April 2009

Action Boys
Editor’s Note: I’ve decided to begin posting some reviews of films screening at Hot Docs 2009 early, hope­fully helping anyone attending make some decisions about what to see. Action Boys is screening on Sunday May 3 at 9:45pm at Innis Town Hall and Monday May 4 at 4:15pm at the Cumberland Cinema.

Action Boys (Director: Jung Byung-gil): If you’ve ever wanted to know more about the guys who do the crazy stunts in Asian action and mar­tial arts films, Action Boys is for you. But instead of telling us how they do their incred­ible stunts, the film is more inter­ested in who they are when they’re not crashing cars or swinging swords. Director Jung Byung-gil is a 2004 graduate of the Seoul Action School, a rig­orous six-month training pro­gram for tele­vi­sion and film stuntmen, and the film is more like his per­sonal tribute to the friends he made there, even though most have not gone on to pro­fes­sional stunt work. Out of his class of 34, fewer than half com­pleted the training and at the time of filming in 2008, only three were actu­ally working as stuntmen.

Byung-gil him­self gave up stunt work for dir­ecting almost imme­di­ately, and it was his 2004 short film Standing on the Edge of a Sword that served as a sort of visual year­book and demo reel for all of his class­mates. We see some of that impressive footage but it’s bal­anced by hil­arious excerpts from the audi­tion tapes from all the main players in the film. Jin-seok was a former boxer (and hairdresser!) with six-pack abs. Sung-il was admitted, according to the school’s dir­ector, based on his good looks alone. And Gui-deok, des­pite an inaus­pi­cious audi­tion, has become the most accom­plished member of their class, and a spe­cialist in car stunts. These are the three who con­tinue to make their living as stuntmen. And then there’s the hap­less Sye-jin, who has failed to settle into any career at all, but who still tags along with the others like a lost puppy. He provides plenty of comic relief, but so does dir­ector Byung-gil, whose self-deprecation adds a con­sid­er­able amount of charm.

Although there are plenty of stunts on dis­play, this is mostly an unstruc­tured record of the ups and downs of a group of very close friends, some of whom happen to put their lives in danger every day. Invisible com­pared to the actors they stand in for, the Action Boys finally have the spot­light shone on them by someone who has been there. Theirs is a pro­fes­sion where, as Gui-deok says, they feel pain but are not allowed to express it, and this applies to more than just phys­ical pain. Apart from their close friend­ships with each other, the men find it hard to main­tain rela­tion­ships, since they are often called away at a moment’s notice to film a scene. For this reason, as well as all the phys­ical injuries they accu­mu­late, most don’t last very long in the busi­ness. Jung Byung-gil’s camera is able to cap­ture this giddy and tumul­tuous time in the lives of some of his closest friends, and it makes for a com­pel­ling film.

Because it’s such a per­sonal film, though, it can tend to sprawl a bit, and in true Korean fashion, there’s a strong under­cur­rent of sen­ti­ment­ality (accom­panied by some cheesy tinkly piano music every now and then). It’s lightened con­sid­er­ably by lots of self-deprecating humour, and an inter­esting dir­ect­orial decision to employ a female voi­ceover. Other very minor quibbles: in places, the sub­titles fly by pretty quickly, and a few of the minor char­ac­ters are easy to get con­fused. I’m a bit dis­ap­pointed not to be seeing this with an audi­ence, though, because I think this feel-good tribute to some of film’s unsung heroes is the sort of exper­i­ence that’s best enjoyed with an appre­ci­ative crowd. My pre­dic­tion: look for this to be in the run­ning for the Audience Award.

8/10(8/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Ashes of American Flags
Editor’s Note: I’ve decided to begin posting some reviews of films screening at Hot Docs 2009 early, hope­fully helping anyone attending make some decisions about what to see. Ashes of American Flags is screening on Friday May 8 at 9:15pm at the Bloor Cinema and Saturday May 9 at 4:30pm at the Royal Cinema.

