59th Cannes Film Festival

Message

Noir of the Night · #151 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:42 pm

ugetsu wrote:hmmmmmmm..... well Flandres won the Grand Prix, so I was closer than anyone else here. I always thought it would get something, given the presence of the intelligent directors like Suleiman and Martel on the Jury... but I guess some of the bubblehead actors balanced things out. The Loach sound like a compromise decision, a film everyone could agree on. It must have been CLOSE.

How were you closer? I correctly called Best Director.

Anonymous · #152 Post by **Anonymous** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:48 pm

Best Director is a sop. The Grand Prix is second prize. I would have said Babel for Best Director too, if I'd cared /thought about it for two seconds.

Noir of the Night · #153 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:49 pm

The point is, you can't say that you were closer to being right for saying Flandres will get something out of the entire range of awards, whereas I correctly predicted the recipient of a specific award. How important the award is in your eyes has no bearing on this.

I would have said Babel for Best Director too, if I'd cared /thought about it for two seconds.

Yeah right.

ellipsis7 · #154 Post by **ellipsis7** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:50 pm

THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY, directed by Briton Ken Loach and written by Paul Laverty, is the first Irish made and themed (and Irish funded and coproduced) movie to win the Palme D'Or... A great fillip from the native film culture & industry...

Noir of the Night · #155 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:52 pm

Does anyone know if it's going to be playing in Ireland soon? I'm going there in a little under two weeks.

ellipsis7 · #156 Post by **ellipsis7** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:54 pm

I think it is slated for General Release in Ireland for sometime in June...

Noir of the Night · #157 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:54 pm

Cool, I'll have to see if I can go see it.

Edit: Never mind, it's opening a few weeks after I'll be there.

Anonymous · #158 Post by **Anonymous** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:57 pm

The question asked by Antoine Doinel was:

Antoine Doinel wrote:predictions on the Palme D'Or?

The Best Director award is traditionally a sop to the critically popular film of the festival that the Jury nevertheless do not wish to award with anything serious. Babel would really be an obvious choice. Similarly, the Camera d'Or is selected by an entirely different Jury and they would be VERY reluctant to give it to the only first feature actually getting the exposure of being In Competition (compared to the twenty or so other first features that are competing in the parallel sections). Sensing this, the main jury would likewise be quite likely to give Red Road 3rd prize if they felt is deserved an award.

But you are right. I'm pissed that an idiot or two (Jackson, Roth, Bonham Carter?) stole the laurels from Flandres + I'd have a load more money in my pocket if it had gone the extra mile...

Noir of the Night · #159 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 2:59 pm

Ok, maybe I went above and beyond what Doinel actually asked, but the point remains that my prediction was actually correct, and yours was not. It doesn't really matter though.

Noir of the Night · #160 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 3:00 pm

ugetsu wrote:The question asked by Antoine Doinel was:

Antoine Doinel wrote:predictions on the Palme D'Or?
But you are right. I'm pissed that an idiot or two (guessing Samuel L Jackson) stole the laurels from Flandres + I'd have a load more money in my pocket if it had gone the extra mile...

See, this is what annoys me. I saw your post before you edited it, and you just had to edit it in order to change it so that you could say Samuel L. Jackson is an idiot. Of course, he's seen the films and you haven't, but clearly that doesn't matter!

Edit: And now you've decided you had to add Tim Roth, for no discernible reason. Have you seen The War Zone?

Alyosha · #161 Post by **Alyosha** » Sun May 28, 2006 3:03 pm

Can we spot a trend here with Palm d'Or:s to left wing and/or social realist directors?

2003: Elephant
2004: Fahrenheit 9/11
2005: L'Enfant
2006: The Wind That Shakes the Barley

I predict that next year's Palm d'Or will continue this nice suite and go to Roy Andersson's "Du levande".

ellipsis7 · #162 Post by **ellipsis7** » Sun May 28, 2006 3:14 pm

THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY released by Pathe, opens in UK & Ireland on 23rd June...

Noir of the Night · #163 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 3:16 pm

Yeah, and I'll be in Ireland around the 8th, so...

John Cope · #164 Post by **John Cope** » Sun May 28, 2006 3:34 pm

Very pleased by this. I had been pulling for Loach but didn't imagine it was remotely possible. If I had predicted I would have went for Volver as did almost everyone else. Oh, and I'm also pleased by the Dumont. In spite of (or perhaps because of) his ferociously single-minded point of view I admire his work.

Noir of the Night · #165 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 4:47 pm

What ever happened to the story that Flandres had to be cut for violence to ensure a competition slot?

Anonymous · #166 Post by **Anonymous** » Sun May 28, 2006 5:20 pm

Looks like the story never came out. It's true though...

Having calmed down a bit, I guess I can't begrudge Loach this one. His eighth nomination and he's pushing 70... And, who knows, maybe the film is passable. Dumont shall have his day

Noir of the Night · #167 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 5:25 pm

Well okay, if it never came out, where did you hear it from? I would imagine that at this late stage it can't hurt to tell all of us.

Grimfarrow · #168 Post by **Grimfarrow** » Sun May 28, 2006 5:42 pm

ugetsu wrote:The question asked by Antoine Doinel was:

Antoine Doinel wrote:predictions on the Palme D'Or?
But you are right. I'm pissed that an idiot or two (Jackson, Roth, Bonham Carter?) stole the laurels from Flandres + I'd have a load more money in my pocket if it had gone the extra mile...

My god...you say so much for someone who knows so little. The Palm d'Or winner was a UNANIMOUS decision, FYI. How do you make such bad fiction by blaming Jackson and Roth and Carter for this?

Noir of the Night · #169 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 5:45 pm

I also really resent your assumption that if anyone on the jury is an idiot, it has to be one of the actors.

King of Kong · #170 Post by **King of Kong** » Sun May 28, 2006 7:03 pm

Babel sounds promising. I enjoyed Amores Perros and I'm hoping for similar quality (I haven't seen 21 Grams yet, though). Just keeping my fingers crossed it'll do the NZ festival rounds mid-year...

Anonymous · #171 Post by **Anonymous** » Sun May 28, 2006 8:07 pm

Hi Grimfarrow. I suspect you are someone in the industry with an agenda. If you have an issue with any of my comments, I would suggest you put forward some sort of argument instead of throwing around cheap insults and feigning superiority. I really didn't want to get drawn into this again, but you've left me with little choice...

Wong's 'Unanimous' quote is so much spin. All it means is that the Jury reached an agreement. No-one is going to come out of the woodwork and announce their dissatisfaction with the result. However, only in a Star Trek universe would a Jury of that size and diversity have exactly the same feelings about 20 vastly different films. Before agreement is reached, there is inevitably negotiation and compromise. That's how these things work. That's how they always work. You're either naive or very cynical if you wish to pretend otherwise.

So, this year, we have two strikingly different filmmakers in 1st and 2nd position. Loach: morally and politically committed, an ultimately sympathetic view of human nature, a traditionalist focus on screenplay and performance, fairly uninterested in style or form. Dumont: apolitical and committed to exploring areas of extreme moral ambiguity, an animalistic view of human nature, experimental, formalist, uses non-professional actors as models. These two filmmakers sit at opposite ends of the cinematic spectrum - and an engaged viewer could not help but feel a significant preference for one over the other, depending on one's own world view and depending on the purpose one feels art should serve. So this 1-2 decision is surely the result of different forces within the Jury; and, yes, that makes sense if you think about the personalities involved. Would formalists like Suleiman or Martel really pick Loach as their torch bearer? Wouldn't a Loach supporter be likely to find Dumont uncommitted, opaque, inhuman?

Yes, it's guess work, but looking at the evidence (including the way all the critics have responded to the films) it's not too much of a leap to surmise that the Loach was loved by some, whilst providing an inoffensive choice for others. Dumont was probably actively disliked by one or two (hardly unlikely given the critical response to the film, no?), most likely one of the actors with a slighter grasp of cinematic form. Overall, then, the Loach won out, even if it was the more conservative of the two.

Anyway, it's all pretty meaningless, isn't it. Look at Tarkovsky's lack of a Palme d'Or... and in a few hunded years, no-one will even care who Tarkovsky is (or Dumont or Loach or any of us)...

marty · #172 Post by **marty** » Sun May 28, 2006 8:13 pm

I have recently suspected that Grimfarrow is someone who works in the industry and has a personal agenda to vent his spleen in defense of his personal (and business?) interests.

Noir of the Night · #173 Post by **Noir of the Night** » Sun May 28, 2006 8:32 pm

I think it's pretty obvious that anyone disagreeing with ugetsu is someone from the industry with an agenda.

Antoine Doinel · #174 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Sun May 28, 2006 9:23 pm

As a buyer for an e-commerce company, I may not have the exact credentials to make the assessment I'm about to make, but I think I can be fairly safe in saying that ugetsu is blowing a lot of hot air.

pzman84 · #175 Post by **pzman84** » Sun May 28, 2006 9:43 pm

ugetsu wrote:Hi Grimfarrow. I suspect you are someone in the industry with an agenda. If you have an issue with any of my comments, I would suggest you put forward some sort of argument instead of throwing around cheap insults and feigning superiority. I really didn't want to get drawn into this again, but you've left me with little choice...

Wong's 'Unanimous' quote is so much spin. All it means is that the Jury reached an agreement. No-one is going to come out of the woodwork and announce their dissatisfaction with the result. However, only in a Star Trek universe would a Jury of that size and diversity have exactly the same feelings about 20 vastly different films. Before agreement is reached, there is inevitably negotiation and compromise. That's how these things work. That's how they always work. You're either naive or very cynical if you wish to pretend otherwise.

So, this year, we have two strikingly different filmmakers in 1st and 2nd position. Loach: morally and politically committed, an ultimately sympathetic view of human nature, a traditionalist focus on screenplay and performance, fairly uninterested in style or form. Dumont: apolitical and committed to exploring areas of extreme moral ambiguity, an animalistic view of human nature, experimental, formalist, uses non-professional actors as models. These two filmmakers sit at opposite ends of the cinematic spectrum - and an engaged viewer could not help but feel a significant preference for one over the other, depending on one's own world view and depending on the purpose one feels art should serve. So this 1-2 decision is surely the result of different forces within the Jury; and, yes, that makes sense if you think about the personalities involved. Would formalists like Suleiman or Martel really pick Loach as their torch bearer? Wouldn't a Loach supporter be likely to find Dumont uncommitted, opaque, inhuman?

Yes, it's guess work, but looking at the evidence (including the way all the critics have responded to the films) it's not too much of a leap to surmise that the Loach was loved by some, whilst providing an inoffensive choice for others. Dumont was probably actively disliked by one or two (hardly unlikely given the critical response to the film, no?), most likely one of the actors with a slighter grasp of cinematic form. Overall, then, the Loach won out, even if it was the more conservative of the two.

Anyway, it's all pretty meaningless, isn't it. Look at Tarkovsky's lack of a Palme d'Or... and in a few hunded years, no-one will even care who Tarkovsky is (or Dumont or Loach or any of us)...

Wow. I thought I was the looney of the boards.