Toronto Film Festival 2007 anticipation thread

for instance when you open your movie with purported un-aired news footage there's just no excuse for not shooting it with a news camera, or at least an approximation of one. don't make it look like moody 35mm. wtf.

So I was right to be nervous about De Palma's Venice award, then?

sorry, i was still talking about romero there--haven't seen redacted yet.

Oh, OK. I can't remember, were you one of Land's supporters or detractors (or ignorers)?

detractor!

i mean, i thought diary had one or brilliant moments but they just served to illuminate how dismal the rest of it was. land was like that too, only with more good stuff.

C'mon, even I like Land.

This authentic-camera stuff sounds mighty familiar (lame complaints vs Spielberg's WOTW).

spielberg's wotw is a different thing though... i love that movie's POV.

Eric, Uhlich at 'House' sez it's "labyrinthine and multifaceted"

the premise of diary is basically that it's one of those "loose change" get-the-truth-out internet amateur docs.

although in the context of what the movie's about it doesn't make that much sense.

OK, now that I know you were not a Land fan, I can be excited again. Dawn had dismal moments. Night had even more dismal moments. Day had tons of dismal moments. I think they're all brilliant.

I could definitely see Romero running with the "Loose Change" premise.

Morbs, I just found out The Man From London will have a screening at the Walker in late October ... when I planned my trip to Chicago! Ah well.

the dismal : brilliant ratio in dawn of the dead is inversely proportional to same in diary of the dead.

Forget Romero, forget De Palma. It sounds like the (totally expected) big fat misfire in play here is Argento's ill-advised trilogy-completing Mother of Tears.

M'DA on the Romero (via private MB):

[Glenn Kenny's] review is about 16 kinds of dumb. As someone
already noted, Kenny somehow got the impression that
the movie admires its gaggle of dumbass college kids, which
is a bit odd since he (Kenny) then goes on to call it "one
of the most revealing and fascinating critiques of
image-making since Michael Powell's PEEPING TOM." Uh,
Glenn, those are the same kids you think Romero thinks are
our future (in a positive sense) doing the very
image-making you say the film is critiquing. Except this
"critique" consists entirely of (a) one character refusing
to ever put down the video camera and (b) various other
characters noting aloud that he's obsessed with filming
everything, in case we hadn't noticed. An arresting idea
-- or so it seemed eight years ago in BLAIR WITCH, which is
to DIARY OF THE DEAD as DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY is to CQ.

I want my Wack Experiment back. Show this movie to people
with some unknown name on it rather than Romero's and I feel
confident they'd recognize it for the mediocrity it is.

Forget Romero, forget De Palma. It sounds like the (totally expected) big fat misfire in play here is Argento's ill-advised trilogy-completing Mother of Tears.

-- Eric H., Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:06 PM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

ehhh seems like elizabeth and/or across the universe are the big WTFs this year.

Across the Universe was planned to be WTF though, it seems like.

come on and dario argento movies aren't?

ppl's reactions to elizabeth were pretty hilarious tho. i was planning to go see it drunk sunday night but i was too late for teh screening.

"Planned to be WTF," not just WTF. I don't know if I think Argento's movies are planned to be anything in particular at all.

Whereas Across the Universe looks forcibly WTF-ed.

the argento movie features evil monkeys, a women strangled by her own bowels, and udo kier as a priest. that's wtf-planning if i've ever heard it.

Actually, that sounds pretty good.

I may miss the Tarr at NYFF after all (I forgot I was going to the Mekons show).