Ashes of American Flags (Directors: Christoph Green and Brendan Canty): If you enjoy the music of Wilco then you’re going to love their new con­cert film, Ashes of American Flags. Brendan Canty cap­tures their 2008 US tour in fab­ulous HD at Tipitina’s in New Orleans, the Ryman Auditorium in Nashville and sev­eral other venues.

The film is a simple mix of live per­form­ance and band member pro­files in a series of loose inter­views. The per­form­ances convey the incred­ible artistry and unique sound that each musi­cian brings to the group. It’s one thing to hear Wilco on a CD, but watching them per­form live makes you appre­ciate their music on a whole new level. They truly are one of the best live bands in America.

Ashes of American Flags was released yes­terday (April 28) on DVD but you’ll want to see this film on the big screen.

Official site of the film

Here is the Q&A with dir­ectors Christoph Green and Brendan Canty from after the screening:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (ver­sion 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest ver­sion here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Duration: 14:35

7/10(7/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Tyson
Editor’s Note: I’ve decided to begin posting some reviews of films screening at Hot Docs 2009 early, hope­fully helping anyone attending make some decisions about what to see. Tyson is screening on Tuesday May 5 at 9:15pm at the Isabel Bader Theatre.

Tyson (Director: James Toback): You don’t have to be a boxing fan to enjoy this new doc­u­mentary about Mike Tyson. It covers his amazing career inside the ring with footage that reminds us of how exciting he was to watch. The rest of the film covers his con­tro­ver­sial private life and bizarre antics.

Through a series of ram­bling mono­logues Tyson tells his story, some­times with brutal hon­esty. He reveals that when he faced Trevor Berbick he was fighting gonor­rhea, con­tracted from a pros­ti­tute or pos­sibly “a filthy dirty girl” as he put it.

The film never tries to be objective and provides us with only one point of view, Mike Tyson’s. Director James Toback and Mike Tyson have been good friends for more than 20 years and Tyson is one of the pro­du­cers of the film. Instead of the truth we get a fas­cin­ating glimpse into the crazy, com­plic­ated world of Mike.

Toback often presents mul­tiple head shots of Tyson with over­lap­ping audio in a split-screen format that hints at mad­ness. Tyson says that he used to talk to him­self on a reg­ular basis when he was in prison. There is also men­tion of his tem­porary black­outs when he bit Evander Holyfield’s ear. Madness? Insanity? How else can you explain Tyson’s erratic behaviour?

There are some amusing moments when Tyson describes Don King as “a slimy rep­tilian motherf***er” who would “kill his mother for a dollar.” I don’t think many people would dis­agree with Mike but when the con­ver­sa­tion turns to his rape charge against Desiree Washington he gets pretty worked up and describes her as “a wretched swine of a woman.” He still claims that the rape charges were false.

Tyson says that he’s settled down and wants to focus on his kids, now that he’s been through prison and rehab. He tries to come across as a gentler, wiser, older Mike Tyson but I’m con­vinced that he could still explode at any given instant.

I wanted more inform­a­tion about Tyson’s depres­sion, his cocaine habit and those mys­ter­ious black­outs during the infamous Holyfield fight but the film seems to sidestep those issues. I guess it’s better to leave the audi­ence wanting more.

Official web site of the film

8/10(8/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Summer Institute of Film and Television

Maybe being immersed in doc­u­ment­aries for the past few months has done some­thing funny to my brain. I’ve gone and signed up for a five-day doc­u­mentary work­shop at the Summer Institute of Film and Television (SIFT) taking place in Ottawa from May 26–31. SIFT is a pro­gramme of the Canadian Screen Training Centre and is in its 29th year. There are work­shops in dir­ecting, pro­du­cing, screen­writing and doc­u­mentary (which I assume encom­passes all three for the doc­u­mentary format).

