Skip to main content

RIFFA Day 3: Film Critic Master Class and Anthropocene

Klaus Eder talking film criticism with moderator Dilani Rabindran

       If there was a theme to the Third Day of RIFFA it's that the current state of affairs is bad. Whether it be personal technology, modern cinema, or the physical world as we've remade it, in the old vs. new debate the old was winning out, or at least being more vehemently argued for, while the problems in modernity were being spotlighted.
       Obviously such generalities are flawed though, and that's demonstrated by my first real disappointment of the festival. Selfless is a film that’s equal parts documentary, sermon, and Terrence Malick movie as it examines modern technology and social media dependence, on which it blames most problems facing today’s teenagers. It doesn’t seem to understand the neutrality of technology and social media though, that they’re only symptoms of much larger social and cultural institutions that don’t go away when you turn off your phone. Nor can the film grasp the irony of decrying the artificiality of such things whilst filtering and manufacturing most of its content to better align with its preconceived point. It’s a real shame this doc refused to plume to the root issues with the internet age and social media, interrogating the information it yields rather than the means in which that information is received; instead dwelling on superficial concerns from a decade ago, wistfully idolizing a British family who live off the grid, indulging in hollow acclamations on life and beauty, and affording screen-time to one of the most obnoxiously condescending human beings as an expert.
       My palette was thoroughly cleansed of this film though by attending Klaus Eder's master class "What Are Film Critics Good For?" It's always a delight to hear other critics discussing criticism, and especially when the man in question has served on the juries of Venice, TIFF, and Cannes, and came up in the profession during the height of the German New Wave (as he mentions a few times). He talked of the differences between European and North American critics, what the democratization of information and opinions has meant for art criticism, and defined real criticism as educating the public, encouraging them to think deeper about film and learn its history. Yet he was open to admitting to the subjective nature of criticism, that a films' merits can't be objectively determined; that a movies' resonance with the viewer is the most important thing. The greatest validation for a critic he explained is when someone goes to a movie and enjoys it because of his review. But of course, he seemed to have a dim view of much of modern cinema, which he expressed as much through his silence as otherwise, stating that he prefers old films as he gets older. I didn't agree with all of his points, but it was a wonderful, enlightening discussion nonetheless.
       I watched another German film afterwards, Break Free -Two People, Two Years, One Dream about a couple embarking on a road trip through Africa intended as six months but becoming two years. It's a journey of self-discovery as they find themselves in various communities, forging relationships, and enduring harsh conditions and illnesses, while being blockaded by political and bureaucratic red tape. It's charming and interesting, vivid at times, but with the pacing of a nature documentary. It also doesn't so much end as just stop, which was a bit jarring.
Trevor Herriott, Jennifer Baichwal, Sue Deranger, and Jared Clarke
       However, the poor, sometimes ugly conditions glimpsed in this movie served an effective preview for the ultimate event of the day: Anthropocene: The Human Epoch, the best film I've yet seen at the festival and one I wish I could have experienced on an IMAX screen! The Koyaanisqatsi of climate documentaries, it's a beautiful and beautifully harrowing exposé of the catastrophic impact human beings have had on the planet. Presented with only minimal interviews with impacted peoples and restrained narration by Alicia Vikander, it allows the imagery and visual language of worldwide ruination to convey much of its crucial message, hammering home the urgency of substantial action this way more powerfully than it ever could have under conventional means. It may be the best climate change documentary I've ever seen, a label that isn't quite accurate as climate change is only one part of the devastation illustrated. Director Jennifer Baichwal participated in a panel afterwards with writer Trevor Herriott, biologist and NDP hopeful Jared Clarke, and Indigenous climate activist Sue Deranger, the most blunt and impassioned of them all. It was grim, depressing, and frustrating to hear their talk about what's not being done, what should be done, and the near-impossibility that it will; and it's a discussion that needs to be had with more influential figures than us ecologically conscious artists and art fans.
       Of all the presentations I attended yesterday, the Anthropocene showing and panel had the most legitimacy behind its condemnation of the modern world. And its implications will be on my mind through the rest of the festival and beyond.


Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...