San Sebastian Announces Lineup For "Horizontes Latinos" Sidebar

The 57th San Sebastian Film Festival (which runs from September 18-26, 2009) unveiled on Tuesday the selections for their Horizontes Latinos sidebar, a competitive showcase of Latin American films that have gained festival traction throughout the year. 13 films from Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay - some of which are co-productions with Spain, Germany, France, Holland, Portugal, USA, and Canada - will compete for the main prize of 35,000 euros.

The opening slot was given to Cary Joji Fukunaga's "Sin Nombre" - in my opinion a hackneyed dual tale of a reluctant teenage gang member from Tapachula, Mexico whose girlfriend was killed by a rival gang member, and a Hondural girl embarking on a long and dangerous journey to the United States. A multiple award winner at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival.

Other titles include: Adrian Biniez's "Gigante" ("Giant), which garnered three awards at Berlin this year, Ciro Guerra's "Los Viajes del Viento" ("The Wind Journeys"), and Alejandro Fernández Almendras' "Huacho." The last two were shown at Cannes' Directors Fortnight and Cannes' Critics Week respectively.

However, not all the film selected for Horizontes Latinos have had festival exposure. Several, like Cristián Jiménez's "Ilusiones ópticas" ("Optical Illusions"), came from the 2008 edition of the San Sebastian's Films in Progress lab.

Should you be planning a trip to Spain in September, here is a complete list of films, along with links to reviews (if available):

1. EL ARBOL (THE TREE) - Spain/Mexico - dir. Carlos Serrano Azcona
Reviews: Variety, The Rumpus
2. CONTRACORRIENTE (AGAINST THE TIDE) - Peru/Colombia/France/Germany - dir. Javier Fuentes-León
3. DANIEL Y ANA (DANIEL AND ANNA) - Mexico/Spain - dir. Michel Franco
Reviews: Nisimazine, Huffington Post
4. FRANCIA (FRANCE) - Argentina - dir. Israel Adrián Caetano
5. GIGANTE (GIANT) - Uruguay - dir. Adrián Biniez
Reviews: Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Screendaily
6. HUACHO - Chile/France/Germany - dir. Alejandro Fernández Almendras
Reviews: Variety, Screendaily
7. ILUSIONES OPTICAS - Chile/Portugal/France - dir. Cristián Jiménez
8. LA INVENCION DE LA CARNE (THE INVENTION OF FLESH) - Argentina - dir. Santiago Loza
9. MAREA DE ARENA (SAND TIDE) - Mexico/Argentina - dir. Gustavo Montiel Pagés
10. PERPETUUM MOBILE - Mexico/Canada - dir. Nicolás Pereda
11. SIN NOMBRE (NAMELESS) - USA/Mexico - dir. Cary Joji Fukunaga
Reviews: NY Times, Variety, LA Times, Cinematical, The Guardian
12. EL ULTIMO VERANO DE LA BOYITA (BOYITA'S LAST SUMMER) - Argentina - dir. Julia Solomonoff
13. LOS VIAJES DEL VIENTO (THE WIND JOURNEYS) - Colombia/Argentina/Germany/Netherlands - dir. Ciro Guerra
Reviews: Variety, Screendaily

"Voy a explotar" ("I'm Gonna Explode") - Review

So I've just returned home after watching "Voy a explotar" at the Walter Reade Theater, where the film is enjoying a week-long engagement. A film that plays more than once is a rare occurrence at the Walter Reade, and I have to say it was great to have a choice of dates and times to see the film. I guess this is a kind of test-run by the Film Society of Lincoln Center in preparation for the two new underground theaters they're currently building as part of a $40 million expansion. The plan is for some of the theaters to operate more like commercial cinemas and screen films for longer periods. As long as the programming remains unchanged, I say the more theaters the merrier!

But I digress. This is supposed to be a review so let's get to it. "Voy a explotar" is Gerardo Naranjo's 2008 much acclaimed, festival favorite, reportedly inspired by Godard's "Pierrot le fou." Naranjo has transposed the story of two desperate French lovers (Jean-Paul Belmondo and Anna Karina) on the run to Juanajuato, Mexico and substituted Godard's über-sexy protagonists with two disaffected Mexican teenagers. Standing in for Belmondo is Román (Juan Pablo de Santiago), the son of a corrupt politician who has a morbid fascination with gory photographs from traffic accidents and keeps a journal that outlines his plans to commit mass murder and suicide. Maru (Maria Deschamps) is the antithesis of Anna Karina. Sullen and chubby, she lashes out against her mother at every opportunity and cuts all her hair off just because. We're not talking about a sophisticated pair of misfits here, but that's part of their charm. The first time Román catches Maru's eyes, he pretends to hang himself from a noose on stage at the school talent show. While the stunned crowd remains silent, Maru applauds.

The first opening minutes of the film have a terrific, wham-bam energy and appeal. Naranjo unleashes all of the trademark New Wave devices - voice over, a fragmented structure, alternating color treatments, disassociated images, lingering close-ups, etc. The film promises a Godardian romp, Mexican-style. But those expecting "Y tu mamá también 2" will be sorely disappointed since Naranjo is more interested in the messy emotions of adolescence than in adventure. In fact, the stylistic change comes early and abruptly. After pulling off a shoot-em-up escape from school, the kids go on the lam only to end up... in a tent on the roof of Román's house, unbeknownst to the worried parents below.

The switcharoo grows on you, especially because the film finds its footing in the exploration of Román's and Maru's comedown after the thrill of escape and the fleeting fulfillment of childish dreams. It's fantastic to see these two outcasts - trained to guard themselves against ridicule or indifference - try to connect, first through music and eventually through sex. Román is revealed to be innocent and self-conscious, despite his daring heroics. Stripped of her brooding armor, Maru is a scared and tender child seeking a protector. It's a testament to the honesty of their performances that the slow peeling away of their emotional shields is conveyed in an utterly realistic way.

"Voy a explotar" has its contrivances as well. In the service of social and political criticism, the parents and their peons are portrayed as clowns (for what good is a Mexican film nowadays without a dash of social satire thrown in?). And of course, as is always the case in films about lovers on the run, too much time is invested in setting us up for the tragedy to come.

Perhaps it was those conventional plot mechanics that made me feel strangely detached from the story at times. My wife had a similar reaction but her take on it is that the characters didn't show enough desperation. I agree that there wasn't enough tension and after much thought I think it's a result of a miscalculation on Naranjo's part. He thought real teenage angst would mesh well with Godard but unfortunately the experiment split the film in two. The (borrowed) cinematic theatrics Naranjo employs (on occasion) have the effect of pulling us out of what is a beautiful and nuanced study of two teenagers who foolishly put themselves in a situation where they end up feeling even more pressure than they did before and then try to save face by pretending to one another that they're enjoying complete and utter freedom. Maybe the director thought that wasn't an original enough idea (granted) but he is so keenly attuned to his characters' fragile need for connection that I wish he had just trusted his main story without trying to be Mr. Cool Filmmaker.

Still, "Voy a explotar" is wonderfully engaging for most of its 106-minute running time. And I must say that even though it fell short of greatness, it was wonderfully refreshing to see a film where the lead actress wasn't Hollywood-perfect (this is a particular gripe of my wife, so credit where credit is due), or where the lead actor has a unibrow, or where the sex is awkward and painful and real, even in a film as stylized as this. Why is it that American films - indies, even - feel so fucking sanitized? Why are they so devoid of piss, shit, semen, and all the other things that make life disgusting and true? The other day I was watching a film from a Latino filmmaker who will remain nameless and the moment the perfectly angular lead actress showed up on screen, I went "oh, come on!" When people use the word visceral to describe a film, it's always about gore and blood - Eric Roth and Quentin Tarantino come to mind - but to me, it's about getting your insides twisted when confronted by the excruciating nature of real life - which at its most real is both ugly and beautiful simultaneously.

Back in the 70's - the decade considered by many as the best in American cinema - movies had that visceral quality that I'm talking about. Just watch "Panic in Needle Park." It was so because directors were afforded unparalleled creative freedom and because back then people were still unafraid of the human body. Now, America is obsessed with hand-sanitizers, plastic surgery, and shaved pubes. So go to a soccer game in Argentina and endure being pissed on, literally, by a guy from the upper tier, as I was once. Or catch an impossibly crowded bus in Mexico City without air conditioning and smell the sweat from the bodies pinned up against you. Come on, try it! You'll live! And it could also make you a better film director.

NYFF 2009 - Latin American Films MIA

Last year, the NYFF included a bountiful offering of Latin American films but when this year's selections were announced earlier in the week, Almodovar's "Los abrazos rotos" ("Broken Embraces") was the sole, entirely predictable entry in the lineup. If you want to get technical, Almodovar is European not Latin American so let's just say his is the only Spanish-language film out of 29 selections.

Speaking to indiewire, Festival Director Richard Peña lamented the fact. "Last year, there was a heavy Latin American component. I was personally very happy about that because [that region] is of particular interest for me, but unfortunately there’s nothing this year," he said. I believe him. I know first hand that his commitment to Latin American cinema runs deep. He is the son of Spanish and Puerto Rican parents and he once personally handpicked one of my documentaries for an edition of "Latin Beat," the Film Society's yearly showcase of Latin American fare. So I can't imagine that the omission was intentional. But it still begs the question - why couldn't the selection committee find any worthy titles?

At the beginning of the year, Latin American films enjoyed great exposure in many of the world's major fests. Back in February, Berlin had Adrián Biniez's "Gigante" ("Giant"), and Claudia Llosa's "La teta asustada" ("The Milk of Sorrow") in its main competition slate. They actually won the Silver Bear (Jury Grand Prix) and the Golden Bear (Best Film) respectively. In March, New Directors/New Films unveiled 5 quality films (out of 25) from Latin American directors, including one of my favorite films of the year, Sebastian Silva's "La Nana" ("The Maid"). Tribeca had a slimmer slate of Latin American fare (4 out of 125) but their selections were nonetheless pretty high-profile. They included Lucia Puenzo's "El niño pez" ("The Fish Child") and Carlos Cuarón's "Rudo y cursi." So there's definitely been lots stuff out there this year but it's entirely possible that by the time the NYFF selection committee started looking at films the well had dried out.

But then I looked at Toronto's slate (which runs in September, slightly earlier than New York) and I realized the well hadn't run dry at all. TIFF has, by my count, 9 films by Latin American directors, including "Gigante," Ciro Guerra's "Los viajes del viento" ("The Wind Journeys"), and Alejandro Amenebar's "Agora." Granted, these nine films are included in a lineup of 199 features (to date) but still...

Since I haven't seen any of those tiles, I'll give the folks at the NYFF benefit of the doubt and I'll consider the fact that maybe these films are not up to par. Also, the NYFF has a much smaller slate of 29 films, which makes the selection process a lot more difficult. But to pick Catherine Breillat's undercooked "Bluebeard" over Gaspar Noe's (he's Argentinian) visionary "Enter the Void" definitely raises eyebrows. Seems to me they're playing it safe.

The NYFF is the Film Society's most important event of the year and it draws many of their biggest patrons. Considering the financial hardships that many similar organizations across the country are going through and the ambitious expansion of their film complex currently underway (at a cost of $40 million dollars), my theory is that the selection committee wanted to maintain a sense of continuity to assure the money keeps coming in. Indeed, this year's slate is mostly comprised of established directors and that's a big let down from a festival that last year promised a more, dare I say, maverick vision.

If this is true, then we also have to look at the other side of the equation - why is it that Latin America has so few established directors? Other than Almodovar, is there a Latin American director whose mere name will guarantee him/her a spot in Cannes or New York? I'm not sure there are. And this speaks to the fact that Latin American cinema is still, in the eyes of film programmers, a burgeoning movement. So I guess we'll still have to wait some years before Latin American directors are a mainstay in prestigious fests.

One last thought - Peña also told indiewire that they were considering certain films that were not finished in time for inclusion. With all the changes being instituted over at the Film Society, why not consider doing what Toronto does - stagger the announcements and buy yourself a little bit more time? Food for thought.

Overreaching: When Directors Stretch Bad Things Can Happen

I make no secret about my admiration for Argentinian director Lucrecia Martel. Just check out my top ten list on the left. I think the woman is a genius - nothing I've seen this year even comes close to the visual and narrative rigor of "La Mujer Sin Cabeza" ("The Headless Woman"). The film makes the viewer work hard, no question. It provides no easy answers. But that's the point. She keeps you in the dark about many of the details of the story but her intent is not to entertain you. Rather, she's aiming at your conscience, asking you to put yourself squarely in the shoes of the privileged protagonist. In this way, she makes the audience a full participant/accomplice and elevates the artform to something beautifully experiential.

So naturally, I felt some trepidation when I heard the news that her next project will be... drumroll, please... a science fiction flick! Yup, she has decided to take on "El Eternauta" ("The Ethernaut"), a film based on a popular series of 1960's Spanish-language comics written by Francisco Solano López. The story concerns a deadly extraterrestial invasion to Buenos Aires whereby most of the population was eradicated save for a few survivors.

Now, just to be clear, I'm not saying Martel is selling out - just that this will probably constitute a radical shift from her elegant, socially conscious films. And to be honest, I'm a little worried. While I applaud her impulse to stretch her cinematic canvas, I also fear that she will never, ever return to doing what she did well. Of course, if she stays on her current track she might eventually grow repetitive and tiresome. So I guess for both our sakes, this is probably the right course of action.

Martel's choice made me think of the many instances in which directors have shifted gears and ended up with awful results. (There are exceptions, of course, like Steven Sodobergh who has tackled different genres with equal skill and made a career of it but those are few and far between). So I decided to compile a list of the top ten films that marked a disastrous change of pace by some of the most important and acclaimed directors of our time. Here's hoping Martel doesn't follow in their footsteps:

10. Jane Campion: "In The Cut" - The worse part about it is Campion trying to explore female sexuality and promiscuity within the constraints of a very conventional, thrill-less thriller. "Holy Smoke" does a much better job of that, even though I'm not a huge fan of it either.

9. Chan-Wook Park: "I'm a Cyborg, But That's Ok!" - Park followed up his brilliant, tense, and energetic vengeance trilogy with what amounts to a bland chamber piece set in a looneybin. Change of pace? How about no pace at all? Bo-ring! He's now trying to regain his footing with Cannes-winner "Thirst."

8. Robert Altman: "Popeye" - I hope the money was good, that's all I have to say.

7. Francis Ford Coppola: "Captain EO" - Starring the late Michael Jackson (wow- that's a weird thing to write), Coppola made this sci-fi musical on the heels of "The Cotton Club." While his career has certainly been eclectic (his recent indie makeover notwithstanding), this was just way out there and entirely forgetful. I blame it on George Lucas' script, someone I never thought had any talent.

6. Ang Lee: "The Hulk" - A disaster in every sense of the word. The intended anti-war message just didn't register and the psychological father-son subtext was trite. The scale of the film seemed beyond his grasp. And what about that "24"-style picture-in-picture editing. Awful. The saddest part about it is that "Hulk" tarnished Lee's reputation as a director who could tackle anything.

5. Brian DePalma: "Bonfire of the Vanities" - For satire to really work, you need a subtle hand - or else you'll veer dangerously into caricature territory. Every scene in "Bonfire" felt over-directed, as though he was trying to apply the same muscle he used in "Scarface." Obviously it didn't work. DePalma is a noir stylist and he was clearly out of his league on this one.