The spe­cific work­shop I’ve enrolled in is called Docology: Transforming Ideas into Images and it’s being led by the legendary Peter Wintonick, whose con­tri­bu­tions to the field are too numerous to list here. It prom­ises a com­plete over­view of the pro­duc­tion pro­cess, from get­ting it made, to making it, to get­ting it seen. Even if I am never involved in the making of a doc­u­mentary film, I think this will give me invalu­able insight into the pro­cess and make me a more know­ledge­able com­ment­ator. That being said, I’m bringing a couple of ideas to Ottawa, so who knows?

I’m pretty excited about the oppor­tunity, and will do my best to post some updates from SIFT next month.

p.s. Thanks to local doc blogger Ilka De Laat for let­ting me know about the programme.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

The Tiger Next Door
Editor’s Note: I’ve decided to begin posting some reviews of films screening at Hot Docs 2009 early, hope­fully helping anyone attending make some decisions about what to see. The Tiger Next Door is screening on Friday May 8 at 10:00pm at the Royal Cinema and Sunday May 10 at 1:30pm at the Bloor Cinema.

The Tiger Next Door (Director: Camilla Calamandrei): Beginning with the rather shocking asser­tion that there are likely more tigers in private cap­tivity in the US than there are left in the wild, The Tiger Next Door intro­duces us next to Dennis Hill, a man who keeps 24 of them on his Indiana farm. A former meth addict, the wild-bearded Hill seems to scare and charm his neigh­bours in almost equal num­bers. Like many other obsessive animal lovers, he started with just a few big cats on his prop­erty, but his desire to col­lect and even breed more exotic animals soon leads to a situ­ation that could end in tragedy, either for the animals or for the local popu­lace. In classic liber­tarian fashion, Hill decries any attempt by the gov­ern­ment to reg­u­late his oper­a­tion, but after more than twenty years, the Indiana Department of Natural Resources finally con­ducts an inspec­tion and gives him 30 days to get rid of all but three of his tigers.

The bulk of the film fol­lows his efforts to both find homes for his cats and to make the required changes to his cages so that he can keep some of them. Hill seems like a decent enough man, gentle with the animals and con­tent to mind his own busi­ness. But he seems to pay little atten­tion to the con­cerns of his neigh­bours, and con­tinues to breed tigers to raise money to pay for the upkeep of his mena­gerie. Throughout the film, Calamandrei weaves news footage of tiger attacks and talking head inter­views with both gov­ern­ment offi­cials and oper­ators of rescue organ­iz­a­tions who are crit­ical of the idea of private own­er­ship of these animals.

The ten­sion between the dangers (and pos­sible cruelty) of keeping tigers as pets and the obvious love Hill has for his animals keeps the film in an inter­esting bal­ance until near the end, when two con­flicts erupt. The first occurs when sev­eral of the tigers begin to grow anxious as they’re being taken away by new owners. One paces her cage relent­lessly, while another throws him­self at the fen­cing in his cage until it begins to give way. Even the new owners seem a bit spooked, and we’re quickly reminded how wild and powerful these animals really are. The second con­flict is between Hill and the owner of a rescue organ­iz­a­tion who has taken in a number of Hill’s animals over the years. Even after taking in yet another of his tigers, the man clearly dis­likes Hill, and a tour of the rescue facility with the two men quickly des­cends into a bitter argu­ment. Suddenly, Hill’s motives and ethics don’t seem so clear.

Strangely, the film ends on a note that is both uplifting and chilling, as Hill vows to con­tinue pur­suing his dream of breeding a stripe­less white tiger. His con­flicts with people only seem to make him more determ­ined to sur­round him­self with animals. For most people, this would be harm­less, but for Dennis Hill, only time will tell.

There is one point in the film where the chro­no­logy becomes a little con­fusing. We observe a public hearing into whether Hill will get his permit, at which his neigh­bours speak out for or against him, but at the same time the film is inter­cut­ting scenes of him pre­paring to move animals out to new owners. It’s not clear for a while that Hill is present at the hearing, making it appear that the two events might be hap­pening at the same time. Eventually we realize they are not. Apart from that sequence, the film is well-edited and paced. Calamandrei has uncovered a story that not many people have heard before, and tells it well.

Official web site of the film

7/10(7/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }