By Kim Voynar Voynar@moviecitynews.com

SIFF 2010 Ends Record-Breaking Fest with a Spectacular Closing Weekend

The funny thing about a film festival that runs for 25 days (plus three weeks of press screenings before it even kicks off) is that you get used to it being a regular part of your life and schedule, and when it’s over, it leaves a big hole in your life that won’t be filled for another year. I feel a twinge of sadness when any fest wraps — saying goodbye to endless days of immersing myself in film, saying goodbye to old friends who are a pivotal part of my life, for all that I see them only at fests at certain times of year, with only Facebook and email to keep us tethered together during the spaces in between.

Sunday was the closing day of the 36th Seattle International Film Festival. With the exception of a couple years when my life was kind of falling apart and I was moving kids back-and-forth across the country, SIFF has been an important part of my life since I moved to Seattle a decade ago; SIFF is one of those reliable things about Seattle that makes it such a great place to live, along with heaps of life music, abundant art in its various other forms, energetic, vibrant people, and excellent coffee. Like any fest, SIFF has had its “on” years and “kinda off” years programming-wise, but I think this year’s slate was the best they’ve had in a while, at least based on the films I saw, and many more I know I missed but hope to catch up with later — the SIFF team’s work doesn’t stop just because the fest is over, they have a year-round program of bringing excellent films to Seattle to keep working on.

I suppose in a way it’s typical of a fest with as many excellent films on its slate as SIFF that my closing weekend of the fest I’d see a couple films that I particularly enjoyed. On Friday night we caught two very tonally different documentaries, Paris Return and The Way We Live, but today we saw what I think was my favorite doc of this year’s SIFF, Thunder Soul, which buzzed big at SXSW this year. Thunder Soul is about a high school band instructor who, in the early 1970s, turned an all-black high school band into a world-wide sensation as a funk band, and it is beautiful, inspiring, heartfelt storytelling of the sort that makes a documentary leap into the category of truly great.

Yesterday’s Awards Ceremony at the Space Needle was evidence that SIFF, while other fests are flagging financially, is still holding its own. The brunch served to a bevy of filmmakers, press and passholders was spectacular, far beyond the usual coffee, juice and pastries one might expect; the buffet spread included baked salmon with Braeburn apple salsa, pasta salad, an excellent egg scramble, and some sinful apple crepes that were out of this world. You can see the full list of award winners and honorees over here, if you’re so inclined. The fest itself was a big winner; festival Artistic Director Carl Spence told the brunch crowd that, in spite of the economy, fest attendance overall this year was up 20% over last year and broke previous attendance records. I know that just about every screening I went to was well-attended, but it was nice to hear from Spence that the Seattle cinephile crowd came out to support their fest in record numbers.

Sunday night’s closing film was Get Low, which I missed at earlier fests on the circuit this year due to illness and surgery and other fun stuff. The film stars Robert Duvall as Felix Bush, a crusty old recluse who wants to throw a funeral party for himself while he’s still alive, and set the record straight for the townsfolk on why he’s been living in a state of self-imprisonment for over 40 years. Bill Murray has an excellent turn as Frank Quinn, the town’s funeral home director, Lucas Black is Buddy, Frank’s youthful, optimistic assistant, and Sissy Spacek shows up as Felix’s old sweetheart returned home. First-time feature director Aaron Schneider does a fine job at the helm, deftly weaving a complex story that’s part folk tale and part drama, with Murray providing just enough levity to lighten the load.

The awards brunch was great, but the fest wasn’t done partying yet; following the film, fest attendees trudged a few short blocks to the Pan Pacific Hotel for the Closing Night Gala, always a spectacular affair. Unfortunately, I had an equally spectacular headache and so had to skip the party, but I hear a good time was had by all until late last night.

I have to add a word here on behalf of the SIFF staff, both those who work on the fest all year and those who slave away tirelessly for the weeks leading up to and including this mammoth fest. The SIFF press office, year after year, is one of the best teams I work with at a festival. There are lots of other people making the fest run, but the press office team is the one with which I interact most often, and everyone there is warm, welcoming, endlessly helpful, and quick to resolve any problems.

If you’ve ever dealt with less helpful press offices at bigger fests, you can appreciate how much of a difference it makes in the stress level of a writer covering a film festival to have such great people in the press office to work with. Other fests could take a lesson from how the press office at SIFF operates, and if any Seattle press had issues with the few glitches and hitches, well, all I can say is, go deal with Cannes or Toronto and then come back to Seattle and appreciate the great people we get to work with here.

I’ll have a few more reviews off the films I caught over the last week coming up in the next couple days as I wrap up my SIFF coverage, and then it’s a sad farewell to another great year with SIFF. Well, except for the year-round screenings at the SIFF Cinema, of course, which will allow me and my fellow Seattleites to see great films until next year’s SIFF kicks off.

-by Kim Voynar

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon