Who will win the Palme at Cannes? [2018 edition]

Also:

OPENING NIGHT FILM
Everybody Knows, dir: Asghar Farhadi

SPECIAL SCREENINGS
Dead Souls, Wang Bing
10 Years In Thailand, dirs: Aditya Assarat, Wisit Sasanatieng, Chulayarnon Sriphol & Apichatpong Weerasethakul
Pope Francis – A Man Of His Word, dir: Wim Wenders
La Traversée, dir: Romain Goupil
To The Four Winds, dir: Michel Toesca
Le Grand Cirque Mystique, dir: Carlos Diegues
The State Against Mandela And The Others, dirs: Nicolas Champeaux & Gilles Porte

MIDNIGHT SCREENINGS
Arctic, dir: Joe Penna
The Spy Gone North, dir: Yoon Jong-Bing

OUT OF COMPETITION
Le Grand Bain, dir: Gilles Lellouche
Solo: A Star Wars Story, dir: Ron Howard

UN CERTAIN REGARD
Long Day’s Journey Into Night, Bi Gan
Little Tickles, dir: Andréa Bescond & Eric Métayer
Sofia, dir: Meyem Benm’Barek
Border, dir: Ali Abbasi

Sextape, dir: Antoine Desrosières
The Gentle Indifference Of The World, dir: Adilkhan Yerzhanov
El Angel, dir: Luis Ortega
In My Room, dir: Ulrich Kohler
The Harvesters, dir: Etienne Kallos
My Favorite Fabric, dir: Gaya Jiji
Friend, dir: Wanuri Kahiu
Euphoria, dir: Valeria Golino
Angel Face, dir: Vanessa Filho
Girl, dir: Lukas Dhont
Manto, dir: Nandita Das

Sincerely hope I don't have to wait three years again to see the new Zhang-Ke

There's probably a few more films to come. Lars von Trier, Mike Leigh and Laszlo Nemes notably missing. I think I might be rooting for Panahi, though.

apparently the Farhadi is actually in competition as well as opening? seeing differing reports on this.

snapped up by Netflix and kept out of the fest:

Roma, dir: Alfonso Cuaron
Norway, dir: Paul Greengrass
They'll Love Me When I'm Dead, dir: Morgan Neville
Hold the Dark, dir: Jeremy Saulnier
The Other side of the Wind, dir: Orson Welles

Yeah, the Farhadi was announced as being in competition as well.

TODOS LO SABEN (EVERYBODY KNOWS) by Asghar Farhadi #Competition #Cannes2018

— Festival de Cannes (@Festival_Cannes) April 12, 2018

Thrilled for Ryusuki Hamaguchi, and gonna throw him my vote.

Having options missing from this poll is a proud tradition of my own anyway.

Nothing has heartened me so much, this long late winter, as watching Cannes bitch-slap Netflix.

After finding out that Hamaguchi has made a film called Touching the Skin of Eeriness, yeah, I might vote for him as well.

By my count, three female directors; seems they could've done better than that.

Actually, tho I voted Ryusuki Hamaguchi, I fully expect Jia Zhang-ke to win. Didn't realize he hadn't won yet.

We won't know all the women they turned down until Quinzaine publishes their program, but rumours said Claire Denis and Mia Hansen-Løve had films ready, and three films is just obviously bullshit. Fremaux said that they'd never have 'positive discrimination' for women directors, to which I just want to say: 'Yeah, but you also programmed The Last Face by Sean Penn, making it clear you obviously don't program for purely artistic reasons, so shut the fuck up you old blind sexist piece of shit'.

I might be a bit tired by the Cannes bullshit in general. Should probably relax.

Well put.

wow! cannot wait for that new Jia Zhang-Ke movie and the Nemes Habsburg period movie looks ace as well.

Gave Godard a sentimental vote, thought perhaps the Cannes jury might too.

rooting for Zhangke, and not only cause China hasn't had a win since '93

Which was also China's only Palme ... which it shared with another film.

Another country that's only gotten one Palme so far: Iran.

still haven't seen Mountains May Depart because our local arthouse film club are wankers

gonna have to get a DVD i think

Holding out on voting till I can at least see a trailer, or anything, from Nadine Labaki's film. Though the heart says Panahi.

Excited for new JLG!!

Gave Godard a sentimental vote, thought perhaps the Cannes jury might too.

― Ward Fowler, Thursday, April 12, 2018 10:04 AM (three hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Last time he showed at Cannes he came with what was perhaps one of the most mindblowing of all his films so wouldn't put it past the old maestro to come with the goods once again.

yeah me too i voted for godard

while i'm here what are some other Godard films that are like EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF / SLOW MOTION? I fucking love that movie but am not excited by the early work. WEEKEND maybe?

Hmmm...none of his films is like the other (to me) but maybe try "Passion"?

If I'm counting right, 8/18 are in the main competition for the first time, and 4 of those are making their first appearances at Cannes. Nobody has won the Palme d’Or before. Only 2 of the directors have won Grand Prix (Rohrwacher once, Garrone twice). And it looks like Yomeddine is AB Shawky’s first feature-length movie!

Yeah, there's a whole lot of new names, and some of them, like Panahi and Hamaguchi, are legitimately exciting! Others seem like typical overhype, and Pawlikowski would be who I'd put my money on if we were guessing who will be booed out. But still. It's also one of the most diverse years in a long time, with seven directors from Asia and one from Africa. So that's good! Otoh, it kinda makes the lack of women even more galling...

Where's Claire Denis?

I've heard a rumour that she dislikes being in Competition, which is why she's so often in the Quinzaine, but I don't know.

ah, that makes sense. it seems her sci-fi film is just about ready to go though.

Also, my own completely unfounded hunch - just based on all the gossip surrounding equivalent figures in the Danish film-world - that an organization with so much gross stuff going on as Cannes, including sexist dress codes, constant photoshopping of women, lack of inclusion and bullshit reasons for lack of inclusion, films by Woody Allen, etc, that there's probably a lot more grossness beneath the surface, and many female French directors just don't want to participate.

Guess who's back, back again

https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/the-wrap/article/Cannes-Is-Ready-to-Welcome-Back-Lars-von-Trier-12840160.php

meanwhile...

The Cannes Film Festival has, for example, been reluctant to place her films in the main competition. Bastards from 2013 played in the Un Certain Regard sidebar. Let the Sunshine In opened down the Croisette at Directors’ Fortnight. No Denis film has competed for the Palme d’Or since Chocolat. (She tells me High Life will not be ready for this year’s event.)

“I take what I am given,” she says. “I am always considering maybe my films are not good enough. Maybe they are boring. Maybe there is something Cannes doesn’t like. I never asked them, by the way. I don’t care.”

