It’s just before 9am, I’m in Sweet Mother’s Kitchen, and I’ve already been up for more than three hours. This isn’t how I had intended to start my Film Festival experience – I’m hoping waffles will help.
What I had intended to do was to have a mellow end to Thursday, possibly finishing off some ideas I had for this year’s I.T. Crew gear, and then knock off around 6:45pm; unfortunately, an unforeseen request at 6pm, combined with FileMaker deciding to be a complete pain in the bum, meant that I didn’t get to leave work until a bit after 8pm, and then had to go back in at 6am and reboot the server (or risk it all turning to custard for the guy covering for me).
Anyway, I’m just waiting for the theatres to open so I can buy the first 10-trip of the season, and then I’m off to Te Papa to see Space Tourists. More after waffles.
* * *
It turns out that Te Papa doesn’t open until 10am, so I read about the history of sheep in NZ in the Te Papa store until they let us in.
There were a couple of things that Space Tourists reminded me of. The first, and most superficial, was an article I read about the injustice done to the women who tried to become the first astronauts (though this New Scientist article suggest that they were never in the running since they weren’t (and couldn’t be) test pilots, and thus automatically disqualified); the second was the movie last year, Paper Soldiers, which was a drama set in the beginning of the Russian space programme. The Russian facilities were anything but new and shiny, with dated décor and an air of decay; but that drama suggested that it was never chromed and shiny.
There were some very different attitudes about space travel displayed – the tourist who spent $20 million on a trip for herself, but also sponsors the various prizes for commercial spaceflight; the photo-journalist who takes pictures of decaying Soviet space propaganda monuments and art; and the former geologist who seemed to feel the same kind of contempt towards space tourism that a Unix geek feels towards Windows users, and said that it wouldn’t be “fun” if he paid for the trip, rather than getting there himself.
I think… that I’m not actually that interested about going into space. Zero-g looks really interesting, and I’d love to experience that; but I’m not that worried about the vacuum or the view. I’ll admit to drifting off during some of the landscapes at the beginning, but perked right up seeing them swirl ping-pong balls around the circular hatches.
I enjoyed it, but nothing I think I’d need to see again.
* * *
Next was off to Paramount for Summer Wars – one of the few anime options. It was a bit of a disadvantage to know a bit about internet security; but luckily I remembered to approach it as a kid’s anime, rather than a techno-thriller, and so it was fun and enjoyable. Not too slow, not to frenetic, lots of little flourishes of colour that would have been fun to do, like the avatars of all the characters in the virtual world, or the extravagant acts of the men of the family while trying to fix things, and the family interactions were good fun; I wasn’t blown away, but I’d happily watch it again, and will think about getting a copy.
One thing that I did think about, later, was that it might be interesting to have an animated film that did more with the Oz theme in an online-world sort of way. I think you would have to stretch to find Oz parallels in this story, and for all it’s flaws, I quite liked the Tin Man TV series. So… yeah, I think there’s a good film lurking in that whole “online Oz” idea, too.
* * *
I noticed someone filming in the Paramount – a college kid was doing some sort of interviewing assignment, and he was there with his mum filming people who were going to things in the Festival. I chatted to them, and ended up being interviewed, pita-pocket in hand. Hopefully, I was coherent; I hope even more that it disappears into the abyss of schoolwork.
Next, Hahaha – a pretty typical Asian slice-of-lifer. There were some nifty things that it did with the central conceit (two buddies sharing stories over drinks, not realising that the tales they’re telling are interrelated, with the audience seeing both sides). But – there were some really weird camera decisions. For example, it wasn’t’ shot in a documentary-style, no handy-cam jostling while the camera-crew keep up, but there were really noticeable jerky zooms, and sometimes the camera was slewed sidewise suddenly to keep the action in sight.
As is the case with many of these, most of the characters were sympathetic enough to keep you engaged, but you wouldn’t want them in your life. I doubt I’d watch it again.
* * *
Paramount a third time for Homegrown: Works on Film. I don’t know whether it’s completely true, but I got the feeling that there were more works where subtitles were important – Amandi, a low-key take on the experience of an African refugee trying to reunite with his family (contrasting with the loss felt by a woman gone strange after losing some of her children in a fire), and Manurewa, a retelling of the recent killing of the Indian liquor store owner in Auckland. I liked that the second one showed those that committed the crime as well as the victims – especially that not all of them were enthusiastic, but not all of them were victims of the system, either.
There was a Wellington film (Choice Night) where I’m afraid I found the Producer’s talk more interesting than the short. (Will a teen resist peer pressure and turn down a night in a strip club paid for by his rugby coach in order to be with the girl he lurves, but won’t acknowledge in front of his mates? Nope.) I feel bad, because they used a second-hand bookshop that I love, and the film was well put together; but there it is.
There was a depressing “abused teens do drugs with tragic results” short (Redemption), an uncomfortable short about a couple of larcenous pre-teen girls at the beach who may have encountered a sexual predator (Licked, in which I felt the actors did well, and that the innate selfishness and amorality of some kids was accurately portrayed, but I wasn’t enthused about the story); and a really well constructed and funny short called Careful With That Crossbow. In all, I’m glad I went, but there were a number that didn’t really stir me.
* * *
I really liked Love In A Puff. I mean, I wouldn’t say that it was a cinematic masterpiece; but it was moderately funny, and I found myself invested in the central romance.
Maybe it’s because this movie seems to think that love can work out well, which is something that I believe is true.
* * *
The ultra-rich are a metaphor for vampires; or is it the other way around? Anyway, the thing I found most disturbing about The Housemaid was the servant’s complicity with what their masters wanted – both the housekeeper who was loyal to the household she despised, and the nanny who admitted to waiting for the man of the house to come for her in bed.
There were lots of striking images, especially as the household became more inward-looking and stranger, and the evil selfishness of some of the characters was well done; and I’ll admit that I don’t know how you can fight back against those much richer and more powerful than you. But… I’m not sure whether I wish I’d gone to see Birdemic instead.
Post a Comment