Day-O-Celebs

This was an ultra day of celeb sighting. I attending a panel discussion with Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling, plus got to meet James Franco. And, during the panel, I was the last person to be allowed to ask a question, and since the film their were discussing, "Blue Valentine," is about a couple who' marriage is crumbling, I asked about the message of the film and prefaced it with the fact that I am getting married in less than 4 weeks and the movie totally threw me off. Long story short, the whole cast and cerw wished me congratulation and a happy marriage. What's up, that's cool.

The festival is winding down, with fewer and fewer screenings, and more and more assignments being due. Tomorrow two are due, as posted below:
Review 2: “Blue Valentine”
By Anna Ferguson

Starring: Ryan Gosling, Michelle Williams
Directed by: Dereck Cianfrance
Rating: N/A
Running Time: 120 minutes


Maybe it was a truly well-made movie. Maybe the dual performances from Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling were simply superb. Maybe the writing and directing were so in sync, it was impossible not to be moved. Or maybe, it's just where I am right now in my life. Whatever the case, director Derek Cianfrance newest film, "Blue Valentine," has proven to have a lasting, deep impact on my psyche.

The story of a married couple struggling to weave back together the dissolving pieces of their tattered relationship, "Blue Valentine" hits hard to the core, depicting characters you don't just see on the screen, but can actually feel stirring your soul. With Wiliam’s Cindy, and Gosling’s Dean, viewers are allowed to delve deeply, intrusively, into the personalities and minds of these two lead characters. So much so that you, the viewer, feel that you know these people. If you have been a lost, wandering 20-something, then you have likely been to a backyard cook-out with this couple; you have likely experienced double dates with this couple; you have likely even been this couple.

From the outside, this is a man and a woman who could not be more different. Cindy comes from an upper-middle class, though troubled, family, is attending college to become a doctor, and has her life on track to be both happy and successful. Dean, on the other hand, stems from a polar opposite perspective. He has left his home in Florida, where his mother left at an early age and his father was unable to provide much in the way of either love or opportunities. He dropped out of high school, with no real intentions of becoming anything more than full of untapped potential.

While watching the two interact through their first haphazard date and on lovely rendezvous’ in their younger years, the gap that exists between their lives is not readily apparent. It is not until the awkward family dinner that the vast difference between their backgrounds floats to the surface. Asking Dean about his life and his family, Cindy's father raises his eyebrows disapprovingly, obviously not smitten by Dean's wit and charm, nor by the fact that he has no future plans or comes from a poor, single-parent home. Not that Cindy is looking for their approval. She's not too keen on her parents anyhow, as she states early on in the film.

"I hope I never become them," Cindy says of Mom and Dad, as the family sits stiffly and quietly one night at their usual tense dinner, where everyone’s eyes are either full of distain or merely avoiding any contact all together.

And it seems that Cindy won't end up in an unhappy, loveless union, what with the generous spark struck when Dean and Cindy first meet. But somehow, life got in the way. After having an adorable child (Frankie, played by the delightful six-year-old Faith Wladyka, in her endearing debut role), working to make ends met and spending far too much time apart, the couple lets their love fade. It was no one event, but rather the series of years of non-communication that led to their utter demise, as so often happens in real life and in real marriage. Cindy leaves her best self at the office; Dean wants nothing but for his family to thrive. Somehow, they can’t make themselves fit into one another the way they once effortlessly had.

Even though the on-screen couple extinguishes their spark, the connection and chemistry between Williams and Gosling pops from the screen the entire two hours of play time.

This is not a relationship being feigned; these are two people who are obviously sharing moments, bonding, laughing, loving and fighting with anything but generic chemistry. The curious way Gosling rubs his stubble-lined face, the angry squint of Williams' glaring eyes; the actors' gestures are genuine, smooth and powerful. We, as the audience, feel what they feel, long when they long, hurt and laugh when they hurt and laugh.

Director Cianfrance, who also co-wrote the script, brilliantly crafted a deep, kinetic relationship between Williams and Gosling by, more or less, letting the characters build their connection on their own using a less than traditional method. For a month, the two actors lived together in the Scranton, Penn., home where the film was set. They did their own grocery shopping; they did their own dishes; they did just about everything a real married couple would do, except sleep together and fight.

According to Cianfrance, fighting, even more so than the graphic sex scenes, was the hardest element for the two actors to create. They actually scheduled a so-called “fighting day”, wherein the two were forced to argue.

That day paid off, as on screen, if the actors were fake fighting, you couldn't tell. Every second the couple spent nit-picking, rolling eyes or shrugging in frustration came off more as documentary than fiction. Acting, it seems, is a true gift given to both Williams and Gosling. These roles were 12 years in the making, with Williams signing on six years ago, and Gosling coming on board four years ago, allowing the picture to marinate for more than a decade to ensure a pitch perfect, meant-to-be film.

"The best food always takes the longest time to cook," Cianfrance said in a recent panel discussion. “Anything that could go wrong in the film and production process, did. This film had to be done when the universe was ready for it. And now, after a lot of hard and steady work, the universe is ready and we have made the great film we had hoped to make.”

Not so much a film of warning, but instead coming off as a simple yet layered tale of a normal couple, "Blue Valentine" balances itself perfectly between moral guide and entertainment.

Cianfrance obviously has a keen understanding of the human spirit and the human capacity for love. Having worked as a filmmaker on several documentaries, including directing “Black and White: A Portrait of Sean Combs” (a 2008 made-for-TV film) and “Dream the Impossible” (2008), Cainfrance lives and breathes by the motto that watching and listening is more important than talking when it comes to his characters. By tapping into this philosophy, he is able to create a family unit that seems boldly real and utterly ethereal all at the same time.

Beyond stellar direction, sparkling chemistry and dazzling performances, the film's script and story itself are enough to win over most audiences. Though often gritty and uncomfortable, "Blue Valentine" masterfully depicts what can happen to a marriage when the couple stops paying attention to each other, and wholly focuses on the daily tasks of living. Jumping between past and present experiences to shape a duality of perspective between the two, the film never points fingers or places blame on one or the other character. Rather, both are shown in an equally favorable/unfavorable light, with the ending offering no ultimate solution to how they do, or don’t, fix their marriage and themselves.

As an anxious twenty-something, only weeks away from getting married, “Blue Valentine” spoke to me in a way that perhaps the director never even intended. What to do, what not to do, what could be; all these ideas were on display for me during the entire 120 minute running time. Cindy and Dean were so available, so lovable, so right and so wrong for each other; it was impossible not to see a part of my fiancé and myself in each of them. “If their love could crumble, what then, of mine?” I found myself wondering, during, and for days after, the viewing.

How can a love be saved? How can a love be maintained so that it does not need saving? While “Blue Valentine” didn’t exactly answers these questions, it did make me, as it likely will for most viewers, ponder such issues, which is surely a sign of awareness. Through awareness, hopefully, comes understanding and the ability to avoid a messy situation. At least, that’s what I’m banking on.

Able to make audience's think and feel, laugh and cry, squirm and celebrate, all in equal measure, this film is neither a commemoration nor condemning of love. It is instead a loaded work, delivering a clear message with a heavy hand, proving ripe to be loved by indie audiences du jour.


Review 3: TuTu Much
By Anna Ferguson

Director: Elise Swerhone and Vonnie Helmolt
Running Time: 83 minutes
Rated: N/A

Like most little girls I grew up with, my parents signed me up for dance lessons at a young age. Jazz, ballet, tap, I tried them all. Perhaps my parents thought dance classes would teach me to be graceful, or have rhythm. It didn’t. After some nearly 10 years of being stuck in beginners classes, it became apparent that I just wasn’t meant to be a dancer.
Despite my own inadequacies with the form, I still enjoy watching the medium with fervor. I jump on any chance I get to attend a recital from a professional dance company, watching eagerly as the elegant performers spring up en pointe, twirl into pirouettes and leap across the stage. Such poise, talent and stamina, are all required to take a choreographed piece from a music-filled thought to art in action. Any performer who can do as much has my attention.
So it was with much excitement that I attended the debut of the documentary, “TuTu Much.” A Canadian film directed by Elise Swerhone and Vonnie Helmolt, “Tutu Much” follows a group of dancers during a four-week summer session with the Royal Winnipeg Ballet Dance Company in Canada. Dancers came from across the globe to attend the summer school dance session, in hopes of both honing their skills as well as being offered a year-long stint with the company after the session wrapped.
Nine young women, ranging in age from 10 to 14 years old, were followed throughout the four-week session, as we watch them improve (or not) on their already sharp gift. The pressures and pitfalls of dance life are highlighted, with the girls offering candid interviews to reveal their true feelings about themselves, their time at the school and their hopes for the future.
Though Swerhone and Helmolt capture the girls’ excitement, anxieties and bonding with ease, the two seemingly miss a fine opportunity to tackle the ugly unknown or un-discussed elements of the dancing field. An art industry riddled with troubles, the dance world is a prime venue for exploring the larger realm of societal problems. It’s no secret that dancers’ lives are often rampant with issues, with eating disorders, drug use, injuries, depression and homosexuality among the top concerns. And yet “TuTu Much” simple did not hit on any of these. Merely, it glosses over a few of the topics without any real investigation or explanation.
The major issue troubling the dancing world seems to be the demand to be of a certain body type. Tall, thin, long, lean bodies, that can form strong, graceful lines, are ideal in the eyes of dance instructors. Because of this tradition, girls outside that limited segment of bodies are often alienated and seen as too far outside the norm to be professional dancers.
In the film, Swerhone and Helmolt only glaze over this issue, by focusing on one girl, 13-year-old Melissa, who is rejected from the company due to her broad shoulders and short neckline. Though she has true promise as a dancer, and is shown later in life to become a successful member at another company, the Winnipeg school opts out of using her talents due to her shape. The directors never come out to openly discuss this rejection or issue of body image, leading audiences to feel that the film has missed a golden opportunity to get across an important message.
The duo of directors again fail to open the film to controversial issues by avoiding interviews with male dancers. The company and summer session were littered with both young and older male dancers, and yet none of them were given a platform for offering a man’s perspective on what it is like to be a dancer.
Swerhone and Helmolt, however, are able to draw upon the financial and emotional burden that being a young dancer has on families. Several of the girls who were accepted into the company were unable to take their invitation due to monetary concerns, as their parents were unable or unprepared to pay for their training. As well, home-sickness played a role in why some of the accepted girls turned down the once-in-a-lifetime offer. By interviewing both the dancers and their parents, Swerhone and Helmolt seized the opportunity to depict the difficulties faced by both dancer and guarding when taking on this tumultuous art profession. Here again, the directors merely glaze over the issues, but at least each was momentarily addressed.
One issue that “TuTu Much” fully captured and delivered was the enthusiasm, passion and female bonding that occurred between these pre-adolescent and teenage girls and their love for the forum. Because these young women were so enthusiastic about their craft, the directorial team had no trouble bottling up then showcasing their drive and energy, which plays to the film’s favor and balances out the often-distracting production elements. On more than one occasion, a boom mic is in the frame, the camera unintentionally shakes, and images that should be in focus are accidentally blurred. Ultimately, viewers will want these mistakes to be overlooked for the sake of the dancers gifts, but depending on the viewing venue, that may be easier said than done.
Though Swerhone and Helmolt do wrap the film with an updated synopsis on the girls’ careers and lives post-summer camp, they never fully show the girls in action, an aspect of the film that should have been included. Seeing as this was a documentary about dancers, it would have been refreshing and nice to see them in more than warm-ups. Once again, the two directors missed the boat.
Overall, though, the film comes off as a moderately in-depth glance into the world of dancers, though it never really goes far enough. The nine interviewed girls add oomph to the piece thanks to their stage presence and energy, but it seems as if the youngsters do all of the heavy lifting.
With so many girls offering so many aspects of the dancers life, “TuTu Much” comes off as too too many interviews and too too little real information. The abundance of dancers and lack of directorial fortitude prove for a weak, if not entertaining, 83-minute film. On the directorial duo’s next go-round, if there is one, hopefully they can flush out their piece, edit more and create a work that can stand on its own two pointe shoes.

Otherwise, things are good. The sun is back out. We have hot water finally. And it looks like in a few days, I will be able to get more than 4 hours of sleep and eat more than bread and Coke Light. Although the steady diet of Coke Light and great soft bread is rather enjoyable, now that I have discovered the great condiments in the French grocery stores.

In bad news, on kid (John David) got slapped in the face by a mean French men, causing a nose bled, Anna Beaver's purse was stolen, I was elbowed more than 20 times today (I counted), which all backs up my theory that 3/4 of the French natives are a-holes.

And, check the Grady web site, (http://www.grady.uga.edu/). The Cannes group is on the main page!