Monday, September 15, 2008

"blind loves"

the subtitle of which should be, "or, don't ever live in slovakia" THAT message came through loud and clear in the TIFF documentary i saw last wednesday, much clearer than the competing messages of "entertaining" "well-edited" and "interesting subjects" which were all thoroughly sublimated. this is my longhand way of saying that the documentary was in no way deserving of the accolades it had received and i thought it was a proper snoozefest.

it was very detached, very cold, very much a "window into the lives of ___" examination, which is all very well and good, when ___ make great subjects. most of the blind people in this film did not make for great viewing...quite frankly, it all came off a little sad and forlorn and dull and very post-communist eastern bloc with all the grim greyness that reference suggests.

the real kicker was the Q&A. most people who know me know that there are few things i loathe more than a Q&A. in my experience, Q&As invite every last asinine observer of the human condition who has ever longed for a soapbox to come scuttling out of the woodwork like so many banal and pretentious cockroaches. they make my teeth hurt. K, on the other hand, has somehow miraculously avoided such prototypical Q&A experiences and earlier in the day had informed me of her and J's intention to stay. D and bwong also wanted to stay. so i stayed. and lo and behold, one of the first questions shot at the director was the following: "when working with the disabled, did you ever feel uncomfortable filming them?"

keep in mind, the director seemed to understand english okay, but had a very shaky grasp on speaking english. tickets to TIFF screenings are $20. TWENTY DOLLARS. tickets to gala screenings are THIRTY DOLLARS. i mention this because i would GLADLY pay that much to hire a slovakian-english translator for the 30 minutes it would take to conduct a Q&A, instead of watching the poor director grasp at the words necessary to present his no doubt sophisticated rebuttals and explications of his thought processes to the audience. it was excruciating.

then, the nitwit above, upon realizing (belatedly) that the question was a dud, came back to the REAL reason for asking a question in a Q&A, which in my experience has been to be self-serving in some capacity or another, "because well...when i was in south america working with the poor, i felt very uncomfortable filming them for my own gain" (i'm paraphrasing, but you get the gist). ugh. it's like first year university all over again. except the ENTIRE class is filled with that one dork who read kafka and "the catcher in the rye" and nietzsche in grade 11, for "fun" (read: to impress women) and now likes to show the world how they read above the regulated reading level. basically, it's a whole class full of ethan hawke. and mature students. yikes.

then someone ACTUALLY asked this little doozy, "i noticed in your film that you really referenced the great european masters of film...was that a conscious decision to emulate fellini?" *sound of crickets*

this reminds me of this exchange that took place between the dotytron, dr. rei and myself on saturday. we were talking about theatre and dr. rei was proclaiming that she doesn't get theatre or modern art. she mentioned how she had gone to see "waiting for godot," which was boring and consisted of, in her words, "watching two guys, day in, day out, saying, 'WHERE IS HE?!?' 'I CAN'T BELIEVE HE'S NOT HERE YET'" *insert dr. rei over-enunciating and dramatically looking at a fake watch* 

at which point, i interjected, "is that what it's about? i always thought it was two dudes expounding on philosophy and stuff" lol! i'm so gullible! can you believe that i actually almost let dr. rei lead me to believe that "waiting for godot" consisted of two guys going "WHERE IS HE?" hahahaha! she's a slippery little badger is that dr. rei. always trying to pounce on my innate initial instinct to take her seriously. she tried to convince me that what i thought danzig sounded like isn't what danzig actually sounds like. HA! wrong! danzig sounds EXACTLY what i thought danzig would sound like. this was a by-product of a conversation where it was revealed that faith no more doesn't sound anything like what i thought faith no more sounded like. i thought they sounded like danzig. on that, i'm willing to concede defeat.

on a different note, watching "gossip girl" with the dotytron is one of the best experiences of life. the dotytron's boundless enthusiasm is so infectious.  the very first episode, as the cast scrolled across the screen, he exclaimed, "penn badgley?  blake lively? chace crawford?  they really went all out with these characters"  when i told him that those were the actors names he got all saucer eyed.  hilarious.  his impression of nate is so funny.  i'm so obsessed with gossip girl...i only have maybe 3 more episodes before i'm done the first season and have to watch them in real time and it's kind of breaking my heart.  chuck and blair are the best couple of life.  i love the redemption of the tortured bad boy.  my friend I called on saturday to speak to the roomie and upon hearing her voice i screeched into the phone, "I LOVE GOSSIP GIRL!"  i'm lucky it was her.  i'm pretty sure if it had been a telemarketer, coming as i was off of mainlining 3 hours of episodes, i would have done pretty much the same thing.

tonight is the first dodgeball game of the season.  afterwards, i'm rewarding myself with tacos al asador and i'm picking up takeout for the house family.  

fin.

2 comments:

K said...

Neo-realism!

kitsch:in:sync said...

don't forget the fact that missy angelina jolietobe, having prostrated at the altar of her own amour-propre, promptly LEFT THE THEATRE after dropping her little gem about the class guilt of the film maker's burden with her SO in tow during someone else's question.