Month: September 2023

A contrasted final evening at the Palabiennale screening venue last night. 

Yet another useless French movie – honestly guys, it’s becoming slightly worrying. I’m all for a stronger financing of culture but dear lord, maybe we should think about redistributing the French funds elsewhere. If “Le Monde” gave this one a 5 star (as it did for “La Bête”) I swear I am ready to write them a letter questioning the need for sending a correspondent to Venice. It does not make sense to pay for a plane ticket to distribute 5 stars for free. 

“Hors saison” does not even deserve me loosing my time summarizing the plot. It’s just too long, too slow, not credible for one minute (my Holly’s super powers are more credible than this relationship) and… just a pain to watch.

I thus suffered the screening just for the sake of the second movie (otherwise I would have escaped after 1 hour). Problem is that this required quite some energy and that by the end of movie 1, I was half asleep. The short 15mins break between the two screenings did not suffice to regain some strengths for Franco’s movie. Therefore I spent the first 45mins of it struggling with my eyes shutting down and my head falling. Thank you Stéphane, really. It was a hard struggle but I was determined to enjoy Jessica Chastain – a pleasure, as usual, and the right way to close my 2023 Mostra.

Franco’s movie questions quite a sensitive topic: the possibility of love and of a relationship when one has dementia (and honestly the second half of the couple is not at its best either). A pretty tricky subject. I would not have dared. There is a thin line not to cross there, between treating the matter with delicacy and restraint and shifting towards the disturbing, if not voyeurism. This is what firstly kept me awake and eventually fully woke me up. Thank you Michel.

To be honest, I spent most of the movie hoping for the best and for it not to shift to something really wrong. Thankfully, it lived up to the expectations. Quite a delicate exercise it was and it was probably a successful one thanks to the quality of the acting – always subtle, never too much (not only Jessica, on both sides of the couple, actually). 

But this should not overshadow the similarly impressive quality of scenario. Where Stéphane Brizé shows you 10mins of a beach under the rain to make you understand that you are… at the beach and off season (I really had NOT noticed), Michel Franco proposes a very smart set of subtle, precise and tender moments about the least probable love story in the world. And the miracle happens when you actually start believing in it.

Whilst it was not the Mostra’s best movie (I am still getting over my conversion to Lanthimos – my personal Golden Lion), it was a very pretty one to finish my festival with. Highly recommended.

So this is it. The sun has set on my 2023 Mostra. A very satisfying selection according to me. Looking forward to hearing what the jury thought of it (closing ceremony tonight). In my heart, Venice remains the most beautiful and relaxing city in the world (if you know how to manoeuvre through it). If all is right, I’ll see you back in Venice and on facebook in September 2024 (hopefully with my full festival team). In the meantime, I’ll disappear back from social media but will keep on updating my blog whenever a movie catches my eye! Ciao a tutti!

So this was my last Sala Grande screening. Meaning the official screening in the film cast’s presence. I like these screenings very much as one gets a good sense of the public’s reaction to the movie (not that I always agree with the public, but still). The Venice crowd is not as radical as the Cannes one. I have rarely (if ever) witnessed strongly negative reactions to a screening. Therefore, in Venice, your barometer is the strength and the length of the applause. From the ones I have seen this year in the Sala Grande, the applause winner is definitely Hamaguchi. But then, in the Sala Grande I was not for Lanthimos’ movie. My little finger tells me this must have been a big celebration.

Our little Belgian production “Holly” still got a quite decent welcome as well yesterday. Fien Troch is already a bit of a Venice chouchou. She received the Best Director Award in the Orizzonti section back in 2016. She has her crowd of followers and they were definitely present yesterday.

As for the movie itself, the first reactions are mixed. Strangely what is criticized is what I appreciated the most about it. 

But let’s start shortly with the plot: a 15 year old schoolgirl calls her school one day to say she won’t come in as she has a feeling that something extremely bad is going to happen. That day a fire breaks out at school and leaves 10 students dead. Holly, who is a bullied outcast in her school with only one friend (another bullied “special” boy, as she describes him) suddenly becomes sort of a messiah, mostly for the grieving adult community. Now, deal with it when you are 15 and people are willing to pay you 50 EUR for a hug that will make them “feel better”.

What I liked about the movie is that nothing in it is set straight: the nature of Holly’s “powers” is unclear. One sometimes wonders if they are real or if it’s yet another manifestation of collective hysteria. Holly’s mixed feelings about the entire situation are very much interiorized as well – one thus regularly questions her understanding of what is happening around her. Is she just her own life’s spectator? I found this very well balanced and interesting.

It seems that precisely this uncertainty disturbs many critics. We apparently live in an era when everything needs to be clearly explained and understood for it to make sense. Let’s just agree to disagree.

Finally, the very qualitative second roles are worth mentioning: the “special” friend (Frederic Heremans) and the school teacher/counselor (Greet Verstraete) put a really good performance in this production. 

Conclusion: a bit of a strange one but definitely worth watching precisely because of its strangeness.

Ca’ Pesaro – the Gemma De Angelis Testa Donation (only until 17/09 but really worth seeing): an absolutely wonderful contemporary art collection donated recently to the Ca’ Pesaro with pieces by Ai Weiwei, Cy Twombly, Anselm Kiefer, an incredible Bill Viola video (and many many others). The crème de la crème, if you are into this kind of art.

Punta della Dogana (Fondation Pinault) – Icônes (until 26/11): as I always say, nothing makes me happier than a colourful square. If that’s your kind of thing, run to the Punta. This year’s exhibition is one of the best ones I’ve seen in this amazing place in years. Already its opening, with Lygia Pape’s magnificently poetic installation is worth going there (let me brag about the fact that I have seen 2 other variations of this one, one at the Venice Biennale a few years ago and one in Inhotim, Brazil, and that they never stop amazing me).

Prada Foundation – everybody talks about the weather (until 26/11): an interesting art parcours through meteorological phenomena and climate change, from Monet through Turner to contemporary pieces (Dan Peterman, Pieter Vermeersch, Vivan Suter etc.). Nice one as well though I would say the two first ones are more like an absolutely must see.

Also worth seeing if you have more days: the architecture Biennale at the Arsenale (I have been told the Giardini are nice as well but have not been there myself) and the Palazzo Grassi with a huge photo collection recently aquired by Pinault (Chonorama – treasures from 20th century photography, until 26/11 as well). I was slightly overwhelmed by the amount of pictures on display but met with my mini-me in there:

Let’s say that “Coup de Chance” was a sympathetic light ending to a light and relaxing day at the beach – quite a perfect fit. It is the lightest we have seen until now and let’s admit it, once in a while, lightness does you good.

“Coup de Chance’s” fully French cast gives us a glimpse of Paris’ wealthy bourgeoisie milieu. Those that go to their country house (aka manor) during the weekend to hunt and who attend almost daily (and gossipy) upper class receptions and dinners. Once the setting is set, a little infidelity comes to spice it up and triggers a pretty inoffensive (and very Allen-esque) intrigue involving detectives, hitmen and an investigating mother/mother in law (the best of Valérie Lemercier I have seen in years). 

Now. It is definitely not Allen’s best movie. It suffers a bit from weaker dialogues and a simplistic plot. But if one takes it as a “farce grotesque” (as I am sure it is intended, knowing the guy) it still does the trick for me. I’d honestly rather watch the Allen-style least discrete detective and most cliché Romanian hitmen than Michael Fassbender in a two hours monotonous monologue as in “The Killer”. At least you get a good laugh out of it.
Hence the conclusion is: perfectly watchable for me.

And yes, the Grand Hotel des Bains is still sadly empty and abandoned – its ghost is watching you on the Lido beach…

After a quite disappointing day 4, I decided to wait for another (promising) screening before I spit my venom towards the outside world. A wise decision it was. My venom is way less poisonous now that I went through my Hamaguchi therapy.

Let’s briefly run through day 4. “The Killer”, just a big disappointment. I was expecting quite a lot from the cooperation between David Fincher (“Seven”, “The Zodiac”) and Michael Fassbender (aka one of the loves of my life since “Hunger” and “Shame”). What I got was a big bulk of nothingness. A styling exercise that seems to have appealed to some of the critics but that, to me, brought absolutely nothing new to the beautiful world of cinema. Had I written this yesterday, I would have just offered you a list of better killers to watch in the movie history instead (if I were you, I would start with Javier Bardem in “No Country for Old Men”). 

As for “La Bête”, even less to say. Just a confirmation that French cinema is not doing so well and obviously not choosing the right projects to finance. And another confirmation that (#verypersonalopinion) Léa Seydoux is still as unbearable as before… and that I will never understand why James Bond died for such an irrelevant actress.

Now that I see that my venom is still pretty agressive, let’s move on fast to day 5 – a magic moment. Again, loads of expectations from this one because of Hamaguchi’s “Drive My Car” (if you have not seen it…. Just do watch it). 

And this time, expectations fully met (pfew).

A pure moment of Japanese delicacy and  poetry. The plot is quite simple: a glamping project comes to disrupt the inhabitants of a small Japanese community of 6000 in the middle of the untouched nature. Where a Western movie would most probably turn into mass hysteria, demonstrations and shouts, Hamaguchi’s movie goes towards a discrete but very deep discussion about the community’s relationship to nature, the history of its inhabitants and their reason for being where they are. The delicate confrontation between modern business goals (absolutely inadapted to the local realities) and people who simply have found their place is a pure delight to watch. I have to say that seeing people listening to each other whilst having quite irreconciliable points of views and objectives has sadly become very rare.

Top it up with a quite mysterious ending for which we have already found two different interpretations, and what you’ll eventually get is a massive (and absolutely deserved) standing ovation in the Sala Grande. I won’t tell you about the end but would be very happy to hear about your understanding of it as it is still a matter for discussion on our little Lido paradise…

This one was a big disappointment and thus will be a short one. Not that I thought that I would be as thrilled as on day 2 (hard to achieve). Based on “A Star is Born”, I expected to see a decent production, nothing very original but something that would probably make me slightly sentimental and bring me to some reasonable tears. Even these moderate (at least according to me) expectations were not met.

I am actually quite surprised to read the (overly, again only according to me) positive reviews this morning.

A decent production it quite was – my praise goes to Bradley Cooper and his very convincing incarnation of Bernstein as an orchestra conductor. These scenes are actually quite fascinating – one is dragged within the orchestra and sees Bernstein’s passionate conducting as if he were right in front of us. That is the big (and only… aaagain according to me) plus of this movie.

Original it was definitely not (except for the above mentioned scenes).

As for the sentimental me and the expected little tears, they were awaited until the end of the movie but never showed up. The movie pretends to be a jump into the intimate life of Bernstein and his wife (and three kids) – taking into account that his attraction towards men, made it slightly complicated to the least. I however felt that it was very difficult to relate to the characters as most of the scenes were made of noisy insignificant party conversations. A hint about what is going on in the background is given here and there through a short exchange between husband and wife or just a sentence. But it remained way too much at the surface for me to feel anything. 

The highlight of the day thus remains our 7 hours boat trip through the venetian laguna – that had a bumpy end to it that I shall share with some of you in private. The islands and the nature around were definitely way much more worth watching than Cooper’s “Maestro”.

I don’t think you could experience a more contrasted day at the Mostra – not in terms of quality but in terms of content and style. We indeed went from the most classical to the most experimental.

There are also some similarities: both movies are slightly too long (I take back my yesterday’s compliments) and both are contenders for the Golden Lion – with a higher probability going towards Lanthimos, because of its originality and creativity.

“Bastarden” is a pure historical drama to be definitely seen on the big screen because of its picturesque quality. It’s one of those that (just like, for example, Jane Campion’s “Power of the Dog), if you watch it on a small screen, you loose half of the experience. 

Cinema is definitely not dead, people.

It’s a story of rivalry between two men from very different social backgrounds (and mentality/psychology) in the roughest of the Danish land. It’s austere, ruthless and beautiful. Mads Mikkelsen is a perfect match with this scenery. And I do have to admit that enjoying his physical presence in the Sala Grande during the screening added to my experience. I’m just a girl, after all 🙂

Now. “Poor Things”. Impossible to summarize the plot. The festival website presents it as follows: “the incredible story of the fantastic transformation of Bella Baxter, a young woman brought back to life by Doctor Goodwin Baxter, a brilliant but unorthodox scientist”. 

Right. But we have to factor in that it’s a Lanthimos movie (remember “The Lobster”, “The favourite”?). So when you enter the movie theatre, you kind of know it’s going to be, let’s say, an experiment.

Well I knew it. Though I had warned my movie buddie, I don’t think she was ready for it.

To give you a little bit of context, my relationship with Lanthimos has been less than ideal until now. I tend to be part of the half of the room that really doesn’t get it and does not laugh. Hence, I was ready to suffer for two and a half hours and get out of there still wondering what people see in it that I do not see. It started as expected. Halfway through the movie (factoring in as well my movie buddy’s face), I was ready to let it go and get out. We (smartly) decided to give it a bit more time.

That’s when the miracle happened. Lanthimos suddenly won me totally over. I don’t know how but I caught myself laughing so hard at the absurdity of the scenes and dialogues combined with such clairvoyance about human nature. It’s so weirdly brilliant, it’s genius (though my movie buddy is still wondering what just happened to her yesterday evening). Emma Stone (who honestly had to work hard to win me over as well) holds the role of her life. If it does not get the best movie, she should definitely get the best actress. Well the cast (Mark Ruffalo, Willem Daffoe), in general, is great. 

So I would tell you to run to the movie theatres. You might end up getting out of there wondering what on earth was that (just like my movie buddy), but I don’t think you will ever regret going through the experience.

With a bit of delay as I had really nothing to say about the opening movies, here comes my first batch of impressions from Venice 2023.

Let’s first say that for once, the opening ceremony was a quite straight to the point but dignified one. It all came down to Charlotte Rampling handing the lifetime achievement Golden Lion over to Liliana Cavani. Both these ladies are born with elegance and things to say. And both said them right. Such as the fact that, in 80 editions and over 90 years of existence, it is the first time that such an award goes to a female movie director at the Venice Mostra – could do better guys.

As for the movies, I am glad to say that my small nostalgia from the early days does not seem to have affected my movie-acceptance levels. I am pretty satisfied with what I have seen until now.

What I very much liked about Michael Mann’s “Ferrari” is that he did not make it an action movie about racing cars. Though the racing scenes in these beautiful old cars are nicely filmed and quite catchy, the focus is more on the man and the family tragedy in the background – a dead son, another one hidden from the “official” family. These are brought to the screen with a certain delicacy and discretion – not that many words, but the ones spoken are usually meaningful. They sound right, not cliché. 

I had a feeling that Adam Driver delivered nicely on this one and made a pretty credible Enzo Ferrari – from the quick reactions I could get from my movie buddies yesterday, I don’t think all agree with this statement. But as usual, all of this is very personal.

Conclusion: although I would not say it is the movie of the year, it is a pretty pleasant and enjoyable watch.

Before I start with movie 2, let me express my immense gratitude to these directors who finally seem to have understood that you don’t need to put everything in a movie and make it a 2:30-3:00 hours long crusade by default. Both yesterday’s screenings lasted less than 2 hours and I really did not feel that an additional hour was stolen from me or could have added anything to my experience. On the contrary. Grazie mille, people.

As for Luc Besson’s “Dogman”, from what I could read this morning, it seems that it is not being very well received by professionals. I would tend to agree that it is a bizarre creation and not necessarily one that I would pay for to watch back home in the movie theatre. Many things don’t make sense in it and one struggles slightly to understand the point of it. I mean. Dogs entering rich peoples’ houses and stealing their pretty diamonds for their own master? Like, really? Really, really, Luc? 

We however stayed (almost) until the end. And my only explanation for this is acting performance – Caleb Landry Jones. He incarnates a fragile but powerful, sensitive but frightening Dogman, that kind of made it worth watching although everything around him was bizarre, bizarre and… bizarre.