At the very end, Anderson said, "See You Next Year." I really hope he’s being serious about that and plans on coming back to teach at the academy again next term.
By the way, Jose Miller17, did you happen to leave them your email address during that last lecture?
I have this nagging feeling that Hribar actually claimed "Boogie Nights" was Anderson's directorial debut, which is pretty funny considering this guy was sitting right there next to him! The workshop probably would have been even better if Anderson had just handled it himself.
To be honest, I couldn't make it to every single session, and even when I did show up, I usually had to dash off early just to make sure I didn't miss the start of the next movie.
That session on production featuring Mike Downey and Sam Taylor was actually really great.
I’m pretty sure these are definitely headed for distribution:
"Punch-Drunk Love" "Bowling for Columbine" (honestly, it should have been released already) "The Hours" (this one's also long overdue) "Hero" "Lilja 4-ever" "Dogville"
I haven't actually seen the Russian "Coward"—which is honestly my loss—but man, I was a total wreck just picking up my passes at the press center.
The second one on my list was Rušinović’s "World Monster"—I made sure to catch his lecture on storyboarding just so he wouldn't hold it against me. 😉
When I mentioned those '27 possibilities,' I was referring to the main lineup and the retrospective on new Russian cinema.
A quick little snapshot of this year's Sundance Film Festival: it feels like every single movie is some heavy, depressing drama where the goal is either to kill off the protagonist or just destroy everyone else's spirit (Lars von Trier is leading the pack there—but then again, who else would 🙂?). At least five of the films dealt with illegal immigrants or the messy fallout of societal transitions (think things like "Reserve Part," "In This World," "Lilja 4-ever," "The West," and "Struggle"). The only real feel-good movie I found was "Almost an Ordinary Story" from South East Europe.
Here are the ones that really stuck with me:
"Punch-Drunk Love" by Paul Thomas Anderson (he's a pretty cool guy, by the way), USA "Morvern Callar" by Lynne Ramsay, Ireland/UK "Noi Albinoi" by Dagur Kárar, Iceland "Fiesta de Margerita" by Renato Falcao, Brazil/USA "Divine Intervention" by Ella Suleiman, Palestine/France "Winter Sleep" by Nuri Bilge Ceylan, Turkey
I managed to squeeze in 25 out of the 27 films on the lineup. Honestly, I probably wouldn't have made it through without a steady supply of Red Bull, so I'm officially giving them all my eternal gratitude right now. 🙏
The side programming was actually pretty solid too—especially the sessions hosted by the USC School of Cinematic Arts—though it did feel like Hrvoje Hribar had to play the role of the strict classroom teacher just to keep everyone in line.
newcomer said:I was just reading an article in The New York Times claiming there are more social climbers than actual cinephiles attending this year's festival. So, come on, let's settle this—who among us is actually here for the art, and who's just here for the red carpet? 😁
Well, I've personally sat through 23 films so far, so if we're going by the numbers, I'm definitely leaning toward the cinephile side of the fence! 🙂
It’s actually something Paul Thomas Anderson has mentioned before—that you can pick up so much more about the art of directing just by listening to the commentary tracks on DVDs. Whether it's the actual crew behind a newer production or film historians and scholars dissecting an older classic, there's a goldmine of info there.
I remember back when Damian Chazelle was venting about how terrible the education system at the local university was, someone actually challenged him, asking how he could possibly know how to direct if his schooling was such a mess. "I watch movies," he simply replied.
Honestly, I feel like this whole conversation kind of belongs in the 'What's wrong with American cinema' thread.
It honestly gets under my skin sometimes, because you often find those hilarious outtakes tucked away during the end credits—especially in comedies. There are certain movies where those little snippets actually hold some pretty significant weight even while the full credits are rolling, but most people just don't realize it, and frankly, neither do the theater owners 😠 .
I’ve always had a soft spot for the one used in Age of Innocence. As for more recent stuff—that track from the dissertation really stands out to me in Catch Me If You Can.
Then there’s the one from Shyamalan’s Signs that most people might not think twice about, but I found it so striking; it’s that moment where the letters start subtly 'sliding' toward us, the music builds into this frantic, manic energy (it actually reminded me quite a bit of the score from Vertigo), and those letters just keep racing faster and faster. It was such a simple choice, but it honestly left a huge impression on me.
Nol was clearly trying to ride the wave of that whole Tarantino trend back then, but since getting movies finished in America is such a massive uphill battle due to how slow the funding flows, the trend had basically run its course by the time "Russian meat" finally hit theaters.
By the way, in various interviews, Nol mentioned he drew inspiration from actual brothels during the early days of the war. It honestly takes a special kind of 'talent' to take something that actually exists in the real world and make it look completely unbelievable on screen.
Crook said:Wait a second... If I’m following you correctly—is there some kind of homosexual subtext in this book?
What kind of element are we talking about here, like three guys from Sweden hanging out? 😉
You’re probably thinking of how Richard doesn't actually act on his attraction to the woman from France. If that's the case, I should probably point out that while Richard is clearly craving her, he's really holding himself back just so he doesn't blow up his friendship with Etienne (her boyfriend). That whole sense of longing is actually one of those ways Garland builds up this feeling of loneliness, even though the main character is basically living in a utopia, totally cut off from the society he chose to walk away from.
Crook said:....so, how did things wrap up in the book?
SPOILER alert for anyone who hasn't read the book yet—SPOILER
That peaceful island vibe gets totally wrecked when a shark attacks those three Swedes. As for the aftermath, one of them is dying, and another has basically lost his mind and fled the island. To make matters even more chaotic, a new group of travelers arrives, only to be intercepted and killed by the local marijuana growers. Among the newcomers were two guys whom Richard had given copies of the map—the very same one Duffy handed him at the hotel during the beginning of the novel and film. Because of this, Sal and her boyfriend end up blaming Richard for exposing their "commune," causing the whole situation on the island to spiral into the exact opposite of a utopia. Richard, that Black guy (I can't recall his name), the two Frenchmen (though in the book, Richard doesn't actually hit a woman), and one other guy (who I think was cut from the movie) decide they have to get off the island before it's too late. Their big plan is to load up the dinner pot with enough marijuana leaves to knock everyone else out, and then, adios.
Sadly, right in the middle of dinner, some drug kingpins show up with a warning that far too many people are heading to the island and they just won't tolerate it anymore. To prove they aren't joking, they bring along the bodies of the recently killed travelers. In the midst of all this absolute despair, the crowd—who, mind you, had been heavily drugged by that special "addition" to the meal—viciously attacks the corpses, viewing them as intruders who ruined their paradise. After that, they grab fishing spears and turn their sights on Richard. They start picking him apart with small stabs until he’s rescued by that guy who wasn't in the movie (the one who was watching over the dying Swede). Then, the Frenchmen and the Black guy jump in to help him, and they manage to retreat toward the raft they prepared earlier and escape the island.
gabal said:Leo totally ruined the adaptation of an incredible book. I’ve read it quite a few times myself, so I honestly can't recall if there was a part about someone speaking American in the original text. If anyone out there has a better memory than I do, please let me know—I'm dying to know, but I really don't feel like cracking the book open again just to check.
That part isn't in the book. There are two women mentioned from the former USA, but their nationality is never actually specified. Sal just mentions having a soft spot for refugees, so I personally just assumed they were from Canada.
BTW, the book really explores that thin line between utopia and dystopia, whereas the movie feels like nothing more than a cheap postcard. It's a pretty poor adaptation.