politics

The Lady

by Drew Kerr on September 29, 2011

in Film Festivals,TIFF

The Lady

The Lady (Director: Luc Besson): Director Luc Besson steps out of his com­fort zone with The Lady, a biopic about Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese politi­cian who spent almost 15 years under house arrest in her family com­pound for leading a demo­cratic uprising that opposed Burma’s oppressive and cor­rupt gov­ern­ment. Best known for high energy movies like La Femme Nikita, The Fifth Element, and Leon: The Professional, Besson reins in the action for this expansive drama, which sur­pris­ingly focusses as much (if not more) on Suu Kyi’s rela­tion­ship with her family as on her polit­ical his­tory. In per­form­ances sure to gen­erate Oscar buzz, Michelle Yeoh plays the tit­ular char­acter and David Thewlis plays her hus­band Michael Aris, a pro­fessor of Tibetan and Himalayan Studies at the University of Oxford.

Suu Kyi lived abroad in England for most of her adult life, where she and Aris raised two boys, until returning to her native country in 1988 to tend to her sick mother. Once there, she is approached by locals to lead efforts to form a new gov­ern­ment that will bring demo­cracy to the country, ending the iron-handed rule and human rights abuses of the leaders in power. This is one area of the film where the expos­i­tion felt clum­sily handled; it’s jar­ring and con­fusing when Suu Kyi rap­idly goes from seem­ingly being a simple Oxford house­wife to the high pro­file leader of a polit­ic­ally chaotic country. No back­ground is given on her adult years before her return to Burma (was she polit­ic­ally active while in England?) and there’s no real probing into her motiv­a­tions or qual­i­fic­a­tions for taking on such a weighty and dan­gerous pos­i­tion, other than the fact that her father aspired to be a figure of change in the country before he was killed by opposing mil­itary forces when Suu Kyi was a child. That was obvi­ously a factor, but a deeper explor­a­tion of this crit­ical point in Suu Kyi’s life is needed, espe­cially when we see the massive sac­ri­fices she makes for her beliefs (she misses years of her family’s lives and is unable to be with her hus­band as he fights and ulti­mately suc­cumbs to cancer in 1999). Thewlis gives an excel­lent per­form­ance as Aris, who devotedly shared in his wife’s struggle and unre­mit­tingly fought for her freedom.

Yeoh delivers a dig­ni­fied, com­pas­sionate por­trait of Suu Kyi, but is hand­cuffed some­what by Besson’s and screen­writer Rebecca Frayn’s rather ped­es­trian sum­ma­tion of her struggle. Despite its lengthy run­ning time (145 minutes), the film feels rushed and fails to res­onate quite as deeply as such a remark­able story should. Yeoh met the politi­cian in Burma last December, a month after Suu Kyi was finally freed, and attempted to visit her again in June while on a break from shooting The Lady in Thailand, but was deported and black­listed by Burmese officials.

I’d never heard of Suu Kyi until U2 brought her name to a wider audi­ence with the song “Walk On” and during brief seg­ments about her at every show on their last couple of tours, for which Besson gives the band a couple of shout-outs in his film, how­ever awk­ward (one of Suu Kyi’s sons wears a shirt from the band and one of their songs plays on the soundtrack). The Lady, although flawed, is a well-intentioned effort that will bring fur­ther atten­tion to her extraordinary life and the ongoing fight for human rights in Burma.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Sarah Palin: You Betcha!

Sarah Palin: You Betcha! (Directors: Nick Broomfield and Joan Churchill): Sarah Palin: You Betcha! seeks to get the real story behind the divisive former vice pres­id­en­tial can­didate and gov­ernor of Alaska, who has somehow man­aged to become a prom­inent figure on the American polit­ical land­scape, des­pite what appears to be an almost laugh­able lack of qual­i­fic­a­tions. Her short­com­ings become the focus of Broomfield and Churchill’s film, which will likely be dis­missed as a char­acter assas­sin­a­tion by the Republican right, but Palin’s defi­cien­cies are impossible to ignore. In fact, they’re front and centre.

Broomfield is best known for his doc­u­ment­aries Kurt & Courtney, Biggie & Tupac, and Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial Killer. Sarah Palin: You Betcha!, making its world premiere at the fest­ival, employs the same style used in many of his films, where Broomfield him­self fre­quently appears on-screen. Documentary pur­ists might bristle at the fact that the dir­ector, like Michael Moore, becomes such a prom­inent figure in his own films (which he also nar­rates), but it’s a style that works for him, mostly because of his quirky charm. One scene in the movie shows Broomfield arriving at an interviewee’s res­id­ence and begin­ning the inter­view with her before he’s even let inside; she talks to him through an open window as he tries to stay upright while standing on the sheet of ice that’s cov­ering her driveway, all while holding on to his ever-present boom micro­phone and audio recording equip­ment. The fact that he’s out­fitted in an ugly flannel jacket and funny looking winter hat with ear­flaps only adds to the enter­tain­ingly oddball scene.

Broomfield and Churchill (who does most of the camera work) spent ten weeks shooting in the dead of winter in Palin’s hometown of Wasilla, Alaska, which could best be summed up as a land of guns, God, and snow. The town itself is a bit of a fas­cin­ating sub­ject: it’s the crystal meth cap­ital of the state and home to a stag­gering 76 churches for the pop­u­la­tion of just 6,000. They inter­view Palin’s par­ents (mostly her father, Chuck), who at first are fairly wel­coming, but who soon become more leery of the film­makers as they find out they’ve been talking to some of their daughter’s enemies and detractors in town. Chuck is wor­ried about another “hit piece” by the media. Former Palin friends and class­mates are harder to find — the few that will talk tell the film­makers of wor­ries about reper­cus­sions from Palin and her sup­porters that could affect their ability to earn a living in the small town, or even their safety. One man from her high school inner circle dis­misses the revi­sionist PR job that Palin and her team did to paint her as a suc­cessful high school ath­lete who came to be known as “Sarah Barracuda” because of her tenacity. He says she was a very mediocre ath­lete and only got the “Barracuda” nick­name because their group of friends simply loved the song with the same name by Heart. The meatier parts of the film are the numerous inter­views with Palin’s former polit­ical col­leagues, who col­lect­ively depict her as someone who felt con­tempt for intel­lec­tuals, was dis­en­gaged from the polit­ical pro­cess, vin­dictive, naive, and dis­loyal. Some vari­ation of the phrase “thrown under the bus” occurs with comedic reg­u­larity from the former co-workers, but it’s most sobering when you hear a ver­sion of it from one of the senior strategists who worked on John McCain’s pres­id­en­tial cam­paign. It’s a damning indict­ment of the McCain camp that they failed to uncover Palin’s skel­etons, which appear to have been hiding in plain sight, before making her their vice pres­id­en­tial nominee.

The film­makers also speak to former family mem­bers, who use many of the same adject­ives that Palin’s polit­ical col­leagues used to describe her. Most prom­inent from this group is her former brother-in-law, Mike Wooten, who was the focus of the “Troopergate” scandal that implic­ated Palin over a pos­sible abuse of her powers, while gov­ernor, to get Wooten fired from his job as a state trooper. Unsurprisingly, he has nothing good to say about her, even making some fairly pointed accus­a­tions about the par­enting skills of Palin and her father. Of course, no doc­u­mentary on Palin would be com­plete without an exam­in­a­tion of her staunch reli­gious beliefs. The most inter­esting inter­views on the topic come from an Alaskan pastor who has a rocky his­tory with Palin, not­ably their dif­fer­ences on homo­sexu­ality in the church. He wor­ries about her mental sta­bility around some­thing as important as nuc­lear launch codes because of the fact that “she believes she’s God’s anointed one”.

Palin her­self remains an elu­sive target and the film never man­ages to get any closer to her than Broomfield’s appear­ances at a few of her book sign­ings, where she’s non-committal to his inter­view requests, and Broomfield turning up in the audi­ence at a couple of her speaking engage­ments. The speaking engage­ment scenes add comedic value, but do come off as some­what grand­standing on his part as he gets kicked out of one event after sur­repti­tiously asking Palin a ques­tion from the venue floor, and resorts to using a mal­func­tioning mega­phone at another as the audi­ence files out of the arena after the event, clearly not inter­ested in talking to him.

Churchill and Broomfield took to an online funding web­site for cre­ative pro­jects called Kickstarter last month in an effort to raise funds so the film could get dis­trib­uted in US theatres. They raised a little more than their target goal of $30,000 in less than three weeks and man­aged to secure a lim­ited release in New York and Los Angeles at the end of September. Audiences will dis­cover a con­sist­ently enter­taining and occa­sion­ally rev­el­atory por­trait of one of the most fas­cin­ating polit­ical fig­ures in recent memory.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

The Invisible Eye (La mirada invisible)
The Invisible Eye opened the­at­ric­ally at the TIFF Bell Lightbox on May 26, 2011.

The Invisible Eye (La mirada invis­ible) (Director: Diego Lerman): Based on the novel Moral Sciences by Martín Kohan, The Invisible Eye attempts to link Argentina’s crum­bling dic­tat­or­ship with the social order inside an elite private school during the autumn of 1982. Maria Teresa (Julieta Zylberberg) is a young teaching assistant who seems to enjoy the small amount of power she has, imposing order and dis­cip­line on stu­dents just a few years younger than her. She’s also fas­cin­ated by her super­visor Mr. Biasutto, a man who, it’s implied, has received this posting as a reward for unspe­cified ser­vices in the mil­itary coup that brought the gen­erals to power in 1976.

In a per­form­ance with hardly any sus­tained stretches of dia­logue, Zylberberg brings an ici­ness to her role while also showing her youthful insec­urity. And Lerman is suc­cessful in cre­ating an atmo­sphere of quiet terror in the school. Perhaps too suc­cessful. The film itself feels air­less, joy­less and oppressive. We see Maria Teresa either at school or at home, where she lives in cramped quar­ters with her mother and grand­mother. In a rare social excur­sion, she seems isol­ated from her work col­leagues and cool to the advances of a male teacher. But she lets Biasutto flirt with her and take her out for coffee. And then she develops an obses­sion with a male stu­dent, although her only way of relating to him is either as an authority figure, or more dis­turb­ingly, as a voyeur.

With Biasutto’s blessing, she begins spying on stu­dents, ostens­ibly to root out “sub­versive” beha­viour like smoking, but her own sexual repres­sion leads her to spend long hours crouched in a toilet stall in the boys’ bath­room. Here the film and char­acter are remin­is­cent of Michael Haneke’s The Piano Teacher (review), but the polit­ical allegory never lets us get to know Maria Teresa quite as well as the woman Isabelle Huppert por­trays. We only know that she’s unable to relate to anyone as an equal. Either she dom­in­ates or is dom­in­ated, and by the end, it leads to viol­ence and tragedy. Unfortunately, the polit­ical mes­sage is so heavy-handed that events within the school have to be taking place at the same time as par­allel events are taking place in the streets just out­side, which weakens the film. But Zylberberg’s per­form­ance is always inter­esting to watch, espe­cially as someone who seems to be profiting from an author­it­arian system. It makes one wonder what hap­pens to all of these minor cogs when dic­tators inev­it­ably fall.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Casino Jack and the United States of Money

Casino Jack and the United States of Money (Director: Alex Gibney): If you like your polit­ical intrigue mired in the cess­pool of cor­rup­tion and gov­ern­mental incom­pet­ence then look no fur­ther than Casino Jack and the United States of Money, the latest doc­u­mentary from dir­ector Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room and Taxi to the Dark Side). Casino Jack… exam­ines the rise and fall of Jack Abramoff, the Washington super-lobbyist who is now fin­ishing up a four-year prison sen­tence after being con­victed of tax eva­sion, fraud, and con­spiracy charges. Abramoff and his crooked deal­ings are the focus, but Gibney also takes a peri­pheral view of the strange world of high-powered lobbying.

The film lays out a fairly dense land­scape of quickly-paced polit­ical facts and fig­ures, with a whirl­wind of inter­views involving former Abramoff asso­ci­ates, out­siders, and journ­al­ists who exposed his abuses of power. The central figure him­self is con­spicu­ously absent (for the most part), aside from the numerous archival clips and pho­to­graphs shown. Extensive inter­views with Abramoff were, in fact, con­ducted for the film, but prison rules pro­hib­ited him from being recorded. The film doesn’t suffer greatly from his rel­ative absence, and his side of things is provided through a voice-over from actor Stanley Tucci (actor Paul Rudd also con­trib­utes a voice-over for Michael Scanlon, a former Abramoff associate).

Abramoff is a very col­ourful char­acter — it’s no sur­prise to learn that a fea­ture film about him is due later this year, star­ring Kevin Spacey. The title being used, Casino Jack, has become a matter of dis­pute between its film­makers and Gibney. At age 12, after watching Fiddler on the Roof, Abramoff con­verted to Orthodox Judaism. Later years saw him obtain a law degree, become chairman of the rad­ical College Republican National Committee (a group of “free market extrem­ists” united by the Reagan Revolution that also included future Republican heavy­weights Karl Rove, Grover Norquist, and Ralph Reed, who espoused belief in min­imal gov­ern­ment and unreg­u­lated cap­it­alism), and even­tual ascen­sion to right-hand man to prom­inent Republican and one-time House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. DeLay, after his own fall from grace, could most recently be seen evis­cer­ating what little remained of his repu­ta­tion by appearing on “Dancing With The Stars”. Abramoff’s polit­ical career arc is inter­rupted by a ten-year stint as a Hollywood writer and pro­ducer — his most, uh, note­worthy credit is Red Scorpion, the schlocky 1989 Dolph Lundgren vehicle. His Hollywood past is humour­ously alluded to in an email shown at the begin­ning of Casino Jack…, where Abramoff writes to Gibney, “No one watches doc­u­ment­aries. You should make an action movie!”.

The lobbyist’s down­fall is care­fully dis­sected, providing an impressive exam­in­a­tion into Abramoff’s biggest blunder: the sys­tem­atic bilking of American Indian tribes who got into the casino busi­ness and needed his influence-peddling to sus­tain their oper­a­tions. Incriminating emails point to the cal­lous greed at the heart of his motiv­a­tion, including one where he laughs at their obli­vi­ous­ness to his fraud­u­lent billings by stating “stupid people get wiped out”. Other mor­ally dubious polit­ical deal­ings involve Abramoff’s lob­bying on behalf of sweat­shop owners in the Northern Marianas Islands (a US ter­ritory), a mis­guided attempt to con­vert the islands into a land of flour­ishing cap­it­alism, and a shady busi­ness deal involving a floating casino oper­a­tion known as SunCruz Casinos that involved the former owner being murdered. Abramoff’s ability to carry on the way he did, for as long as he did, is per­fectly summed up by a quote from a former dis­graced asso­ciate: “Jack Abramoff could sweet-talk a dog off a meat truck”.

It can be a chal­lenge to absorb everything coming at you and not be over­whelmed by the story’s wide scope, espe­cially with a run­ning time of two hours. Gibney wisely inserts some clever graphics, film clips (including Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and Patton), and recog­niz­able songs (including “Enter Sandman”, “Watching The Detectives”, and “Burning Down The House”) to dilute all of the heavy politi-speak hit­ting the viewer and alle­viate the oppressive ser­i­ous­ness of the film’s sub­ject matter. Getting through Casino Jack… may be daunting for some, but it is a sobering eye-opener into the world of lob­bying and the pro­found influ­ence it has on American politics.

Official site of the film

7/10(7/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

In The Loop

by James McNally on November 19, 2009 · 1 comment

in DVD

In The Loop
In The Loop was released on DVD in Canada on November 10 by Alliance Films and will come out January 10, 2010 in the US. You can help Toronto Screen Shots by buying it from Amazon.ca or Amazon.com.

In The Loop (Director: Armando Iannucci): On this side of the pond, the name Armando Iannucci likely doesn’t ring a bell, but for fans of British comedy, the man is con­sidered a genius. His col­lab­or­a­tions with Steve Coogan include the classic Alan Partridge shows (The Day Today, Knowing Me, Knowing You, I’m Alan Partridge). Most recently, he’s been writing and dir­ecting a blaz­ingly fast and funny series called The Thick of It, which mines the comedic ter­ritory of polit­ical media hand­lers working for the British government.

In The Loop takes almost all the actors from that show, mixes up the char­ac­ters a bit, and places them in the midst of the run up to the (unnamed but blind­ingly obvious) Iraq war in 2003. Peter Capaldi returns as Malcolm Tucker, the whipsmart press sec­retary with a mean streak. I’ve never heard more cre­ative swearing in my life, and if you’re offended by “f-bombs” then this film is def­in­itely not for you. But it’s my firm belief that no one can curse more cre­at­ively than our friends from the British Isles, and every char­acter reaches for the stars in this very funny movie.

Simon Foster is the min­ister for inter­na­tional devel­op­ment who puts his foot in his mouth by making off-the-cuff remarks about the pos­sib­ility of a war. The press runs riot and Malcolm Tucker tears young Foster a new back­side. The rest of the film fol­lows the boun­cing min­ister as he’s used by pro– and anti-war fac­tions in both the UK and the US. He con­tinues to fudge his “lines” and the res­ulting mess makes for some very funny situ­ations. While The Thick of It con­fines itself to English politics, In The Loop cre­ates sim­ilar char­ac­ters on the American side, with James Gandolfini clearly enjoying him­self as a peace-loving gen­eral who nev­er­the­less threatens to kill sev­eral of his polit­ical oppon­ents. It’s nice, too, to see Anna Chlumsky (best known for 1991’s My Girl) return in the role of a young aide to an anti-war assistant sec­retary of state.

In The Loop

Overall, though, the Brits get the best lines (as might be expected) and one of the fun­niest scenes is when Malcolm Tucker the angry Scot actu­ally brings in an even angrier Scot to handle yet another press leak. Steve Coogan has a small cameo as an irate local man trying to get his mother’s garden wall fixed in the midst of an inter­na­tional crisis. Though I would have loved to see more of him, giving him a bigger role might have unbal­anced the mostly star-free cast. In The Loop will be riot­ously funny to anyone with even a passing interest in the work­ings of politics. Though it’s not any­thing spe­cial cine­mat­ic­ally (think a longer episode of The West Wing), there’s enough crack­ling dia­logue to keep you laughing all the way through. In fact, it’s a per­fect film for DVD since you may find your­self having to rewatch cer­tain scenes, either because the accents are slightly unin­tel­li­gible, or because you were laughing so hard you missed the next piece of dialogue.

This was a film whose trailer let it down because it had to cut out all the swearing. So I’ve included instead an actual clip. Be fore­warned, though, that this con­tains some many naughty words.

8/10(8/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }