Sundance 2006 Festival Report

House of Sand

The initial shots in House of Sand are breathtaking sand dunes that stretch for miles. Very slowly, specks of people appear in the frame, making their way through the desert at an excruciatingly slow pace. My first association was with Lawrence of Arabia and its similar sprawling desert imagery. It becomes clear, however, that House of Sand relates to Lawrence in a visual sense only. Instead of an epic tale,
House of Sand concerns itself with one family. It is 1910, and Aurea and her aging mother (Fernanda Torres and Fernanda Montenegro, respectively) have been dragged to a remote piece of land in the desert by Aurea's husband, who obviously suffers from alcoholism and is abusive. When he dies, Aurea and her mother are forced to adapt to the desert when their frequent attempts to escape are thwarted.

Indeed, this is the recurring and primary theme of the film: adaptation. For Aurea, the desert is a prison. She longs to return to civilization, and clings to it with photographs and other things from her past. Her mother, on the other hand, grows to like the desert, where "men don't tell her what to do." Aurea eventually comes to see the desert as her home, but it is a process that takes at least ten years, and it could be argued that it takes her entire life. In a particularly touching scene that closes the film, Aurea is visited by her daughter Maria, who informs her mother that man has landed on the moon. "What did they find up there?” she asks, and the answer is nothing but sand." In conclusion, the film seems to argue that a quiet existence without the influence of society is at least equal to a modern one; hence the final example of sophisticated technology being used to find something already in reach of these women since 1910.

Sexuality also receives an interesting treatment in House of Sand. Aurea sleeps with Luis, an Air Force cadet she meets in the desert, after knowing him for only a few hours, Shortly thereafter, she sleeps with Massu, a man of the desert she has known for ten years. These actions can be seen to represent Aurea's attitude toward the desert: she sleeps with Luis, a representative of the civilized world, because she pines for a return to civilization. Her finally sleeping with Massu takes place after her mother has died, and represents her final acceptance of the land she unwillingly (until now) finds herself attached to. Another implication is made about sexuality in this scene: a young Maria, Aurea's daughter, spots her mother and Massu making love. The next scene fast forwards ten or so years, and displays an older Maria as a promiscuous teenager, constantly drunk and smoking. A particularly unsettling event occurs when Maria stumbles upon a camp run by Luis, who has returned to the desert after many years to seek dead Air Force pilots. Maria, drunk, sleeps with Luis, who cannot understand why he has met a girl with the exact likeness or the one he met so many years ago.

This fact is enhanced by the fact that Maria is played by Fernanda Torres, who played Aurea in the scenes ten years prior. This is an interesting practice. Fernanda Torres ends up playing two generations of these women, while Fernanda Montenegro plays three; in the final scene, she plays Maria and Aurea simultaneously. This choice, while undoubtedly playing on the popularity of these two actresses, also serves to enhance the theme of adaptation. Aurea grows to resemble her mother, who was at peace with the desert when she herself comes to the same conclusion, and finally, the same is true for Maria. The sprawling (yet intimate) cinematography, which captured the desert as a place to both love and revile, and the concise and effective screenwriting made House of Sand an exceptional film.

Somebodies

Somebodies is a film that originated in Athens, Georgia from the mind of an African-American University of Georgia student named Hadjii. Billed as an innovate film that is about blacks, but not about drugs, the ghetto, athletes, or any other stereotypica1 material, Somebodies has been receiving a positive buzz from critics like Roger Ebert. I was quite excited to see Somebodies after Ebert gave it such praise. The buzz surrounding Somebodies is not entirely truthful. Somebodies is not a film with characters who simply happen to be black, but (far more interestingly) a film that deals with black culture in a unique way that eschews (and pokes fun at) the various stereotypes found in most “black films.”

Somebodies' first mission, however, is to get laughs, and is entirely successful on this front. Though a few jokes suffer from poor pacing, and it is at times obvious that this is the first film from Hadjii, most of the material is spot on. Some of the funniest scenes in the film involve Scottie, the main character, being dragged by his girlfriend to a meet of a super upbeat group of “Campus Christians for Christ,” whose church service involves new-age hymns with squeaky clean lyrics Scottie can't help but roll his eyes at. I was surprised how well this particular set of scenes played here in Salt Lake City. Perhaps it is because, Somebodies, though often poking fun at both black and white church services, obviously has a real love for religion. Hadjii confirmed this at the post-screening Q&A, where he remarked he'd grown up in the church and praised it for helping people in their times of need, which is what Somebodies is really about.

Hadjii described his characters, who are somewhere between high school and the real world, as “in a transitional period.” Scottie, though initially stubborn about listening to the advice of his wild-eyed reverend, eventually comes to cut back on his drinking and start to make something of his life. Shot on video, Somebodies has a gritty feel that is enhanced by a few short scenes strewn throughout the film of Athens street performers, who bring their own flavor to the film. Though at times obviously the work of a first time director, Somebodies is a film with keen insight into topics of race, youth, and religion, and shows much promise.

Stephanie Daley

Stephanie Daley is a film about two women experiencing the psychological effects of pregnancy and childbirth. I read a similar to description to the one above when I bought my tickets for this film, but it does little justice to the complexity and weight of the material and performances. Stephanie Daley is a high schooler on trial for murder; after having sex at a party, refusing to acknowledge her pregnancy and giving birth in a toilet stall. Lydie Crane, a psychologist who is on her second pregnancy after her first was stillborn, is assigned to Stephanie.

The film is structured in parallel; Stephanie will reveal something about her past, then Lydie will go through a similar situation in her life. Though the structure is relatively simple, the real complexity of the film lies in the lives of these women. Aspects of high school, such as parties, classes, and the general state of perpetual anxiety Stephanie feels while at school is incredibly accurate, and leagues above most high school dramas. Lydie, while coming across as self-assured and adult while with Stephanie, finds plenty of anxiety in her own life, and at times acts as childish as Stephanie: a telling moment occurs when she visits a mall and gets her ear pierced at a kids shop. The smallest moments throughout both lives continue to bear this level of complexity. Things are never black and white. Stephanie is date-raped, but is she? Her maybe-rapist does seem to get her consent, but she barely nods and makes a small noise. Is she consenting, or whimpering? Lydie finds an earring that does not belong to her in her home. Is her husband having an affair? We never find out, and that’s not the point: it is simply for Lydie to decide whether she wants to stay with him.

Stephanie Daley is the second film of the festival I have seen that is shot on video. The cinematography complemented the themes quite well. In scenes of emotional chaos, the camerawork was also chaotic, while in more reflexive situations, such as the sessions between Stephanie and Lydie, the cinematography and editing slowed down. Many shots were taken through glass, delivering a confined feeling. There were a few instances in the film that seemed to be building to some grand conclusion but were then discarded. A teacher in Stephanie’s school treated a student very unfairly, but this was never again touched on and seemed not to have any thematic value. There was also a blood motif running through Lydie’s story (she accidentally cut her finger, had a conversation about Bloody Marys and was called a “Bloodhound”), but this never seemed to resolve itself. This seemed like an effort on the part of the screenwriter to fit too much into the story at times. However, this is a minor quibble, and Stephanie Daley was my favorite film at the festival.

Moonshine

Moonshine was initially the film I was most excited to see at Sundance, for two reasons. First, it’s a vampire film, a subject near and dear to my heart. Second, and more importantly, it was directed by a 20-year old for less than ten thousand dollars. Aside from feeling a bit depressed about being the same age and not having a film under my belt, I was excited to see what this guy had accomplished. The film was shot on digital video, and varies wildly in visual quality from scene to scene. Some scenes are lit exceptionally, perfectly evoking the lurking dread of a much more expensive horror film. Others lack this fine-tuned lighting, and display the murky lifelessness inherent in many digital efforts. The script serves to get the job done, but doesn’t display any particular standout lines. The same can be said for most of the performances in the film, which is understandable, as the majority of the actors are simply people the director recruited from his hometown. Impressive, really, is the fact that these actors rarely descend into complete amateur mode, especially considering the seriousness with which they must talk about subjects like vampirism.

Finally, Moonshine is to be praised for actually trying to raise some real life issues, despite being a horror film. Characters discuss breaking out of their situations, display ambivalence about their daily decisions, and betray a surprising level of complexity. In the end, though, I feel like I may be cutting Moonshine a fair amount of slack for the fact it was directed by such a young man. Certainly, he deserves recognition for the skill and pure effort required to put together a feature length film, but I can’t help wondering whether his age was taken into account when Sundance made its selections, and whether other, better films were not selected because of it.

The Trials of Darryl Hunt

The Trials of Darryl Hunt is one of the stories we hear about so often these days: a man wrongfully imprisoned for murder is found through modern forensic methods to be innocent. This documentary succeeds admirably on a number of levels: putting a face to these cases we hear so much about, examining racism and its part in Darryl’s initial conviction and subsequent trials, and painting a picture of the 20-year struggle of the city of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, where the events of the film take place.

Darryl’s first trial took place in 1984, and the directors of the film noted they had been following his case for ten years. That leaves a period from 1984 to about 1996 where they had no footage of their own. However, it is clear they went to extensive effort in assembling a huge amount of material to work with, and nearly always find an appropriate piece of TV newsreel or similar to cover the underlying situation. Present day interviews are from a technical point of view well-lit and framed. They also serve to clearly and chronologically tell Darryl’s tale without an overarching “voice of God” narrator. The film gains great credibility in my mind by interviewing not only those champions of Darryl, but those on the other side, such as his initial prosecutors, who have a chance to defend their actions.

Once we reach about 1996, we begin to have a much more intimate view of those struggling to free Darryl. One hero that emerges is Mark Rable, who was assigned to defend Darryl in 1984 with no prior experience in high crimes. Despite being assigned only to the initial trial by the court, Mark stayed with Darryl to the end. Mark betrays more emotion on-camera than any other person in the film, once breaking into tears after a failed appeal. Another hero that stays with Darryl from day one is Larry Little, a local Winston-Salem preacher who organizes a fund to pay for Darryl’s defense. The person we don’t get to see during this entire process, of course, is Darryl Hunt, who was locked away for most of the film. The film concerns itself more with the legal aspects of his trials than his personal life, though it could be argued his life was his trials for two decades. According to the filmmakers, there is a four hour DVD which delves more deeply into Darryl’s life, but I think they made the right choice by dealing with the legal implications behind the case in the cut screened at Sundance, making the ordeal more universal.

After the film, Larry Little talked about Darryl’s need to “establish his leadership skills.” What he meant is that Darryl is a very soft-spoken, shy man, probably due in no small measure to not being an environment where he could develop. Regardless, I submit that Darryl simply screen this film wherever he goes, and the audience will follow him to any end. That’s high praise, but I think this film deserves it. Far and away the most important documentary I saw at Sundance, and probably the best.

Tis Autumn – The Search for Jackie Paris

In my original notes for Tis Autumn, I wrote, “a structural mess or the victim of my short attention span?” We had just come out a film, and had nary a break to catch our cinematic breath before this one began. However, upon reflection, I can confirm that Tis Autumn – The Search for Jackie Paris is, regrettably, a structural mess. The narrator of Tis Autumn is the director, Raymond de Fellita. He recounts discovering a few rare tracks from an obscure jazz singer named Jackie Paris, and eventually meets Paris and begins filming him. I suspect the production of the film was very haphazard, because the film itself is very jumbled. Interviews with Paris, as well as various music critics, fellow musicians, and family members lack a unified visual technique: some people appear to the right of the frame, some to the left; some are captured by a shaky handheld camera on the street, while others have the benefit of sitting. Unfortunately, they are all unified by a lack of adequate lighting. One singer interviewed at a carnival looked positively horrible, lit from the side with a harsh light. It would be one thing if this was some undercover investigative report, but it is clear these interviews were planned ahead of time, with plenty of time for lighting.

Shoddy lighting and non-cohesive interviews are not the only thing that mar Tis Autumn. Fellita begins to tell us about Paris’ life, chronologically. But then, he will randomly stop to show us a scene of him and Paris going on a walk, for example. One of these walks contained a conversation about how great it would be if the movie was distributed, so Paris could make some money off the soundtrack. I found this conversation to be highly unprofessional to have in the first place, much less to be kept in the final cut of the film. Another conversation takes place at a record exchange, where Fellita searches for more Paris recordings. A record collector says to Fellita, “I hope your movie gets on PBS!” Again, this line has nothing to do with Jackie Paris and is unprofessional to be left in the film. After the film, Fellita was asked what he felt the message of his film was. He wasn’t sure. I felt the question was unnecessary: the film itself made that clear.

In The Pit

In The Pit is a chronicle about some of the individuals building a bridge in Mexico City. Throughout the construction, four people are traced, speaking their minds about various topics: the bridge itself, but also about life in Mexico, politics, and eventually God, love, family, and philosophy. Two of the individuals studied are two friends: “Shorty” and “Grande.” Grande finds himself on the job after quitting the mafia. He’s very pessimistic, and calls life working on the bridge hell. Shorty is his exact opposite: a man who loves life, and is full of emotion, at one point nearly crying when his co-workers present him with a birthday cake.

The film was shot on a combination of HD, 35, and 16 millimeters. Much care was obviously spent on composition, and every shot is impressive in some way, especially the time lapse photography and the final shot in the film, a 5-minute shot surveying the huge stretch of bridge via helicopter. The most telling moments in the film occur when the hard working protagonists ruminate on their dire circumstances while huge billboards for American products loom in the background. Also of note is the soundtrack: in a Q&A session after the film, the composer revealed that all the music (which was quite beautiful) was comprised entirely of sounds culled from the construction zone: jackhammers, for example, provided the beat. In The Pit was a highly impressive film that gave viewers a unique insight on Mexico City.

An Unreasonable Man

An Unreasonable Man is a documentary that details the political life of Ralph Nader. Comprised mainly by interviews with a vast number of important figures in the life of Nader, including Nader himself, An Unreasonable Man is extremely professional looking. Though it clocks in at almost three hours, the film was very taut, and only seemed to drag during the discussion of Nader’s 2004 presidential campaign, as the 2000 campaign seemed to be the real climax of the story. The film is obviously pro-Nader, and makes little attempt to seem unbiased. The only counter-argument to Nader’s 2000 campaign decisions, for example, come from a political pundit whose arguments seem laughably absurd.

However, the film largely backs up Nader’s controversial decisions with solid fact and impressive reasoning on the part of Nader and his supporters. Occasionally, however, sweeping strings rise on the soundtrack when the film is detailing a particularly impressive move by Nader. I found this soundtrack decision felt very disingenuous, and wished the facts were allowed to stand alone without music obviously made to make your heart swell with emotion. Overall, however, An Unreasonable Man was extremely professional, informative, and entertaining.

Cinnamon

Billed as daring and experimental, Cinnamon is actually simply a poorly made film. The film concerns itself with African-American drag racing, and centers around a few members of the drag racing community. It is shot on what seems to be a consumer level DV camera; which is not in itself inherently bad, seeing how Sundance is a forum for independent filmmakers with little to no budget. However, no attempt is made to improve the image with lighting or interesting composition, nor does there seem to be any attempt at sound mixing. Pitch varies wildly from shot to shot, and characters are often almost inaudible. The film is a fictional narrative, but it is shot as if it is a documentary. Though this approach often leads to interesting and authentic feeling films, in Cinnamon’s case, it falls flat. Characters have so few lines they have no emotional draw, which ends up being unimportant, because nothing really happens to them anyway. They work on their cars, then race, then work some more. However, we are not even treated to seeing them race; the film cuts to unrelated scenes as the races begin. At only 71 minutes, this film, with so little to hold on to, felt like it would drag on forever. I feel as if Cinnamon is a case of pure lazy filmmaking hiding under the cloak of “experimental.”

The Descent

The Descent was a surprising film to see at Sundance from the opening titles: as the Lion’s Gate logo appeared on screen, surprised murmuring filled the theater: had it been picked up for distribution before the festival even started? The surprises continued as the film progressed. One of the few films I saw shot on film, The Descent is a slick, relatively high budget horror film, with few pretensions at being anything other than gory and shocking. The Descent follows a group of women from the U.K. who go on an annual camping trip. This trip involves exploring an uncharted cave formation somewhere in North Carolina. In the cave, the women run into creatures resembling Gollum from Lord of the Rings, except they eat people. After a series of bloody deaths, only one woman makes her way back outside, but then suffers her own fate in a sudden shock ending. Although The Descent was not typical Sundance fare, it succeeded admirably on its own playing field, making the rowdy audience scream and howl an impressive amount of times. Being somewhat callous in terms of horror films, I was surprised at how many times The Descent made me jump. The acting was adequate at best, but the gore effects were convincing, and the lighting added to the fright level, as did the cinematography. Though not as brain stimulating as other films I saw at Sundance, The Descent succeeded on its own terms.