On average, how many films get added to the comp lineup after the initial announcement yearly?

between one and three iirc

God, Fremaux is such a sanctimonious prick. This whole 'persona non grata' thing, pretending it's real, while happily programming Polanski and having Woody Allen open the show every third year. The sooner the filmworld is rid of this art-less ass-hole, the better.

Fremaux: Lars, I think your film is better suited for out of competition

Lars Von Trier: I refuse. My film is great. It's worthy of competing for the Palme.

Fremaux: There are like 5 women on the jury and one of them is Ava Duvernay

Lars Von Trier: Alright out of comp it is

— C.J. Prince (@cj_prin) April 18, 2018

Added to the official competiton are Knife + Heart from Yann Gonzalez and starring Vanessa Paradis, Akya by Kazak director Sergey Dvortsevoy, and The Wild Pear Tree by former Palme winner (and a noted absence from the first lineup announcement) Nuri Bilge Ceylan.

Gilliam will close.

OK, the previous film from the brother of M83 looks nuts.

Around midnight, a young couple and their transvestite maid prepare for an orgy. Their guests will be The Slut, The Star, The Stud and The Teen.

uhhhhhhh

Fuck Lars von trier

Jeffrey Wells regrets booking his trip bcz there isn't enough Bennett Miller-level fare

LVT is such a shithead but I confess I like almost all of his movies

Me too Simon, just bothered by the Bjork stuff

I adore melancholia

To be fair, those allegations could have been about any of the Danish director she worked with.

what?

It's a gag, son (cause she didn't use trier's name)

ahh

Lars von Trier is one of the most important filmmakers of the last fifty years, and his aesthetic achievements are perpetually underrated. But it can't really be separated from his shitheadedness, in one way his whole filmography is him dealing with the fact that he is a shithead. And at least it seems as if he really has tried to deal with it, instead of the fake self awareness of a shithead like Woody Allen.

Yeah I agree with that. Despite all his empty (though occasionally funny) public provocations, his films strike me as pretty earnest for the most part.

Yet so masochistic. I’ll watch something like Breaking the Waves (which even among ppl that hate him is generally well regarded, maybe more than any other of his films?) and it just seems like an exercise in torturing his characters & his audience for its own sake. I am a fan though. At least he’s interesting.

He does a lot of really earnest interviews as well, though they're perhaps rarely translated. The whole nazi-thing developed from a pretty interesting interview he gave about romantic aesthetics. The Dogme manifesto had a lot of political thoughts before the easy-to-understand rules. He runs his mouth, though.

I also think he suffers from a few of his most earnest films being among his least well known. Like Epidemic, where Lars himself plays an idealistic doctor who ends up spreading the very disease he was trying to research. Or the Boss of it All, which is totally just about filmmaking and the directors responsibility.

On the same page as you Fred but worried that my love of his work might make me ignore genuinely harmful shit in his life

Like it's not clear but he could well be genuinely guilty of awful behaviour

I don't know, I think most of his sins are well known, and I don't think it's anything like the Dylan Farrow situation, where the grotesque adoration of Woody Allen has had a harmful impact. I mean, Diane Keaton sang the Girl Scout song in his honor at the 2014 Golden Globes...

https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/5603-the-horse-race-begins

Lars von Trier is one of the most important filmmakers of the last fifty years

that's it, lead with the lolz

I really liked The Wonders, will be interested to hear what Rohrwacher's new film is like

Well, this site (linked in the Criterion post) gives it the best odds to win the Palme. Based on who knows.

https://www.jigsawlounge.co.uk/film/reviews/cannes2018/

Neil Young is great, and he managed to predict Nuri Bilge Ceylan correctly that one time. But no, a woman is not going to be allowed to win at Cannes, anyone think Denis Villeneuve will agree to that? He made a film about a misogynistic mass murder that ended with a severely wounded woman telling the male protagonist 'it's not your fault'.

Lmao I was an extra in that but have never seen it

Lol. It was kinda always shit, but time has NOT been kind to it.

not sure about likelihoods, but Lazzaro Felice looks super ambitious to me

I also loved Secret Sunshine and Poetry, so I'm looking forward to Lee's new film Burning

Jia or Farhadi or Hamaguchi or GTFO

Panahi > Farhadi and it's not even close.

Re Lars earnestness - nymphomaniac is about as tone deaf as it gets - it’s 3 hours too long

Nah, it's a flawed masterpiece

it works v well as a culminating work, which has me worried for the new one tbh

Jia or Farhadi or Hamaguchi or Panahi or GTFO

I've now seen three movies by Christophe Honoré, and to my surprise two of them turned out to be musicals! I'm wondering if his new one is too

Ehrlich said he thought that Farhadi's Everybody Knows was his best since A Separation

Faint praise

Convinced.

Farhadi is one of those directors, like Fatih Akin and - sad to say because I used to like him a lot - Christian Mungiu, where whatever aesthetic ideas they had at one point has become calcified and they're basically just great scripts. It's doubly sad because they're both taking up space that could go to good image-makers, but we're sorta also missing out on some very good novelists.

Most directors -- the good ones anyway -- have a pretty strict set of aesthetic ideas and things they think about, either in the content of their scripts, their politics and how some of these are transmitted visually. So no Mungiu isn't taking up space, the execution is still there w/ Graduation

Nah, it's crap.

So far the competition seems a bit so-so. The Godard sounds predictably great, but I'm not that excited by the rest. The Serebrennikov turns out to be a biopic about Viktor Tsoi from the Russian band Kino, but it sounds quite pedestrian and way too pleasant for it's subject. The 8 hour Wang Bing about Chinese death camps sounds absolutely amazing, on the other hand.

im not sure I've the fortitude for an 8 hour documentary about death camps in the gobi desert

idk this could be great but honestly the prospect of sitting through a pessimistic feature-length screed writing off the future from the POV of an old-ass dude sounds like torture to me sorry

http://www.indiewire.com/2018/05/the-image-book-review-jean-luc-godard-cannes-1201963343/

I'd honestly much rather have full on fatalism than the faux concerned cynicism of someone like Bigelow or Villeneuve. And politically, it can't really be any stupider than his Dziga Vertov films, no? More Godardian montage-essay is a-ok with me. This new short was good as well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO5Y6wlPn5k
It's an attack on Macron, who sent riot forces to handle protesters at the Notre-Dame-des-Landes (NDDL) designating it a Zone a Defendre (ZAD) or 'defence zone'. Or at least I think it is.

i am very excited about this film

ASH IS PUREST WHITE: perhaps the finest “stop snitching” film to ever come out of China. Makes a clean companion with MMD in its elliptical timeline, its charting of wide scale change, and its delightful disco dancing.

— Charles Bramesco (@intothecrevasse) May 11, 2018

now THAT I can rock with

xpost Friends in the know have told me the Godard short is a fake :/

haven't seen any of these

after what Jeff Wells wrote about the Honore film (he walked out of it cuz it was "cummy") i will probably punch him in the face if i ever see his stupid mug again.

hate that motherfucker so much

it's like Rex Reed went into the Black Lodge and came out a hetero aspect-ratio nitwit

A world where a Jeff Wells gets to cover Cannes has already gone thru the Black Lodge.

Nah, it's crap.

― Frederik B, Friday, 11 May 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Like I said, convinced.

https://d1nslcd7m2225b.cloudfront.net/Pictures/1200xany/4/9/0/1282490_Jury-Grid-DAY-5.jpg

And here are the Chinese critics

#Cannes2018 Our Chinese critics didn’t enjoy Girls of the Sun pic.twitter.com/7mktWT706a

— Chinese Critics Grid (@CriticsGrid) May 13, 2018

Update on the Screen International list

We have a new leader atop the @Screendaily critics jury grid. #Cannes2018 pic.twitter.com/hyM5f4Sm2j

— Tim Grierson (@TimGrierson) May 13, 2018

I've never seen (or even previously heard of) any Rohrwacher's stuff before but this sounds neat

http://variety.com/2018/film/reviews/happy-as-lazzaro-review-1202808832/

Both Corpo Celeste and The Wonders are really great. She is a major new filmmaker. Alba Rohrwachers sister :)

I've been trying not to read too much about Lazzaro Felice so as not to spoil the surprise. The Wonders was lovely and memorable. Corpo Celeste is available on the library streaming app Kanopy, so maybe I'll watch that this week

the trailer for the LVT is less than encouraging tbh

Kore-eda's Shoplifters is also getting pretty great reviews. Sounds like it has echoes of Nobody Knows, my favorite film of his so far

After the Storm was the best Kore-eda in years, so I could actually sorta believe he recovered his mojo.

An outlying opinion, but the best tweet:

Unfortunately the new Spike Lee often reminds me of Three Billboards or the Starsky & Hutch w/ Owen Wilson.

— Miriam Bale (@mimbale) May 14, 2018

Are you Alba Rohrwacher, Alba? Because if so, cool!

Yeahhh I'd be happy to be wrong but I'm concerned LVT might have tripped over a little too far into troll mode

So in Lars Von Trier's film premiering at Cannes tomorrow the male characters have names and the women characters are LADY 1, 2, 3 and Simple. I was worried this year's festival was too feminist so I am relieved. #Cannes71 #cannes2018

— Another Gaze: A Feminist Film Journal (@anothergaze) May 14, 2018

It's the second time in 25 years that LvT has a male protagonist, and he has used nameless characters before. He is not trolling.

Lvt's entire career is built on trolling ppl.

Glad to help you understand.

Yeah, I've written about him for years, interviewed his collaborators, he is not trolling.

he's too frequently a clown (and not a good one)

The weird thing about LVT is that people seem much more keen on reviewing him than reviewing his films. Maybe it's that fear of being fooled that does this.

he's in his films

Yeah, I've written about him for years, interviewed his collaborators, he is not trolling.

― Frederik B, Tuesday, May 15, 2018 5:47 AM (one hour ago)

You will forgive some of those on the thread for engaging in a little consideration of the source here.

How so?

Well, calling LVT not a troll is a pretty good place to start.

And end, apparently.

I'm cool with that.

Well, let me oblige you: Lars von Trier is not a troll.

The fact that he has worked with ppl and that you've written about him and talked to him doesn't mean he isn't a troll.

It means you haven't picked up on it.

Not to make a big thing out of it but I like/love a lot of his movies (and think he's done some of his best work recently) but I wouldn't deny he has trollish tendencies at the very least.

*as I like/love etc

Someone who spends as much time on every detail of his films as Lars von Trier does is not a troll. His composers constantly map out everything with him, and rearranges and records the classical pieces he uses so that they fit the film - doubling instruments, changing instrumentation. It's like the difference between Milo and Jordan Peterson. 'Maps of Meaning' is idiotic and gibberish, but it's not the work of a troll.

This might be better discussed on a dedicated LVT thread but I don't see how meticulousness precludes trollishness

What Simon said (Dogville is clearly a key 21st century movie, I think). Maybe we're disagreeing on the definition of troll here. One can put a lot of effort and care into a piece of art, but if the outcome is intended to be confrontational, that's the work of a troll, no matter how skilled.

Lawful evil, as opposed to chaotic evil

confrontational? like, dada?

Dogville was a key 3 hours of pain in my life

The definition of trolling is just provoking to provoke. Spending so much time on stuff nobody would even consciously pick up on is something else. LvT is provocative, and runs his mouth, but he is not a troll by any definition of the term. He is obsessed with power and violence, and constantly asking whether or not a director should be manipulative and emotionally violent towards his audience - and often, but not always, saying yes. But that's different.

And yeah, reducing 'trolling' to just being confrontational is... well, sad? Would you call 'dada' trolling? Bertolt Brecht? Stravinsky?

no wonder E likes de Palma, someone who confronts nothing, ever...

I don't like either of you.

right NOW, you mean.

The blackly comic thriller, which stars Matt Dillon and Uma Thurman, follows the murder spree of a serial killer over the course of several decades. Advance word on the film suggested that it would feature scenes of sadistic violence and brutality, with Cannes director Thierry Frémaux saying that it featured “a subject so controversial” that it could only appear in an out-of-competition slot at the festival.

That advance billing seems to have been lived up to, with Variety’s Ramin Setoodeh reporting more than 100 people leaving the cinema prematurely due to the film’s “disgusting” content. “Gross. Pretentious. Vomitive. Torturous. Pathetic,” wrote one attendee on Twitter, while entertainment reporter Roger Friedman described it as a “vile movie” that “should not have been made”.

The scene which seems to have prompted the majority of walkouts is one in which Dillon’s character shoots two children at a family picnic in the head with a rifle. In another Keogh’s character is seen having her breast sliced off, while a flashback scene shows a child removing a duckling’s leg with a pair of pliers. Archive footage from concentration camps is also shown.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/may/15/vomitive-pathetic-lars-von-trier-film-prompts-mass-walkouts-at-cannes

http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/6a00d83451b8c369e2014e8887d3a6970d.gif

I'm just doubting anything can be as horrifying as the toughest scenes of Antichrist and Nymphomaniac (five hour version), and those descriptions don't really change my mind. I'm more worried that it's just a sad retread of Nymphomaniac with a violent man in the lead. If there's one really bad thing LvT constantly does, it's repeating himself. Manderlay is pathetic, but it's far from the worst offender. IMO.

A lot of critics were fairly pissed at those tweeting walkouts, though. The festival scheduled the press screening on the morning after the galla screening, and so journalists got scooped by people who didn't even stay to the - allegedly pretty wild - end. Not that it has anything to do with LvT, but the changes Cannes is making are pathetic.

Wait, it's by far the worst offender, it's just not the only one :)

Are you Alba Rohrwacher, Alba? Because if so, cool!

― Frederik B, Monday, 14 May 2018 22:11 (yesterday)

Sadly no.

Looking forward to Happy as Lazzaro now:

Also, I'm sorry but Lazzaro has the exact gait and demanor of Dougie in TWIN PEAKS: THE RETURN and once I noticed that I could not unsee it.

— Jessica Kiang (@jessicakiang) May 14, 2018

I don't know why I've got so into following Cannes this year. I made a Twitter list of people there tweeting about it, in case anyone wants to use it. It's quite fun monitoring the reactions just after a premiere:

https://twitter.com/NickyD/lists/cannes-2018

a strange detail in Peter Bradshaw's review makes me want to see it so I can see this artefact:

There is supposedly a place called “Carlson’s Supermarket” near one of these very remote chalets, and although we don’t see this store, we see its brown bag with its logo. I don’t think I have ever seen a more obviously faked artefact in a film in my life.

re the LVT, obv.

Someone who spends as much time on every detail of his films as Lars von Trier does is not a troll. His composers constantly map out everything with him, and rearranges and records the classical pieces he uses so that they fit the film - doubling instruments, changing instrumentation. It's like the difference between Milo and Jordan Peterson. 'Maps of Meaning' is idiotic and gibberish, but it's not the work of a troll.

― Frederik B, Tuesday, 15 May 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is nonsense, btw. Under this definition no auteur could ever be a troll. You are confusing someone who spends time typing stuff out in the dark web with someone who makes films for a living. Just because the former supposedly takes less time (although seeing people apparently argue for hours upon hours you'd think wasting enormous amounts of time and energy comes with the job) doesn't mean that's the only thing to trolling.

And LvT is much more of a troll than a provocateur. The latter actually spends time thinking about things and formulating matter that makes an apperance over and over again across a filmography, as a theme. That's Haneke for me. Von Trier doesn't think stuff through, nor does he have any discipline to expand any of it, so that leaves him with these weird pronouncements in interviews like 'Hitler had a hard time' or whatever. Just your usual free speech neighbourhood warrior. For someone who attacks Cannes as being un-supportive of women it says volumes you are defending LvT.

Having said that the guy has made some good films. You can be a troll and make some good films.

Just trying to think of anytime I've been impressed about the score in a LvT film and that was Bjork's soundtrack for Dancer in the Dark.

We know how that ended for her.

Coming vainly back to the poll, Under the Silver Lake seemed a good bet going in. Now, not so much.

Von Trier doesn't think stuff through, nor does he have any discipline to expand any of it, so that leaves him with these weird pronouncements in interviews like 'Hitler had a hard time' or whatever.

This was the last of several interviews where he talked about his own problems with embracing romantic aesthetics, Wagner, etc. He definitely thought it through, and just because you don't realize it doesn't mean it's not there.

The English translation is not online anymore, but put this through google translate: https://www.dfi.dk/omdfi/det-eneste-formildende-er-jorden-gar-under

Your male feminist has logged on and he's defending Lars von Trier.

Yes google translate will pluck out whatever is in Lars' empty head.

Since we're still doing this, one of the only interesting film pieces the AV Club ever published

https://film.avclub.com/tomorrow-sex-will-be-good-again-nymphomaniac-s-sex-neg-1798267500/amp

Re UNDER THE SILVER LAKE

I could not hate UNDER THE SILVER LAKE more. A complete turd.

— Miriam Bale (@mimbale) May 16, 2018

Accidental question mark there.

Being a feminist, you still have to be true to yourself. Lars von Trier is a great artist, just as Rack City is a great song. It's a stupid line of attack. Also, I don't automatically defend Lars von Trier, on the contrary, the fight against Zentropas position in Denmark is a very real fight that I've participated in in very real ways and gotten very real harassment in return. That does not change the fact that Lars von Trier is a great artist.

Also:

David Robert Mitchell has talent to burn, but he’s burning it. UNDER THE SILVER LAKE (aka Incoherent Vice) is a bloated masturbatory mess of Lynch ‘n Pynchon. Should play well with the incel crowd. #Cannes2018

— Jonathan Romney (@JonathanRomney) May 16, 2018

xpost

Cannes and American films. They want them so bad, and they so often flop completely.

Loooool at "Incoherent Vice"

Yeah, that's a good one.

FWIW, https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/the-house-that-jack-built

It looks like Long Day’s Journey Into Night by Bi Gan (un certain regard) is getting really positive reviews. It apparently has a single 55-minute long 3D segment that was shot as one take!

I thought his first film Kaili Blues was great

Lee-Chang Dong's Burning is getting rave first reactions.

xpost please tell me that's an O'Neill 3-D sequence

lol I think I read that the story has nothing to do with the play

xp ^glad to hear about Burning! It seems like a lot more of the films in competition are being highly praised this year compared with the recent past. I don’t know if it’s just that I’m paying more attention

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi6Kw7V8gXk

I hasn't read about the new LvT film till just now, it sounds utterly attrocious:

http://www.pajiba.com/film_reviews/this-is-not-a-review-of-lars-von-triers-the-house-that-jack-built.php?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

btwn the pans and the Slant rave it seems clear to me that his fans and detractors process film in totally irreconcilable ways

Yeah, one group watches the film, and one leaves halfway and still writes about it.

Is Asghar Farhadi a troll?

I guess Farhadi wrote that shit in 3 hours including lunch and toilet breaks. Trolling of the highest level. #EverybodyKnows #Cannes2018

— Ali Benz (@Alibenzkr) May 16, 2018

To follow on from what you've just said and this, from the slant piece:

But it also doesn’t seem unreasonable to suggest, at least on evidence of The House That Jack Built, that von Trier might encourage these conversations.

Actually you'd say he shuts off all conversation. So that quote is unreasonable.

And what else shuts off conversation? Why now, trolling does. xps

I don't begrudge people not wanting to engage w. LvT or his movies on the grounds of his real-life actions and words - we all have our limits and allowances or lack thereof when it comes to that sort of thing - but I agree w/ the Slant review that he is pretty clearly empathetic towards his heroines

any more word on the Godard?

Its perfectly reasonable to leave halfway through and write about it - Caspar got enough of an idea about it. Its probably the only review of the film you'll remember.

Lol, okay, that should clear up how little we need to care about your opinions on cinema.

The Other side of the Wind, dir: Orson Welles

Wait what netflix has this?! Is it actually done already?

(Many xps)

I don't begrudge anyone for not wanting to engage with LvT, but then just don't go see the film. It's not even in competition. Going to a serial killer film and then acting shocked! shocked! when it's violent is supremely silly.

lol, don't go and see the film is just what LvT would want - quit the hero worship routine Fred

https://img.memecdn.com/go-home-kitty-youre-drunk_o_848180.gif

Wait what netflix has this?! Is it actually done already?

Apparently they're putting the finishing touches on it now. I'd expect it later this year.

haha I didn't expect any response from you. Pathetic. xp

My new theory is that xyzzzz actually *is* Lars Von Trier.

lol

Caspar made a similar kind of point in that review that I alluded to above wrt Haneke - the violence in LvT's films rarely does anything much, there are no layers, it doesn't use any of its potential to open up anything. That might be the contract.

Fred is just bothered whether the reviewer dutifully sat through it all.

xp = haha Fred doesn't love and worship me Alba. He doesn't even listen to my cinema opinions, which he should.

xyzzzz isn't LvT. LvT watches films.

Anyways, Semaine de la Critique has given out it's awards: https://mailchi.mp/semainedelacritique.com/winners2018 The winner has been really good the last few years (The Tribe, Paulina, Mimosas, Makala) so I'm looking forward to Diamantino. And Benedikt Erlingsson wins an award for the follow up to Of Horses and Men.

See, talking about more awards - you love a free ticket or two don't you Fred? How many film fests are you attending this year?

xyzzz is right that I get annoyed when film critics don't watch the films they write about, lol. So old fashioned of me.

I stopped watching Nymphomaniac I after 20 mins, and felt I'd seen enough to know it would be wasted time, so won't judge critics who walked out. And I sat through the entirety of I Stand Alone and Irreversible from a fellow (probably more talented) edgelord, both of which I thought were garbage, but I watched them entirely! LvT seems to have a kind of itch that only forming an alt-right goth band will scratch better than making movies imo. He's one of the worst.

And yes, I love the fact that I get press cards to film festivals, otherwise I wouldn't be able to watch half the films that I do. Silly me.

A lot of reviews aren't enhanced by the mere act of the reviewer sitting through till the end. You just wouldn't know either way (beyond the fact spoliers aren't given).

Lars von Trier is a great artist

LOLed a little bit @ this tbh.

stop falsifying quotes ffs, nobody would really say something as idiotic as that, oops control-f lolpologies!

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Wait, when does the Hamaguchi screen?

lmao at the claim that Noe is in any way a better or more skilled filmmaker - can't imagine him daring to attempt anything remotely akin to a Kingdom or Five Obstructions or Boss of it All, regardless of if you think those worked or not

Another review tabulation has Burning out in front:

🇰🇷🇰🇷🇰🇷 BURNING just moved into the lead for our CANNES Critics Panel. Awaiting more votes, and five films left in the competition. pic.twitter.com/hf0o23p3RD

— IONCINEMA (@ioncinema) May 16, 2018

A troll speaks:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/may/17/lars-von-trier-cannes-walkouts-the-house-that-jack-built

Lars von Trier is a great artist

LOLed a little bit @ this tbh.

― Poisoned by Johan's pea soup. (Tom D.), Wednesday, 16 May 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The biggest LOL for was reserved for "Being a feminist, you still have to be true to yourself." - when the 'great artist' strolls by the first thing to fall through is all that progressive bullshit you've been spouting off.

The interview is here: http://cineuropa.org/en/interview/354532/

let's do this here now so some other filmmakers can get some love and hate, yes?

a new lars von trier poll and discussion thread so we can keep all the yelling in one place for a while

Wait I do agree with Fred that reviewers have an obligation to watch the entirety of whatever movie they're reviewing or writing about. That's a no brainer.

A lot of reviews aren't enhanced by the mere act of the reviewer sitting through till the end. You just wouldn't know either way (beyond the fact spoliers aren't given).

― xyzzzz__

what? this is nonsensical. it's dishonest to write about a movie you didn't finish watching w/o disclosing it

looks like Gaspar Noé's "Climax" won the Art Cinema Award from Director's Fortnight

Negative Voice review for Under The Silver Lake, though it sounds like the kind of thing I like even when it's bad.

what? this is nonsensical. it's dishonest to write about a movie you didn't finish watching w/o disclosing it

― flappy bird, Thursday, 17 May 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I know its not the done thing, and in most films the content isn't abhorrent enough to walk out from...however much arthouse cinema isn't really narrative driven where you get some kind of resolution - its not as if you are seeing something like a plot through. A good reviewer should have the experience and be able to discern enough from a good portion of the film (especially in a lot of auteur cinema where you are watching another chapter of someone draw out their thing (I guess this isn't a million miles away from a franchise with many multiple sequels)), and bring some thinking to a satisfying enough review. I don't see the problem. This thing of a reader feeling cheated as if a contract has been entered to is a feeling I get but as time passes and the more you examine it the less sense it makes to absolutely hold on to.

Its like when you've learnt enough of a subject to pass an exam, then the summer and years go on and you've forgotten most of it. What have you learnt? Caspar's review was good because you saw someone thinking outside of the thing, not sitting his bum down and gobbling his cinema ticket at the Cannes film festival.

You've never worked as a critic, right?

No I just have to put up with the nonsense most critics write.

I've gone to festivals as both a critic and programmer at the same time, and as a programmer you totally can miss half the film and still know if it fits the program you are putting together, but it's just not possible to write a 'review' of a film you haven't watched until the end. Not even a non-narrative slow cinema documentary. Of course, you can write something about how this violent scene at the beginning was rubbish, or how the editing was in the first half of the film, but you simply cannot get a feel for the whole. I've had to leave films with two minutes to go, and still then it's impossible.

You can get a lot around pacing, editing, feel, acting, visuals and what the thinking is -- just a lot of the aesthetics -- from watching about 1/3 of a film. I've read more than enough reviews and I don't see the work as necessarily coming from 'oh yeah this crit has watched the whole thing from beginning to end', or whatever.

Obviously you wouldn't often do it - and this discussion comes out of that write-up where the reviewer says (mistakenly) that it wasn't a review. But it was more worthwhile than most of the write-ups from Cannes, even if what it amounts to is a finger-wagging 'stop this' it was a fully fleshed out position.

There was nothing in that 'review' that couldn't have been written just looking at the trailer. It was doubly idiotic.

I had to leave with five minutes to go of Sergei Loznitsas 'Victory Day', which is a typically Loznitsan description of the Russian Victory Day celebrations. I've seen scores of Loznitsas movies, I could almost have written about it without even watching it. But missing the final five minutes, I still don't know what it built to, and I really can't say if it overall is better or worse than Maidan or The Event or Austerlitz, three films that all have very significant endings.

And one thing that was really clear in the write-ups of The House that Jack Built is that the ending is really something else.

Caspar's piece is very good but this is still a stupid conversation, sorry. His piece is about the film, the filmmaker and the greater responsibilities of artists, audiences and society, it's not a review of the film.

Anyways. The Nadine Labaki is apparently getting raves and is seen as a major frontrunner for the Palme. I don't know, it sounds a bit mainstream to me. I'm kinda rooting for Rohrwacher.

his essay is absolutely not idiotic

Going to a serial killer movie and then complaining that you don't have to make films where people die is stupid. Sorry. Just don't waste your time on it, then.

leaving a film during a scene in which a woman's breast gets cut off and then writing about the trauma of that is perfectly valid and possibly valuable.

There was nothing in that 'review' that couldn't have been written just looking at the trailer. It was doubly idiotic.

Was the cutting of the breast in the trailer?

Going to a serial killer movie and then complaining that you don't have to make films where people die is stupid. Sorry. Just don't waste your time on it, then.

Except it was more nuanced than that, sorry you can't read.

And LvT hasn't always made horror films - and not all horror films display this kind of violence against women.

Lars von Triers very first film, The Element of Crime, was about a serial killer whos victims were young women.

And you're right, it's more nuanced than that, he doesn't just say that the subject is wrong, he says that it isn't legitimized by the 'very terms of the film', or the 'contract' von Trier has made with the audience, though of course he left before the end of the film, so how on earth does he know what the point is? This is not something you can write without having watched the film: Von Trier blithely, or perhaps stupidly, asks us to accept the very terms of his film, and to judge the movie on what he has set out to do — namely, to accept that the violence depicted here, the torture and abuse, can be a parable for Von Trier’s own abusive behaviour towards women, and the way his films have enacted, again and again, the suffering of women. I mean, anyone who has seen Antichrist or Nymphomaniac knows that the endings are pretty important when it comes to figuring out what the films are about.

You can get a lot around pacing, editing, feel, acting, visuals and what the thinking is -- just a lot of the aesthetics -- from watching about 1/3 of a film.

This is 100% wrong, esp w films and filmmakers who change up things throughout a film, obviously. And that's independent of any narrative "twists".

First third of Wizard of Oz is just a depressing midwestern farm melodrama etc

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

The Spike Lee film looks terrible. Like TV skit bad.

I voted for burning based on the ecstatic reviews.

I'm convinced that Spike only makes good movies by accident

that's a good idea for a thread.

bad filmmakers that made a good film by accident.

Spike's made a couple too many good movies for it to be accidental imho

no one could make "do the right thing" by accident.

Isn't it possible that the bad movies are the ones made on accident?

yes, interesting.

imo the only "accidental" good movies by bad or noxious directors happen are when their normally unpalatable sensibility lines up with the project (ie Pain and Gain)

i think i made a thread about good directors making bad movies (and i think wim wenders was the trigger for it) but i can't be bothered trying to find it.

I know its not the done thing, and in most films the content isn't abhorrent enough to walk out from...however much arthouse cinema isn't really narrative driven where you get some kind of resolution - its not as if you are seeing something like a plot through. A good reviewer should have the experience and be able to discern enough from a good portion of the film (especially in a lot of auteur cinema where you are watching another chapter of someone draw out their thing (I guess this isn't a million miles away from a franchise with many multiple sequels)), and bring some thinking to a satisfying enough review. I don't see the problem. This thing of a reader feeling cheated as if a contract has been entered to is a feeling I get but as time passes and the more you examine it the less sense it makes to absolutely hold on to.

― xyzzzz__, Thursday, May 17, 2018 5:44 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is just complete nonsense. Nobody can guess the ending of a movie. 'Art house cinema doesn't have resolution' ...So you don't have to finish it... what??? What if Ebert walked out of Taste of Cherry before he tore it apart? This makes absolutely no sense. And wow, what a burden to sit through a two hour movie.

Anyways. The Nadine Labaki is apparently getting raves and is seen as a major frontrunner for the Palme. I don't know, it sounds a bit mainstream to me. I'm kinda rooting for Rohrwacher.

I've read a lot of gushing and a few mentions of the third act being schmaltzy, but the editor of Little White Lies flat out hated it:

Nadine Labaki’s Capernaum - with one day on the clock - looks like worst in show at #Cannes2018 . Rambling, poorly written, drama free, so, so silly.

— David Jenkins (@daveyjenkins) May 17, 2018

btw, I think I'm the chump who voted for Under The Silver Lake but in my defence I think it's a film that looks set to bounce back in some quarters from its initial critical mauling.

Cold War the only one with no votes to actually have a chance, it seems.

According to the reviews, this year's Cannesbwas kinda weak

I bet Lazzaro will win

To carry on with my nonsense.

This is 100% wrong, esp w films and filmmakers who change up things throughout a film, obviously. And that's independent of any narrative "twists".

― Οὖτις, Thursday, 17 May 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

First third of Wizard of Oz is just a depressing midwestern farm melodrama etc

― Οὖτις, Thursday, 17 May 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I would say any 1/3 of a film - and I was talking about more arthouse fare. Wizard of Oz is great ut has more of a narrative to be followed from beginning to end.

This is just complete nonsense. Nobody can guess the ending of a movie. 'Art house cinema doesn't have resolution' ...So you don't have to finish it... what??? What if Ebert walked out of Taste of Cherry before he tore it apart? This makes absolutely no sense. And wow, what a burden to sit through a two hour movie.

Calm down. I never said sitting through films was a burden, unless they are by Lars von Trier. I can't remember A Taste of Cherry so much but I think w/Close-up and some knowledge from Kiarostami's cinema you could deduce what he is doing and write something quite competent if you chose to walk out at some point - even if you were to then miss its very affecting ending.

so what have I missed here?

you don't need to read all of it to get the gist

*Standing ovation*

*hundreds of walkouts*

This thread has infuriated, even appalled me at times, but it wouldn't be Cannes without it.

Fred - as you say the contract is as follows:

accept that the violence depicted here, the torture and abuse, can be a parable for Von Trier’s own abusive behaviour towards women, and the way his films have enacted, again and again, the suffering of women.

And what the reviewer doesn't want to do is understand this, go inside it. As he puts it just later:

And, incidentally, the abuse of women is a poor metaphor for the abuse of women.

He is writing it off as LvT's inability to bring anything that is worth thinking about, there was nothing but gore (and that directed against women) - he decided there was nothing to see here, so he walked. xps

But he can't be sure the contract is that until he has seen the end of the film. It's exactly those kinds of contracts that can only be figured out once you know what the payoff of the film is. It's nonsense. To conclude that there is 'nothing but gore' in a film you haven't seen the last 50 minutes of is dishonest, frankly.

Its staring right in front of you. He has a good sense of where its going and he has a bullshit detector. You are a fan of LvT so that's not there with you.

Also this notion of dishonesty when applied to someone as trolly as von Trier is funny to me. Its clear he wouldn't give most people his time of day, why should anyone?

Who the director would give the time of day isn't really of consequence tho right? This isn't Cannes' Palme d'Best Friends.

True but if you get the sense with this person that he is just doing it for a laugh and there is nothing at stake. That comes out of that person's attitude towards other ppl.

xp Was gonna say. It's odd to see xyzzz hold onto his stance so fiercely. I'd not trust a music critic who only heard half of an album, and I don't trust a movie critic who runs out halfway through yet writes about the whole thing. It's silly.

Compare with someone like Fassbinder who used and discarded ppl but the results on the screen often show really tenderness. That's something else to deal with. With von Trier the behaviour and results go hand in hand and as someone who looks at both the film and background you then ask why yourself why should you give a fuck.

Just watch half of it and walk out. xp to Eric

Jeff Wells loved Capernaum, so bevare.

Un Certain Regard Awards were just handed out:

Grand Prize: Border (Gräns)
Director: Sergei Losnitza, Donbass
Screenplay: Sofia
Performance: Victor Polster, Girl
Special Jury Prize: The Dead and the Others
Sound Creation award: Border

disappointing that "Long Day's Journey Into Night" got nothing, although Border and Girl both sound interesting

Calm down.

no

Taste of Cherry is the most extreme example I could think of where the last five minutes completely alters how you view the rest of the film. The idea that one can infer where a film is going and wing it just because it's an 'art film' is beyond stupid. It's an indefensible, nonsensical position - if you're an audience member, walk out and give your opinion of whatever you saw, sure. But if you're being paid to write about a film - or anything - without finishing it and without disclosing that you didn't finish it - is a journalistic violation. if you're a film critic you have to bear the burden of sitting through bad, boring, or offensive movies to write about them, unless you make your walk out part of your review.

Girl by Lukas Dhont (from Un Certain Regard) won the Queer Palm

International Federation of Film Critics (FIPRESCI) prizes:

Competition: Burning, Lee Chang-dong
Un Certain Regard: Girl, Lukas Dhont
Semaine/Quinzaine: One Day, Zsófia Szilàgyi

from what I'm reading on twitter Lee Chang-dong hasn't been invited back for the awards ceremony, but Spike Lee, Nadine Labaki, Hirokazu Kore-eda, Alice Rohrwacher, Sergei Dvortsevoy, and Jafar Panahi are coming back. not sure how accurate that is

...or family of Panahi, since he can't travel

Yeah, I'm switching my vote to Rohrwacher now.

it looks gorgeous

there are also rumors that the acting prizes are going to Samal Yeslyamova (Ayka) and Marcello Fonte (Dogman)

https://www.slantmagazine.com/house/article/cannes-film-festival-2018-winner-predictions

he incorrectly states that one of the three women in competition would be the first to win the Palme.

Pawlikowski wins best director

so far:
Jury Prize: Nadine Labaki, Capharnaüm
Special Palme d'Or: Jean-Luc Godard – The Image Book
Actor: Marcello Fonte - Dogman
Director: Pawel Pawlikowski - Cold War
Screenplay: (tie) Alice Rohrwacher – Happy as Lazzaro, Jafar Panahi & Nader Saeivar - Three Faces
Actress: Samal Yeslyamova - Ayka
Caméra d’Or: Lukas Dhont - Girl
Palme d’Or Court Metrage: All These Creatures

so it's either Lee or Kore-eda for the Palme d'Or?

Grand Prix for Lee

Palme d'or for Kore-eda

"Special Palme d'Or"?

I love Kore-eda so happy with that!

Hmmmm

Who voted for him in this poll?

my boyyyyyy

Dennis Lim’s top ten from Cannes 2018. pic.twitter.com/UCjtDAU9sU

— Ryan Swen (@swen_ryan) May 19, 2018

Hilarious reaction from Scumbag Wells:

"Why did they give the top prize to a film I didn’t get around to seeing? I resent that."

Ugh, Ulrich Köhler

What's he done?

Made films I don't like...

Dennis Lim is a guest on the Cannes day 4 episode of the Film Comment podcast in case you're interested. And on day 5 they briefly discuss whether you have to stay to the end of a film (when you're not reviewing it, that is).

good looking out!

I saw Burning last night (by illicit means) and thought it was very good but I'm slightly confused by the absolutely ecstatic reviews. The performances are a wow though.

I liked Burning but prefer Poetry. Steven Yeun, though -- damn.

Cold War however was a collection of received gestures. After this and Ida I realized Pawlikowski is not for me but for those who miss high-toned '60s-era European ci-ne-mah.

yeah Yeun is so great in it. coulda safely shaved off a half-hour and not lost much of anything, and I agree w/ Morbs that the ending doesn't quite work.

At the panel discussion I served on yesterday the audience agreed that the cat didn't exist and wasn't convinced by the ending.

that wasn't me; i haven't seen Burning yet

d'oh

Happy as Lazzaro is utterly gorgeous but its charms began to wear out in its second half.

Alfred otm about Cold War which is certified midbrow filler.

I was half expecting it to win TIFF'a Audience Award as a result

out of the 6 i've now seen from the poll, would pick Asako i & ii in a heartbeat

Happy as Lazzaro just won the top prize at the Chicago film festival

saw Hamaguchi's Heaven Is Still Far Away, it was interesting

This year's competition slate announcement is pretty overdue.

It's coming this thursday.

Still haven't seen that much of this slate, but I think my favorite is Livre d'Image. As a correction to myself upthread, I ended up really liking the Köhler, btw.

Under the Silver Lake sounds like a hoot

it's pretty tedious tbh

Looking forward to seeing Happy as Lazzaro and The Wild Pear Tree in the next few weeks. Just to be completely predictable, I think my favorite from the entire lineup is the 8 hour documentary on Chinese death camps

The lineup sounds pretty boring: https://variety.com/2019/film/global/cannes-xaiver-dolan-pedro-almodovar-ken-loach-terrence-malick-competition-1203190447/ Though I'm hoping for a Jessica Hausner breakthrough.

that DOES sound boring. Kekiche again?!

making for a stronger and starrier lineup than last year’s slate

Oy.

Did anyone see the first Mektoub film?

just realized Innaritu is jury president this year. barf

Lol. Finally saw Amores Perros, btw. Might be the worst film ever, so much worse than even Birdman and The Revenant.

21 Grams is even worse iirc

I wonder what the best Palme winner to come from the worst director might be.

Or, rather, the worst jury head.

The Tim Burton jury picked Uncle Boonmee, so that seems like a pretty good bet.

worst/worst has to be between:

Luc Besson/Dancer in the Dark

Tarantino/Fahrenheit 9/11

Burton's made more bad movies than either of those guys (though both Tarantino and Besson are creeps) and Uncle Boonmee is the best winner of the last while, so I agree w/ Eric here.

Also, Dancer in the Dark is great. So.

Dancer in the Dark is fine, but even I, avowed Bjork nut unto death, can admit it beat out at least 4 far greater films.

Oh, sure, but every Cannes winner except for Uncle Boonmee does that...

Waiting for someone to do the poll (we should honestly probably wait a few days, rumors say the Tarantino will be added later) but so far it looks better than I'd feared. Hausner, Mati Diop, Porumboiu. Pretty good additions.

someone who's not me should make the poll this year

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/apr/18/cannes-2019-new-films-from-terrence-malick-and-ken-loach-but-no-tarantino

I think we should wait until the lineup is complete until we make a new poll.

Glad to see new work from Serra and Laxe in UCR. It's a pretty good lineup so far! And we haven't even gotten to Director's Forthnight yet!

Hausner making an SF film = here for it

it's what, about half repeat appearances, half new blood in competition this year? I'll take it.

I think 8 out of 19 is new. A bit better than usual, though worse than last year. Fun fact: All four of the women in competition are new, which also means a fully 50% of debutants are women.

Agreed that we should wait to make the poll until closer to the start of the competition.

The Dead Don’t Die (dir: Jim Jarmusch) – opening film
Atlantique (dir: Mati Diop)
Bacarau (dir: Kleber Mendonça Filho & Juliano Dornelles)
Frankie (dir: Ira Sachs)
A Hidden Life (dir: Terrence Malick)
It Must Be Heaven (dir: Elia Suleiman)
Les Misérables (dir: Ladj Ly)
Little Joe (dir: Jessica Hausner)
Matthias and Maxime (dir: Xavier Dolan)
Oh Mercy! (dir: Arnaud Desplechin)
Parasite (dir: Bong Joon-ho)
Portrait of a Lady on Fire (dir: Céline Sciamma)
Sibyl (dir: Justine Triet)
Sorry We Missed You (dir: Ken Loach)
Pain and Glory (dir: Pedro Almodóvar)
The Traitor (dir: Marco Bellocchio)
La Gomera (dir: Corneliu Porumboiu)
The Wild Goose Lake (dir: Diao Yinan)
The Young Ahmed (dir: Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne)

This slate, even if it ends up making room for Tarantino as everyone expects, lacks a sort of "They've never won the Palme?!" already-canonized candidate a la Jia Zhang-Ke last year. I guess one could place Almodovar in that company, but it's been awhile since he's made anything anyone cares about.

They keep making room for Loach, don't they.

What I mean is, with no Jia or Wong or Hou or Godard to attend to, this slate offers a shot at coronating someone extra fresh and new, et al, which is fun.

the Sciamma sounds dopey as fuck tbh

hopefully instead of tarantino they just add three hong films

yay for mati diop though! liked the short of hers i saw

oh, she was daughter in 35 Rhums! I thought she looked familiar.

Hausner making an SF film = here for it

is the Malick his return to "conventional" narrative or whatever?

supposedly it has an actual script; his only other films in Competition have been Tree of Life and (iirc) Days of Heaven

can it be a return to movies that don't fucking blow

To the Wonder was good! (Still haven't seen Song to Song)

Song to Song is hilariously bad. but I don't like any of his movies besides Days of Heaven (which I'm not crazy about either).

I even liked Knight of Cups, but even I didn't dare to watch Song to Song.

the main competition jury includes 6(!) directors this year - Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu, Yorgos Lanthimos, Pawel Pawlikowski, Kelly Reichardt, Alice Rohrwacher and Robin Campillo

the 2018 lineup was criticized as being weak, but in retrospect it seems like it was it was one of the best in a while

I was somewhat perturbed to see Stev Yeun, who was so great in Burning, turn up on one sketch on the gross-out sketch show, I Think You Should Leave on Netflix.

not sure about 2019. the jury selection seems more impressive than the films. agree with Eric that the iconic filmmakers who haven’t been recognized yet category is lacking this year

I don't know if I care that much about iconic directors, but I love that Hausner and Porumboiu, two of the best youngish directors, are there for the first time.

Tarantino and Kechiche added. Think the lineup is complete now. New poll?

Yeah they hit their perv quota

LOL

https://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=40&threadid=108896

Anyone catch The Wild Goose Lake? I quite liked Diao Yinan's previous film, Black Coal, Thin Ice ... people on here seem to be mixed on Long Day's Journey Into Night but eh, I liked An Elephant Sitting Still which wasn't too popular here either.

Is this the only place to talk about Portrait de la Jeune Fille en Feu? It devastated me. Utterly exquisite. A definite 10/10, for me. Some of the things Sciamma does would seem ridiculous if you read about it (the heart going on fire in the previous attempt at a portrait) but she does it with such style and feeling. The last shot broke me.

Adele stan 'til I die.

there is an "arthouse" thread

I was not blown away by it, but Adele Haenel and the cinematography make it

Also, this was in the 2019 Cannes thread, not the 2018 one.

Yup. This is where we'll talk about, like, Girls of the Sun, when all of a sudden that gets a release.

This was a really good slate, in retrospect.

I can't stop thinking about this film. It's perfect, imo.

the writing is amazing as well.

-I've never even seen her smile
-have you tried being funny?

one of the most amazing details is the saliva streams during the kisses.

It's just such an accomplished film from start to finish.

excellent movie but it did make me lol that they're on a remote island in the 18th century and still everyone, including the maid, is immaculately clean and groomed in every single scene

Someone lock this thread already.