By Leonard Klady Klady@moviecitynews.com

TIFF12: Confessions Of A Film Fest Junkie

The Festival of Festivals looms.

For the uninitiated, the Toronto International Film Festival began some three decades-plus ago as the aforementioned F of F. The aspiration of this fledgling event was to cull great films from Cannes, Berlin and the like and put on a show for the local gentry and cinephiles.

It kinda worked out… or worked too well. Toronto still provides the North American premieres from those vaunted showcases but additionally world premieres as many films or more than any of the select handful of bastions to the seventh art.

I haven’t counted but there will likely be some 300-plus features from every corner of the globe on view at this Olympian extravaganza. These films will also run the gamut of contemporary movie art from A to Z… Well, maybe just A to R. Regardless, even as storied a stop as Toronto cannot program 300 great movies unless it includes vault restorations and revivals as well.

Barring floods and fires I’ll likely see about 40 films during my stay in Toronto. My game plan for the past decade has largely been no game plan; more instinct than premeditation.

Film festivals—especially one as large as this one in Ontario—are an experience not unlike going shopping at a supermarket. I challenge anyone to select a breakfast cereal from those on the shelf based on logic, content or visual design. It’s arguably easier (though I can’t vouch for the results) to select one of any eight films playing simultaneously during the Toronto festival.

I’ve noticed an additional hurdle this year. While hardly novel for a film to be represented by a publicity agency, it now appears to be the exception when a production arrives on the scene without a phalanx of press and industry reps. The selections seem more massaged and more readily consumable. Any prospect of stumbling onto a hitherto unrecognized gem has virtually been removed from the equation.

But enough of this carping.

The Toronto 2012 program is chock-a-block with the films one anticipates will figure on the top tier of critical respect. Some have already debuted at Cannes, won festival prizes, been embraced by first string reviewers or divided the house.

While hardly the ultimate bellwether, historically the films that fail to find critical consensus or more precisely elicit reaction on the extremes are invariably the most rewardin—regardless of which side of the fence one ultimately finds a perch. Just about anything from Terrence Malick is going to divide the room and that’s already occurred with his latest To the Wonder, which debuted days ago in Venice.

However, I’ve been trying desperately to rid myself of the auteur bias that was so utterly etched in my consciousness back in the 1970s. I’m not sure of the lesson learned when a good filmmaker loses his or her way; other than perhaps that no one bothered to notice that the “king” had no clothes.

Wish me luck and good viewing… you know I mean it back.

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