
Runners-up:
“The Class” (Mongrel Media) (review)
“I’ve Loved You So Long” (Mongrel Media)
“A Christmas Tale” (E1) (review)
BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
“Man on Wire” (Mongrel Media) (review)
Runners-up:
“Standard Operating Procedure” (Mongrel Media)
“Up the Yangtze” (KinoSmith/NFB) (review)
Doubt (2008, Director: John Patrick Shanley): Directing his own Tony award-winning play, John Patrick Shanley is helped enormously by a stellar cast, including Philip Seymour Hoffman, Meryl Streep, Amy Adams and Viola Davis. All four were recently honoured with Golden Globe nominations, as was Shanley’s script. The film, set in 1964 at a Catholic school in the Bronx, is essentially a battle of wills between Father Flynn (Hoffman), the charismatic and progressive parish priest, and Sister Aloysius (Streep), the authoritarian principal of the school. There are many reasons for their enmity, including the general segregation of priests and nuns and their differing views of tradition, but something causes her to suspect Flynn of sexually abusing a young black student. The title has many shades of meaning, but most obviously, it is a seed planted by the older woman in the mind of Sister James (Adams), and idealistic young nun who looks up to Flynn.
There is much in the script to savour, and by the end, we’re really not sure what to think of each of our players, but the combination of an intelligent script and a cast of first-rate actors make this compelling from start to finish. And surprisingly, for a film dealing with such a heavy topic, there’s quite a lot of humour. Shanley’s deft touch is not surprising, considering he’s working with his own material, but the art direction and cinematography are just right as well, making this much more than just a filmed performance of the play.
Though I’m sure this will reward multiple viewings, it was interesting to me that the children in the film, especially the one at the centre of the allegations, are curiously pushed to the sidelines as the battle of wills plays out. As well, there is very little discussion of faith in God, since it seems to be more about some of the institutions of the Church. One of my half-formed theories is that the rigid separation of men and women in the Catholic clergy naturally leads to suspicion and jealousy on the part of the women, who have less power. As well, Sister Aloysius stood for a kind of virtue that has nothing to do with compassion, while Flynn was the man of weakness who can empathize with his congregation. I’ll be very curious to see how the Christian community responds to the film.
If I have just one pet peeve, it’s that almost every single time you hear of a Catholic priest nowadays, it’s in relation to some past sexual abuse allegation. It’s a shame that this stereotype ignores the many many fine men who served their congregations and schools selflessly. I grew up attending Catholic schools in the 1970s, and happily have no horror stories to report. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
Official site of the film
Trailer on the Apple site
(9/10)
Tagged as:
christianity,
faith
Editor’s Note:
Doc Soup is a monthly documentary screening programme run by the good folks at
Hot Docs. It gives audiences in Toronto (and now Calgary and Vancouver!) their regular doc fix each year from the fall through to the spring, leading up to the Hot Docs festival itself.
Chris and Don. A Love Story (2007, Directors: Tina Mascara and Guido Santi): Don Bachardy was just 16 when he met Christopher Isherwood on a gay beach in Southern California. Prudently, Isherwood waited until Don was 18 before making his move. That is, if a 48-year-old man picking up a teenager can ever be considered prudent. Despite a 30-year age difference, Don and Chris built a lasting relationship that continued until Isherwood’s death (at the age of 82) in 1986. Based mostly on interviews with Bachardy, now in his 70s, Chris and Don is a sweet remembrance of a unique relationship, but as a film, I found it a bit flat.
I knew before seeing it that I’d be comparing it with Bob and Jack’s 52-Year Adventure, which explored similar territory, but with the benefit of having both parties alive to tell each side of the story. Sweet as Don’s remembrances of Chris might be, there’s not much drama there. Talking about a well-loved spouse who’s been gone more than twenty years is bound to become an exercise tainted by nostalgia. Though there were a few bumps in the relationship, Don (or the directors) seemed to gloss over them.
Perhaps most uncomfortable for me was the vast difference in their ages, as well as the fact that Isherwood was a well-known writer while Don was an admitted celebrity-seeker. Both men sought things in their relationship which are generally best found outside of a romantic entanglement. The number of times the father-son dynamic was mentioned was remarkable, and yet the directors didn’t dig very deeply into what could have been disturbing territory. Isherwood found in Bachardy the son he never had, as well as the youth he had lost. In return, Bachardy found a replacement for his disapproving father, as well as a teacher and someone who could introduce him to other famous people. There is a moment when Don recalls his frustration at being completely formed by Isherwood, and I’d have been curious to see more of that, especially since he now seems to have completely made peace with the fact that everything he has achieved in his life (he is an accomplished portrait painter) has been under the patronage of his husband.
Technically, the film is solid but unadventurous, although it does attempt some whimsy by animating images Isherwood drew of his pet names for himself (an old horse) and Bachardy (a cat). I found the animations crudely executed, though my wife thought they were cute.
Overall, then, it felt like a bit of a missed opportunity to me. I can understand the directors’ reticence since they had such great access to Bachardy, but I think some tougher questions could have made the film stronger.
Official site of the film
(6/10)
Tagged as:
aging,
homosexuality,
marriage
