AIFF 2020: Best Narrative Feature - Festival Picks and Mine (Equan Choi's My Son)

It's late February.  This is long overdue, so let me get this done.  Here are the Festival winners in the best Narrative Feature category.  (Narrative Features are the films most seen in movie theaters - fictional stories over an hour or so long.) [Note:  My strong favorite film was Equan Choi's My Son. I mention this here, because as I wrote this, it comes up at the end.  And because this film was overlooked by both the Jurors and the Audience in their awards, I want to be sure it gets people's attention, even if they don't read the whole post.]

First, the Juror Awards.  Jurors are part of the film festival, people selected by the Festival director, who know something about film.  Because our festival director is a Norwegian film maker, she reached out to film makers she knows around the world.  These are not people from Anchorage.  That's neither good nor bad theoretically.  It depends on how well she chooses the jurors and the purpose of the awards and how much they should reflect Anchorage.  

Narrative Features

2nd Runner Up  - Last Days of Capitalism

Runner Up - The Woman In the Photographs

Winner - Dinner in America

Audience Awards.  One could argue that the audience awards add the Anchorage flavor to the awards.  

Narrative Feature - 

2nd Runner Up -  Paper Spiders

Runner Up -Foster Boy

Winner - Dinner in America

Category	Juror Award Winner	Audience Award Winner	Steve's Award Winner
2nd Runner Up	Last Days of Capitalism	Paper Spiders	see discussion
Runner Up	The Woman In the Photographs	Foster Boy	see discussion
Winner	Dinner in America	Dinner in America	My Son

First off, I'd say that Narrative Features was the richest category in the festival.  There were lots and lots of excellent films.  

Second, I think the Jurors picked better movies than the Audience.  But that they are all very good films.  

Third, I'm not really a fan of forced ranking.  Given a film that is technically sound - the video, the acting, the sound etc. are well done - it's the content and feel of the movie that matter.  And even films that are technically imperfect can have content that overcomes that.  So, this means that whether a film is good or not depends on how the content of the film resonates with the viewer.  And that usually depends on the viewer's life experiences and the emotional connection a viewer has with the characters and the issues in the film.  So different viewers will legitimately prefer different films.

I'm guessing that the Jurors were looking at the films as film as much as the content, while the Audience was more focused on the stories and characters.  Paper Spiders was about a daughter whose mother is losing her mind.  It was a very well told story.  Very moving.  Foster Boy was also well told - a trial movie about a young black man who was abused by the foster care system.  I'm guessing this didn't show up in the Juror Awards because it was a very Hollywood movie - including some well known actors.  If the Jurors are like me, they are looking more for 'film festival' movies.  Movies that break the mold, that take risks, that you would be less likely to see at a theater. (I realize some may be asking "What's a theater?" in this time of COVID.) 

The Last Days of Capitalism straddled between those two categories.  It was a perfect COVID film - just two actors in a hotel suite in Las Vegas.  It's a really good film.  I saw it early in the festival and it immediately became my film to beat.  You can see the Trailer here, but I'm not putting it up here because it really doesn't reflect the verbal (almost athletic) competition between the two characters that made this movie.  

The Woman in the Photographs was at the top after I saw it.  This Japanese movie about a photographer and his model is definitely in the film festival category. It explores the nature of reality - is it what the woman actually looks like or is it how the woman looks in the photograph. Especially current in this age of social media and online dating.  This was definitely one of my favorites.  

Dinner in America - This film with a seriously flawed main character who made terrible decisions was, nevertheless, a joy to watch.  Not quite mainstream, not quite festival, it was a real surprise and I understand it being the winner for both the Jurors and the Audience.  There are lots of videos out there with the film's crew, but I couldn't find a trailer.  

BUT, I think there were at least two more movies that fell through the cracks because there was so much good stuff.  

The Subject - This leans more into a festival type film.  A privileged white male film maker who sees himself as trying to give voice to black gang members in his 'cutting edge' films, finds out that he's really not gotten much beyond his own self.  There's another withering dialogue at the end of this film between the film maker and the angry mother of one his film subjects.  The film raises lots of questions about documentary film making and exploitation and doing harm while trying to do good.  For a while this was my favorite film.  

In the end, Equan Choi's My Son, one of the last features I watched, became my favorite.  I'd put it off as long as I could.  The story of a Korean father taking care of his severely disabled son.  It sounded like it was either going to be a sappy story of love and happiness or a terribly depressing movie.  Neither sounded appealing.

But I was so wrong.  This was absolutely the most intimate film of the festival.  Yes, there's a father with his teenaged paraplegic son.  The father's sister who helps look after the son.  There's the mentally disabled teen hired to help with the son.  And there's the father's secret married girlfriend that he visits weekly.  Each character becomes a full person with strengths and flaws and the relationships between the characters - both one on one and as a group - are developed.  This is truly a masterpiece and I'm sorry it got missed by both the Juror awards and the Audience awards.  And it forces the audience to recalibrate their definition of disabled, forces them to remember there is a real, human being inside every body, with a whole spectrum of hopes and feelings and opinions.  

There is so much in this film.  The boy's adolescent need to pull away from his father and become his own person against his father's belief he must look after the boy who can't take care of himself.  The teen caretaker who is physically and sexually adult, but has his own mental defects that cause him to make bad decisions, and how he helps the boy become himself, independent of his father.  The sister/aunt and her caring for the boy and her brother yet resentful of how much they take of her life.  The girlfriend (the father goes to his - I can't remember exactly what sport, maybe bowling - activity each week, but really he's going to visit his girlfriend whose husband is in the military and away most of the time) also becomes a full person when the father becomes ill and she comes to the house to find out what's wrong.  It is then when all the characters interact, when the boy becomes his father's caregiver.  There's so much in this film.  I'm sorry I waited to the end to watch it, when I didn't have time to watch it again.  In my mind, this was the very best feature film in a festival with excellent feature films.  

  [I couldn't find a trailer for My Son.]

If you have the chance to see any of the films mentioned in here, grab it.  They are all worth watching.  

AIFF2020: The Festival Picks Versus My Picks

I was going to run through all the categories to compare the award winners chosen by the critics, the audience, and me.  But I just didn't see enough films in some categories to really comment, so I'm leaving them out.  Those that won that I didn't see are marked with an asterisk* in the tables below.  I posted all the winners here. 

As I was writing this, it became clear that the two narrative categories - Narrative Features and Narrative Shorts - were really strong categories with lots of excellent films.  Features, so much so, that I'll do another separate post on that category.  When it's up I'll put in a link here.  

I'd also note that evaluating films is never easy.  Lots of factors play a role - the quality of the film, how the topic and technique strike the viewer, and conditions of the viewing and the viewers mood and energy level while watching the film.  

Animated Shorts
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Gon, the Little Fox	Grab My Hand: A Letter To My Dad	Grab My Hand
Runner Up	Diminuendo	Just for the Record
2nd Runner Up	Just for the Record	Sad Little Fact

Grab My Hand: A Letter To MyDad was fantastic.  The best of the animation I saw by far.  The story was short and to the point.  The animation was original and beautiful and perfectly illustrated the story.  Identity Crisis and Encounters are worth mentioning.  Identity Crisis for the story, Encounters for the visual effect, though it was much too long.  I understand they wanted to show from the few to the many and back to the few, but it seemed to go on forever.  Maybe I wasn't in the right mood at the time.  

Diminuendo and Just for the Record were also worthy contenders.  Gon, the Little Fox and Sad Little Fact weren't my cup of tea.  

Feature Docs
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Never Too Late Doc Severinsen	Race to Alaska*	Cell
Runner Up	Race to Alaska*	Pushout:  Criminalization of  Black Girls in HS*	Cell
2nd Runner Up	Everything that  Could Have Been	Never Too Late Doc Sev Story	Cell

In the past, this has been a strong category at AIFF.  But this year I didn't see any films that I thought were 'excellent'.  Doc Severinson  was interesting, but as a film it wasn't particularly noteworthy in technique or how it told the story.  Everything that Could Have Been  was to me a family home movie that went on too long.  It was a loving memorial, but it wasn't close to a great film.  

Narrative Shorts
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Jane*	Masel Tov Cocktail	Masel Tov Cocktail
Runner Up	Masel Tov Cocktail	Kama'aina (Child of the Land)
2nd Runner Up	Undercut*	Rebel

I'm not offering Runner Up winners because I thought Masel Tov Cocktail was so outstanding and it's hard choosing among many worthy runners up. And I didn't see them all.    

Masel Tov for me was the perfect film, meaning it took advantage of all you can do with the medium of film to get its story across.  It packed in LOTS on content but there was nothing unnecessary - not even the gefilte fish cooking video.  The acting was fantastic. And it used humor beautifully to discuss the sensitive topic of Jewish identity and stereotypes in modern Germany, and in the telling, broke all those stereotypes. I did have one friend who said some of it was over his head, so it's possible non-Jews missed some things. 

I didn't see two that the Critics chose, so I can't comment on those.  I would note that I have no problem with the Audience Choice winners.  Kam'aina was a powerful look at a homeless Hawaiian teen.  But I also thought The Woman Under The Tree also told as sensitively  a different homeless story.  

Rebel  looked at immigration from the point of view of a young boy whose dad has taken him to a biker sort of rally/camp in the Canadian woods.  

Gather in the Center  and Thoughts and Prayers  were both about school shootings.  The first featuring active shooter classroom training for the teacher and students that goes wrong.  The second took a more unconventional view and looked at school shootings by highlighting a few kids who would be dead (in the film story, this was a narrative, not a documentary)  by the end of the school day.  

Flora was a visually exquisite Spanish film with a compelling story.  Bainne (Milk)  was a visually striking Irish film.   While Flora had brilliant colors and style as though each frame were a classic painting, Bainne was black and white and eerily represented a time of Irish famine. 

I also thought that When It Falls told an interesting, unusual story.  

Anna and Cake Day are two other worthy films in this category.  

Documentary Shorts
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Reclamation: Rise At Standing Rock*	Sky Aelans	Sky Aelans
Runner Up	Sky Aelans	Keep Saray Home*
2nd Runner Up	Antarctica	Hysterical Girl

Again, I didn't see all the films in this category, but I'm more aligned with the Audience Awards than the Critics Awards.  .

I would also recommend a couple of other narrative shorts that made a good impression:

Hysterical Girl - did a good job of looking through history - from Freud to MeToo - where women are dismissed as being hysterical and not taken seriously.  

The Marker - very simply and straightforwardly, but effectively, told the story of an artist who is putting up crosses at all the spots where immigrants have died in the desert crossing into the US.  

AIFF2020: Paper Spiders And Delusion

 I guess this is a film festival post because I'm starting with a film I saw the other night - Paper Spiders.

In the film a widow lives with her about-to-go-to-college daughter.  Her husband, a doctor, has been dead two or three years.  New neighbors move in and the mother gets upset because she sees him,

Screen shot from Paper Spiders

through the window, back into a tree on her lawn.  

She runs out and comes back to tell her daughter that he told her to fuck off.

The mom later says the neighbor is throwing rocks at their house.  One night she's sure he's on the roof.  The daughter goes next door to just talk to the guy and the wife yells at her.  "Talk to her?  He can't come within ten feet of her. Your mother put out a restraining order against him.  Your mother is deeply disturbed."

Mom knows he's an electrical engineer and she's sure he's sending some kind of waves at her that are giving her headaches.  Whatever explanation the daughter gives, the mom twists it around saying "that proves what I'm saying."

"He's trying to torture me, it's a power struggle, can't you see?"

The daughter, Melanie, tells her mom her grades are dropping and the school counselor wants to do family therapy.  The mom quickly starts talking about the "stalker" and the counselor pulls out the DSM and reads her about delusional disorder (my definition comes from The Cleveland Clinic)

"What is delusional disorder?

Delusional disorder, previously called paranoid disorder, is a type of serious mental illness — called a “psychosis”— in which a person cannot tell what is real from what is imagined. The main feature of this disorder is the presence of delusions, which are unshakable beliefs in something untrue. People with delusional disorder experience non-bizarre delusions, which involve situations that could occur in real life, such as being followed, poisoned, deceived, conspired against, or loved from a distance. These delusions usually involve the misinterpretation of perceptions or experiences. In reality, however, the situations are either not true at all or highly exaggerated."

The counselor asks if the mother recognizes any of the symptoms.  The mom's response:  "I think you nailed it.  He has delusional disorder."

Mom hires a private detective to track the man's movements.

They meet the detective for the final report.  The detective chronicles the neighbor's movements.  On Saturday he went to St Percy's hospital.  

• Mom: "You see, he's getting psychiatric treatment."  
• Detective: "I've been in the business for 25 years, so if there was any suspecious activity, I assure you, I would catch it."
• Mom:  "You understand what this means.  We're dealing with a seasoned criminal who can out maneuver a seasoned investigator with 25 years experience."

Things get worse and worse and eventually the mom moves out so the neighbor can't persecute her and sleeps in the car to stay safe from the neighbor.  

As we all watch Donald Trump claim that Biden stole the election, this delusional woman comes to mind.  She's certain about the neighbor.  Every shred of evidence offered to disprove the neighbor's evil mission is turned around as further proof of his devious cleverness.  And Trump ignores the fact that many of the judges turning down his appeals are judges he appointed!  And he doesn't have quite the agility the mom in the movie had to turn around such facts to her advantage. He just changes the subject or blames the messenger.  

Part of me believes that Trump knows exactly what he's doing, but his behavior is so, so similar to this character's, perhaps he doesn't.  

If Trump weren't president of the United States, a normal family would get him treatment.  Or at least try to prevent him from destroying their lives. Given the power/money dynamics of the Trump family I suspect he might not be challenged, even if the kids saw their inheritance being frittered away.  (I don't know whether his assets are greater than his debts.)  

And even in the movie, the daughter had a really difficult time getting her mom treatment.  She was homeless first and then involuntarily admitted only after a very public incident where she turned on her daughter for not supporting her.   

How many of Trump's supporters also have delusional disorder?  Probably not that many.  After all, their news sources all support this mass delusion.   The mom had no one supporting her delusions.  

Here's what the Cleveland Clinic says about treatment:

"How is delusional disorder treated?

Treatment for delusional disorder most often includes medication and psychotherapy (a type of counseling); however, delusional disorder is highly resistant to treatment with medication alone. People with severe symptoms or who are at risk of hurting themselves or others might need to be in the hospital until the condition is stabilized."

The mom was given medication and was in the hospital two weeks.  Even then, at the end she marches off to confront the neighbor again only to be told he's been dead for a month.  But the mom says that's bullshit and points at some equipment in the hallway to prove it's the machine he's been using to torture her.  The neighbor looks and says, "That's his chemo machine."

I don't think any of Trump's destructivenes will end on January 20th.  There are too many people who share Trump's delusions, not just about the election, but about every thing else.  Trump supporters are talking about overturning the election still.  

The Texas lawsuit asked the Supreme Court to throw out hundreds of thousands of ballots.  Over 100 House Republicans joined the lawsuit.  And even after the Supreme Court (including three of Trump's appointees) voted 9-2 against Trump of procedural grounds and 9-0 on substance,  Law&Crime notes:

"In response [to the Supreme Court decision], Texas GOP Chairman Allen West on Friday erroneously claimed that the high court’s ruling—which was widely expected among legal experts and court watchers—created a precedent that allows states to act unlawfully in the administration of elections, leading him to float the idea that the Lone Star State should look into forming a separate nation. In other words, he is preaching secession."

And Trump is inciting his followers by insisting that he actually won the election and that Biden stole it with fraudulent votes.  

At some point, the Democrats are going to have to play hardball.   

"18 U.S. Code § 2384. Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both."

You can see that this discussion could go on and on.  Gore and Kerry conceded their elections even though there was much more evidence than Trump has that they won.  Even Lincoln wanted to welcome the South back into the union to make that return more cordial.  But that resulted in another 100 years of de facto slavery and inequality for blacks.  (See for example White Rage by Carol Anderson.)  It seems to me the extreme behavior of Trump requires serious consequences lest these new excesses become the norm.  

AIFF2020: The Subject Took Me By Surprise

I finally figured out the Q&A scheduling [it's tricky just seeing the times, so I've put up a schedule on the AIFF2020 page above] and Hometown Pride was going to have the Q&A Thursday at 6pm.

I watched Hometown Pride this afternoon.  This is a fun and easy to watch film about a very out and outgoing gay man who comes back to his tiny Ohio hometown to dance at their annual beauty pageant. Good, not remarkable.  We've seen other versions of this story at AIFF in past years.  

Then I went for Paper Spiders.  I'd been avoiding this one because I wasn't sure I wanted to deal with a mother's mental illness, but its Q&A was also coming up.  

We paused Paper Spiders in the middle so we could watch the Q&A for The Last Days of Capitalism.  This was my favorite feature film and I was looking forward to the session.  It's not quite the same on Zoom as it is live at the festival.  But it was a good discussion.  

The back to Paper Spiders which was surprisingly good, but the mom is definitely delusional and paranoid.  But the story was well told and well acted.  There are lots of very good narrative features at this festival.  The title is referred to visually only briefly in one shot.  It leaves a lot to the viewers imagination.  

Then on to another one I was avoiding, because it looked like it was going to be heavy - The Subject.

This film follows a documentary film maker doing a project on Black young men mostly in Harlem.  The difficulties filming his volatile subjects seems to be the focus.  There's also some tension at home which escalates when he hires an assistant.  But then at the end everything kicks up a bunch of notches and we have an amazing confrontation between the film maker and the mother of one of his subjects who has been killed by gang members.  

I feel a little like a fickle boyfriend, but I've abandoned The Last Days of Capitalism and now my favorite feature is The Subject.  I don't want to say too much about it - I think I've told you more than you need to know already.  Just see it.  The issues - the relationship between the filmmaker and his subjects, particularly if the filmmaker is a privileged white male and the subjects are black kids living in poverty and violence - themselves are powerful.  But the final scene is amazing and where the issues are served up like fireworks.  

There's an interview with the director of The Subject Laney Zipoy here.  The AIFF interview was last Saturday and I haven't figured out how, or if we even can, watch the ones we missed.  

AiFF2020: Toprak and The Woman of the Photographs

 I can't believe there are still five narrative features I haven't seen yet.  Or that I'm writing about two obscure films instead of addressing more significant issues.  But there are plenty of people commenting on US politics and not very many commenting on these two films - one  Turkish and and Japanese.  

Toprak - 

I just looked up Toprak on google.translate.  It means Soil.  You don't have to know that watching the movie (I didn't), but it makes a lot of sense.  

Often times, watching a film based in a culture other than one's own, people need to change their sense of time, their pace.  I suspect, given the success of US films around the world, that speeding things up is easier to adapt to than slowing things down.  

This film slows things down a lot.  It takes place in rural Turkey, where this slower pace is the norm.  It focuses on the remnants of one family - a grandmother, her son, and his nephew - who eke out a living growing and selling pomegranates.  It's a theme we've seen repeatedly in AIFF films - young people leaving rural areas and small towns to pursue a more interesting, if not better, life.  And we know this saga in the US and here in Alaska all too well.  

This movie takes us into how these tensions between carrying on the family traditions and breaking the ties plays out in this (and to a much lesser extent one other) Turkish family.  

Originally, a copy of this film without subtitles was up on the AIFF site.  That was corrected yesterday (Wednesday).  Slow down and take a trip to rural Turkey. Pomegranates would make an appropriate snack for this film.

The Woman of the Photographs

We watched this one after Toprak. The topics of this film are very contemporary and the pace much faster.  It's an odd film - the main character doesn't speak a single word until the last few minutes of the film; a praying mantis has a significant supporting role - that explores the boundaries between the reality of who people are - what their actual faces and bodies look like, the manipulated photographic images on social media, or how other people perceive them.  This is a perfect film festival selection.  

I found The Woman of the Photographs a more watchable film than Toprak, I think because the issues raised in Toprak are well-known.  Toprak merely adds a case study to the stories of people leaving their small town/rural lives to larger cities.  Woman of the Photographs offers interesting material for the current concerns about how social media are changing the nature of reality, how we communicate,  and personal identity.  

AIFF2020: Dinner In America: A Movie I Shouldn't Have Liked, But I Did

 I'm falling way behind here.  I'm pretty much picking pictures based on the photo, title, and description.  Here are some I think are worth watching.

Narrative Features

I really didn't expect to like Dinner in America   It starts off in an institutional dining room.  Someone throws up on his tray of food.  I almost stopped it right there.  But I didn't and we get to follow an out of control drug dealer (no, that's just one of his personas) have family dinner in three different homes, do a lot of crazy shit (sorry, that's the best description), and win over both of us.  This is a good movie.  Filmed in Michigan.  

Small Town Wisconsin was filmed in Wisconsin.  We even get a tour of Milwaukee.  Another main character who does lots of things that don't endear him to the others characters or the audience.  A little past midpoint we discussed abandoning the film.  We didn't.  It would have been a mistake.  

Foster Boy - This is more Hollywood than film festival.  It has two well known (there may have been others) actors - Matthew Modine and Louis Gossett Jr. - and  Shaquille O’Neal is the executive producer.  This is a court room drama.  A rich, conservative corporate attorney is assigned, against his will, a pro bono case of a 19 prisoner who is suing the foster care corporation that placed him in about a dozen homes.  A compelling film with appealing heroes and appropriately nasty villains.  

Of the three, I'd say Foster Boy had a number of loose ends - where I couldn't quite believe a) the lead attorney didn't get suspicious faster about his son's cancelled trip or b) all the dirty tricks that happened over Thanksgiving weekend.  I attribute b) to squeezing events that happened over a longer period of time into a couple days to fit the condensed time line of the movie.  The film said it was a fictionalized account of a true story.

Shorts  I think are worth watching:

Masel Tov Cocktail - I've already written about this, but I'm including it again just in case you missed my earlier mention.  At this point, this is my favorite film of the festival.  This was a tricky project and it all fit together wonderfully.  It couldn't have been told as well in any other format than film.  

 Cake Day - A good story told economically and movingly.  

Woman Under the Tree  - Maybe a bit longer than necessary, but it's a well told tale of a homeless woman.  

The Marker - Like Cake Day, a good story told well.  

Happy (Short) Films -  I've added this category because this festival is heavy with issue films.  Here are two shorts, particularly Pathfinder, that present the beauty and wonder of the natural world.  

 Pathfinder - A small group of adventurers put up a slack line high up among snow peaks in Norway with Northern Lights in the background.  Pure joy.

Sky Aelans - Also up in the mountains, the people of the Solomon Islands are protecting the mountain environment.  The camera shares some of the wonders up there worth their care.  

I still have lots of movies to see.  There appears to be a lot worth watching.  More later.  

AIFF2020: Sapelo And A Strong Recommendation For The Last Days Of Capitalism And For Grab My Hand: A Letter To My Dad

Usually Saturday is really busy during the festival with films starting as early as 9 am some years.  But we've somehow gotten into a routine with Netflix that we never watch before it's dark.  (Well, in the summer, before 8 or 9 pm anyway.)  So it didn't seem right to start til late afternoon.  We saw one documentary feature - Sapelo - one shorts program - The Best Ships Are Friendships - and one narrative feature - The Last Days of Capitalism.  

Sapelo is a documentary about. . . well, that's a bit of a problem.  It starts out, it seemed, to be about the Black people who have been living on the island, a ferry ride from mainland Georgia,  for 200 years.  There are lots of pauses to just look at beautiful vistas of the island.  But it meanders into a story about two brothers, their grandmother.  How old are the boys?  Don't remember being told.  I do remember that an older brother was 14, so I'm guessing these two were maybe between 9 and 11.  The grandmother adopted the mother too.  Some of it feels like a reality show.  Some of it feels like an invasion of the kids' privacy, particularly as we watch one of the boys having anger management problems and there's talk of his medication.  He's wearing an ankle bracelet for a while and in the end he's been sent to a detention center.  By the end I felt like these boys were being exploited.  They weren't capable of giving consent.  Was it the grandmother who gave consent?  What was she told they would be filming?  

On the other hand, a unique way of life was being captured.  Well, the end of a unique way of life.  The boys may well treasure this intimate portrait of them when they are older.  But making it public doesn't feel right to me.  

What was the relationship between the Swiss filmmakers and the people on the island.  We never see from or hear about the film makers except near the beginning when one of the boys looks up at the camera and apologizes for his language

The Last Days of Capitalism -  Wow.  Just picked this from the website knowing nothing about it and we were totally absorbed by two actors - Sarah Rose Harper and Mike Faiola.  We had no idea where it was headed.  This was not your ordinary movie fare.  This is what I love about film festivals.  Will I wake up in the morning and wonder what I was thinking?  Not sure.  I just know that we were hooked til the very end.  Recommended.  (Not saying much about the content.  Just know that it is two people probing each other.  Drugs and alcohol and a fair amount of money are involved.)  My hat is off to writer/director Adam Mervis.  

All of the shorts were worth watching.  Grab My Hand: A Letter to My Dad was the one that stands out as visually striking and clever and beautiful and it was the right length for the story.  Nothing unnecessary.  I just don't know why they didn't call it Gatecheck.  Be sure to watch this one.  Camrus Johnson, thanks for this film.  Latchkeys was sweet - I mean that in the best way.

AIFF2020: Opening, Crescendo, Mazel Tov Cocktail, and Green Screens Of The Future

This is the second day of the Anchorage International Film Festival.  Last night we saw the opening ceremony, the opening shorts program, and then we watched Crescendo - a German feature about putting together a peace concert with young Jewish and Palestinian musicians.  I definitely recommend it.  It's a well made movie and the story line is both optimistic and realistic.  This movie was sponsored by the Anchorage Jewish Museum.  

Another German film - Mazel Tov Cocktail - is in the narrative shorts category.  I thought it was great!  As white folks in the US are learning, seems like we've been working on this forever, that each person of color is a unique individual and shouldn't be assumed to behave in some characteristic way, Mazel Too Cocktail looks at the world through the eyes of a Russian Jewish immigrant high school student in Germany as he confronts the many different stereotypes the people around him have of him.  This includes, positive ones, negative ones, from classmates, teachers, people on the street, and even his own parents and grandfather.  But what makes this short stand out is, well, everything.  It's a snappy, irreverent, well acted, well filmed, funny movie with a kick.  I highly recommend it.  

For as much as I've gotten used to Zoom and Jitsi and Skype and Netflix, watching the film festival movies with my wife at home in the living room, just felt wrong.  None of the familiar AIFF faces walking the aisles and lobbies to greet and compare notes with.  None of the audience reactions to the movies. None of the passing exchanges of tips about good movies.  I even miss getting into the cold car and driving from one venue to the other.  (Well, not that much.)

And if people do see great movies, please leave recommendations in the comments.

On the other hand - all the movies are available all the time.  You can watch what you want when you want to.  As many times as you want.  I hope that means I don't miss those hidden gems I went to because there was nothing else in that time slot.  

And we're supposed to get lots of film maker interviews and Q&A's though I'm not quite sure how we're going to figure out when these will happen.  But figuring out new habits keeps us young (or drives us crazy.)

And I thought I'd add the YouTube video I accidentally found the other day on the future (demise) of green screens.  A little behind the scenes of movie making.  

Now that people are using Zoom, more people know about green screens - the green background that allows you to supply the people and objects in front, with a totally different background.  It's called "The Volume" and consists of a wrap around background.  Just watch the video.  It's cool.

AIFF2020 - Some World, North American, and US Premieres In Anchorage

 I got a list of films that had been tagged as premiering in Anchorage with the caveat that they may be shown somewhere recently.  So I've tried to check.  (There are so many films to try to highlight before the festival and so little time left - the Festival begins Friday - that this seems as good an angle as any.)

First I started with the world premieres.  Five were listed.  

Pink Violet

I'd recommend folks check out the Pink Violet website.  There's lots of information there and a chat box which I used to see if we really will be the world premiere.  The answer was:

"Hi Steve! Yes, this is the world premiere of Pink Violet. We did place at another festival (SER Film Festival), but because of COVID they were unable to screen the films. So, awards were announced on their website."

When I asked if they had anything to say to Anchorage film goers, they responded:

"Yes! We’re super excited to be part of AIFF 2020 as the film was made in Alaska by young Alaskan filmmakers. Pink Violet was made as part of UAF’s Department of Theatre and Film courses, Film Production I & Film Production II, where over the course of a semester, students take on key positions and crew roles to shoot a short film. We look forward to seeing all of the other selected films!"

This is an interview with the film makers: 

• Jade Chase, film director and Air Force Veteran  
• Nancy Napier.  Boise State professor and co-author of author of the book, The Bridge Generation of Vietnam: Spanning Wartime to Boomtime  on which the film is based
• Dau Thuy Ha (MBA, ’99) book's co-author.  She zooms in from Hanoi.  
• David di Donato (I think that's right) who filmed much of the movie and did the editing.   

This film was on my list of premieres and I was checking to confirm that we would have the world premier showing.  It turns out that's not the case.  It was shown Nov 17 at the Chi-Town Multi-Cultural Film Festival in Chicago.  

But we'll be among the first to see the film.  If you know any Vietnam vets (Jade, the director works with vets) or friends from Vietnam you might let them know that this film looks at the generation of Vietnamese who experienced the war and have since experienced how Vietnam has changed.  

The interviewer focuses on how the movie was put together - how they connected with the author, how they translated from the book, how they dealt with going to Vietnam and connecting with the subjects, filming and editing technical questions, etc.  

You can see the trailer on the AIFF website.  

I'm going to put this up with just two films.  Each one takes a while to research and two is probably a decent number for people to read about anyway.  

Tickets are on sale for the festival.  You can buy $10 single film tickets or you can buy $100 festival passes.  Since you can watch films at any time between Dec. 4 8pm and December 13 pm online this year, the passes are easier to take advantage of.  

So Much To Blog About Yet So Little Time - Zooming, OLÉ, Winter, Justice, Dark Banners, Anchorage International Film Festival, Elitism

 I try not to blog about sensitive stuff quickly.  I want to get it as right as I can.  And now is a time when so many things are happening that most of the media (let alone a single blogger) has trouble focusing on any one enough to get to the root of the many particular problems.  

Zooming

Yesterday I was zooming from morning to night.  Probably the best as as a visiting grandfather resource in my granddaughter's class in the Seattle area.  I got to listen to two second graders read.  They did really well.  Then I had three Olé classes, Thomas Merton, Refugee Resettlement, and Alaska Trees and Shrubs. The last of the four class fall semester.  The last class is Friday's Alaska Native Perspectives.  All the classes have got my head buzzing with ideas.  Then my San Francisco grandkids via Jitsi, my son's preferred video conferencing program.  

I also wanted to give you a look at how incredibly beautiful Anchorage is during a cold spell when all the trees are encrusted white and the sun glows on them.  But suddenly the bluetooth connection between my phone and my laptop has failed.  I have to figure out how I moved photos before I used the Blue Tooth.  

Government At Cross Purposes

The LA Times reports this morning on the dropping of drug trafficking charges of the former Mexican defense chief. 

"The U.S. government moved Tuesday to drop drug trafficking and money-laundering charges against a former Mexican defense secretary, a stunning turnaround in a case that had deeply angered Mexican authorities."

Which makes me think about the last few days' readings in Black Banners.  He writes about how the US government agencies work at cross purposes.  One part doing one thing and then having another part of the government take it away.  His example looks at how the FBI and CIA were at cross purposes in interrogating al-Qaeda detainees.   Ali Soufan, the author is a Lebanese born, native Arabic speaking, who grew up in the US and became an FBI interrogator.  He writes about clashes between seasoned FBI interrogators and a new set of CIA contractors over how to interrogate al-Qaeda detainees.   Soufan's group, which has been tracking al-Qaeda since 1998 or so, believes in 

• developing a relationship with the suspects  
• through convincing the suspects they know all about them so there's no benefit in lying  
• treating the suspects decently which confounds the counter-interrogation prep al-Qaeda gave them
• and they open up and tell the interrogaters lots of valuable information

They've already had great successes with this methods following the USS Cole bombing in Yemen where they've gathered huge files of data on various al-Qaede members and allies along with locations of training camps and networks, and communication, funding, and training methods.  They use all this along with documents  they've captured in raids of al-Qaede safe-houses and hotel rooms.  In Soufan's telling, it doesn't take long to turn the al-Qaede members and allies, once they realize how much the FBI already knows about them and the FBI demonstrates they aren't the weak, stupid, and brutal Americans al-Qaeda has portrayed them as.  As I read this, it's clear that Soufan's Arabic fluency and his good people sense play a large role in their success.  [Here's a link to a Foreign Policy article that counters the campaign against Soufan when the original very redacted book came out in 2011.  The copy I'm reading is much expanded as lots of the material has since been declassified.  I was able to read most of the Foreign Policy  article before the paywall went up.]

But after 9/11 the CIA, which didn't have interrogation specialists, hires a guy Soufan calls Boris, to coordinate the CIA's interrogation.  They're in a black site in an unnamed country (some things are still classified, though he mentions a cobra in the bathroom which means it could easily be Thailand and the black site link says Abu Zubaydah was interrogated there.)  Boris is a psychology professor who is pushing harsh interrogation methods - what is to become known as Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT).  But the CIA at first didn't believe that the captive was in fact Abu Zubaydah, "America's first high-level detainee since 9/11."  So they didn't send anyone to interrogate him, even though Soufan had been told the CIA was in charge.  So this meant Soufan and his partner had about ten days to work with Abu Zubaydah on their own.  And they gained lots of information which was sent back to DC.  So the CIA got interested and Boris arrived.  He was now going to take over by stripping Abu Zubaydah naked, playing loud rock music 24/7, and depriving him of sleep for 24 hours, which would get him to talk instantly.  But they got no information from him in ten days.  Soufan writes, that the CIA interrogator would go in and ask Abu Zubaydah to tell him what he knew.  Abu Zubaydah would then say, "What do you want to know?" and the CIA guy would walk out.  In contrast, Soufan would ask Abu Zubaydah very specific questions that Soufan knew the answers to, and if AZ lied, Soufan would present evidence that he was lying.  In one example, he asks him if he knows the person in a picture.  Abu Zubaydah says no.  Soufan then plays an audio tape of Abu Zubaydad talking to the person.)  After a week of no information, Soufan is allowed to interrogate again and gets lots more information.

But the CIA are in charge and they have bought into EIT as their interrogation method.  And, I guess, if you don't know anything about the person you're interrogating and you don't speak Arabic, torture is an easier approach.  But Soufan argues in the book, that replacing the FBI's technique with EIT meant the loss of valuable information and as the book's subtitle says, this is "How Torture Derailed the War on Terror after 9/11."

So, how, you're asking, is the related to the headline about dropping the Mexican drug charges?  Well, it appears that the Bush administration wanted certain information from the interrogations that Soufan wasn't getting.  Like, proof that Iraq and al-Qaeda were working together.  Like proof of WMD's (I guess there might be readers who need me to spell that out - Weapons of Mass Destruction.)  Soufan says he didn't get that information because it wasn't true.  But the CIA got those confessions, according to Soufan, who also quotes a Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility Report to support his personal experience, to detainees telling the CIA interrogators what they wanted to hear to stop the torture.  

So I'm guessing this Mexican case dismissal is due to funding between different departments that have different objectives, just as Soufan so high-value detainees snatched away from him because the intelligence he was getting didn't match the administration's agenda.  One part of the US is working hard to prosecute this drug trafficker and another part has interests that they believe will be harmed by pursuing this case.  And one day, an Ali Soufan of this case, will write a book telling the story.  

Getting Oliver and Jacob to Agree

A recent post  seems to have accomplished something that hasn't happened before - regular commenters Jacob and Oliver are in agreement that I'm being elitist because I mentioned that only 34% of the US adult population has a bachelors degree.  So I need to clarify that too.  

Individualism vs. Communalism and US Culture

And I'm also thinking about one of the characteristics of "United States culture" is a form of extreme individualism.  This issue came up in the Alaska Native Perspectives class where we also agreed in the that American refers to people in North, Central, and South America, not just the US.  That's wording I try to use here on the blog anyway, though sometimes American slips through.   I think it's part of the complex explanation of Trump's appeal and of the anti mask wearing nonsense,  as well as the inability of people to understand how White Privilege works.  

Anchorage International Film Festival

AND this morning pass holders for the Anchorage International Film Festival were invited to a Zoom orientation on how the virtual conference will work and a little tour of the website.  The Festival starts in a couple of weeks - December 4.  The virtual festival will have some distinct benefits over the in person festival:

1. you can watch the films whenever you want during the 9 days of the festival and as often as you want
2. you don't have to be in Anchorage to participate
3. there will be more sessions with film makers because they don't have to travel to Anchorage

So I'd urge Alaskans all over the state to consider getting a festival pass ($100) which allows you unlimited viewing of all the films and filmmaker events  OR pick out a few films you want to watch and buy individual film passes for $10 each.  There are a total of 111 films.  That includes shorts.  I think that for shorts a single $10 pass will get you to a shorts program which is a collection of shorts.  

In any case, people in Alaska outside of Anchorage who normally can't get to the festival,  and in the US, I urge you to check out the festival.  I asked festival co-director John Gamache this morning if anyone anywhere can get pass and he said yes.  There will be no restrictions for US viewers, and few restrictions for overseas viewers.  He did mention that one of the filmmakers was blocking showing of the film in the home country.  And I'd mention for my Canadian readers, that the country of Canada is a sponsor of the festival this year and there are eight Canadian feature films.  Here's the link:

Anchorage International Film Festival 2020

This opens to the main page with a link to buy passes.  But on top is a link to see the films that are showing if you want to check that out first.

John also said he'd put in "COUNTRY" as one of the searchable categories for people who might be interested in films in a particular language.  I'll try to post on what countries have films in the festival when that feature gets added.  

So all this, plus updating my daily COVID page, gets between what I'm thinking about and those thoughts turning into blog posts.   

AIFF2020 - Anchorage International Film Festival 2020 - Q&A With Co-Festivial Director John Gamache

I've been blogging the Anchorage International Film Festival since 2007.  Usually, by now (mid-November)  I've got descriptions of some of the films up already.  But tracking COVID-19 in Alaska daily, has distracted me.  But I finally checked out this year's festival website and emailed the staff.  John Gamache, one of the festival co-directors, responded fully, so I thought I'd just present what he said to you.  

I'd said that I hoped they were all well and I knew things must be crazy as they switched over to a

Gamache photo from AIFF2020 website

virtual festival.  Here's John's response along with my questions, which were based on the websites images of 27 films, without any categories.  

Hope you're doing well. And yes, it's been crazy busy. Switching to an online format is about four times more work than presenting the live festival, and that's when I have 2-4 people helping me, so it's a lot. Here are some answers to your questions. . .

1.  I see 27 films. [There are more up now]  Are there categories?

Our ticketing company just switched some things on our website so we're still building that out, but when we're done it will show the usual categories and they will be color-coded and also labeled. We have 14 shorts programs this year. You can already filter by category on the website though. 

2.  No animation at all?  

There are 15 animated short films. They will all be in short film programs, as usual. 

3.  Are all the films eligible for awards?

Almost. Only two feature films were curated and will not be in competition. Crescendo and Rafiki. All other films are eligible for awards in the usual categories, and we've added a Horror category award this year as well, the jury for which is AIFF alum Greg Ivan Smith.

4.  There are only three staff members listed.  What about the board?

Still building out the website, but we've sent out requests to all board members (we have two new ones since the board was last on the site) and are waiting to get all that info back so we can add it.

5.  It mentions discussions with the film makers, so I guess there will be more up on the website, right?

Yes, we're in the process of scheduling all of the Q&As and other live filmmaker panels, discussions, and workshops. Typically we just have the attending filmmakers walk on stage after a film is over. In the virtual world we're coordinating with over 11 filmmakers, producers, distributors in about ten time zones. It's quite an undertaking. :)

6.  What did I miss that I should have asked that people should know?

I think when you activate your pass and preview the virtual festival you might think of more questions. The look and feel of it is very familiar to anyone who has Netflix or Xfinity OnDemand. We'll also have a Roku channel set up so people can more easily watch on their TVs. The option to cast to their TV using ChromeCast or any Apple-compatible devices works, too. 

As you know, on average each year we have between 30-40 visiting filmmakers. Doing a virtual festival means that filmmakers, cast and crew from every film can potentially participate. As an example, at Woods Hole we average between 120-140 visiting filmmakers each year. This year's virtual festival involved over 300 filmmakers and every feature film in the festival had a live Q&A. We'll see what our numbers are this year, but we're hoping to at least triple the number of filmmakers "attending" and interacting with the audience. 

• Passes are on sale now. It's still just $100 for an all access pass - which is $10/day and less than $1 per film. People also have the option of buying the Household All Access Pass for $150 if they have multiple people in their hime who will be watching and want to do a little extra to support the festival. All the live filmmaker Q&As will be easily findable and accessible through the virtual platform for passholders as well. So to sum it up: The pass is the best way to experience the festival.
• Tickets for individual films and shorts programs will go on sale, Friday, December 4. Individual tickets are still $10.

So there you have my first peek an this year's festival.

So I bought my household pass and there are lots of films up.  Here's a teaser.  

•  top two are narrative features, 
• the center two are documentary features, 
• the bottom two are narrative shorts.

These were just randomly chosen.  Well, probably not random.  I thought the bridge picture was eye-catching. But otherwise they're random.  I know nothing about them or any of the others at this point. 

Meanwhile I've created a tab for AIFF2020 where you can find an annotated index of all these posts as they go up.  Here's the link to AIFF2020.  Blogger has a glitch right now (their help page says, four days ago, that they're working on it.  The glitch is preventing me from putting up the AIFF2020 tab on the top of the page just below the header.  But the link seems to work.