4. Roland Joffe: "The Scarlet Letter" - After the greatness of "The Killing Fields," "The Mission," and the underrated "Fat Man and Little Boy," Joffe opted to do this Demi Moore studio vehicle. He's never been the same since.

3. Rob Reiner: "The Story of Us" - "Ghosts of Mississippi" was the last film that garnered Reiner any meaningful attention. Apparently he thought he needed to do more serious fare to reclaim his "A Few Good Men" stature and decided to direct Michelle Pfeiffer and Bruce Willis in this overblown, melodramatic lemon.

2. Luc Besson: "The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc" - Granted, "The Fifth Element" was wildly uneven but there was enough originality in it to sustain my interest. But this follow-up is just plain lazy, a by-the-numbers, uninspired period piece made to capitalize on Milla Jovovich's looks. Besson, who arguably made a very original masterpiece, "La Femme Nikita," sure has disappointed ever since "Messenger."

1. Michael Moore: "Canadian Bacon" - Stick to what you know. 'Nuff said.

This list is based solely on films I'd seen so I'm sure there are many worthy omissions. The point is that sometimes directors can take a wrong turn and get lost in the wilderness.

* Update: In a recent interview with indiewire, Martel said that she was working on a script she had been working on before she started "writing 'The Headless Woman.' I think we should put it in the fantasy genre. It is a strange kind of invasion. A threat to [a] garden. Unwanted or unknown relatives that appear in our houses and live in the garden. Real monsters." That doesn't sound to me like the plot of "The Thernaut," so maybe she's dropped plans to direct that film. However, it appears she's switching gears nonetheless so I guess this column is still somewhat relevant.

Cuaron's Son Will Be Cananá's First Guinea-Pig

So it turns out that the indie scene in Mexico is experiencing a very similar transition period than the one in the U.S. The good news is that production south of the border has increased dramatically in recent years. The bad news is that their home video market is dead and they are desperate for other sources of revenue.

Variety reported this week that Cananá (the shingle from "Y tu mamá también" thesps and best buds Gael García Bernal and Diego Luna) will begin testing a new distribution model using SXSW 2008 selection "Año Uña" ("The Year of the Nail") as guinea pig. Their plan is to follow the IFC model of releasing films in arthouse theaters and weeks later on VOD. They've partnered up with television giant Televisa (my first employer out of college) who owns Cablevision in Mexico for the pay-broadcasts. Cablevision has an estimated 125,000 subscribers who would pay the equivalent of $4 dollars to watch each pic in the comfort of their own home. But will they?

The main issue here is that theater owners in Mexico are not looking upon this new model kindly. In fact, many of them, with the exception of the Lumiere arthouse chain, flat-out refuse to book the films. Their fears are understandable - everyone is scared shitless in this global economic climate. But in my humble opinion, I think they should stop worrying and have a margarita. As IFC has proven, theatergoers are theatergoers and they will pay to see films on a big screen regardless.

When reading about this I though back to earlier this year when an unfinished copy of "Wolverine" was leaked to torrent sites. The media made a big deal about it but the leak had virtually no impact on the film's box office. It won the first weekend handily, raking in $87 million. Either torrents sites aren't as widely known or the X-Men fan base is not as tech-savvy as I thought. Whichever the case, cinemas won.

Let's look at another, less-commercial example. "The Hurt Locker" was also leaked to torrent sites months before it opened. Yet, the film is one of the specialty box-office successes of the year ($9 million and counting). I just don't think the internet or VOD are such terrible foes. I mean, the same thing can be said of the food industry. Just because people can cook food at home doesn't mean they will never go out to restaurants. To me, VOD and sites like Snag Films and Hulu simply serve audiences who enjoy watching movies at home. Restricting availability on those platforms is probably not going to get those people to get off their asses and into their nearest Landmark theater.

To me, the bigger question here is whether Cananá can effectively get people excited about seeing arthouse fare at home. Are they reading the market correctly or are they driven by desperation? It remains to be seen.