Festival in Cannes

I went in expecting nothing since all I"d ever seen of HJ was about a half hour, as much as I could stand, of "Always" a really unbearable movie, starring him, of the lovesick clueless guy somehow had gorgeous girlfriend and now shall mope for 90 minutes and she thinks he's cute even now for some mysterious reason even though it's over while the audience well, simply has to endure him, variety.

Anyway I thought it was pretty great this movie, really well plotted, I liked the actresses in particular: anouk, gretta and the girl who played "Blue". . . they were all really wonderful. The characters were vividly drawn and I thought it was a really well written human comedy.

What I would encourage him to do in the future however is to try something other than a score that shows your movie as being a knock off of woody allen or gives that feeling, which this music did. The film would have seemed a lot more his own had he had a different sound to go with.

Sorry that some fans didn't care for this film, I found it deliciously decadent and oh-so-painfully-truthful! It had all the schmaltz and flavor of a run down fan dancer. So delicate at one time, and now so abused. If you really desire to see the Festival as it is, then view this movie. Mr. Schell is excellent, as well as the gentleman that plays the sleeze-ball Kaz. Truly a remarkable film in that it makes you think/feel documentary. Ala Robert Altman and his unscripted dialogue. The audience in my theatre snickered half the film, and there were some real good laughs at some of the irony. Only drawback was the cameraman. He gave us a splitting headache whenever filming Ms. Aimee and Mr. Schell on the boardwalk. Otherwise, go see it. Enjoy!

As a long-time fan of Henry Jaglom, I'd have to put Festival in Cannes slightly behind his last couple of films, the wonderful "Deja Vu" and "Last Summer in the Hamptons." His work is definitely not to everyone's taste -- none of his characters is free of either self-absorption or self-destructiveness -- but those who don't need clear heroes and villains are well-rewarded with psychologically complex and often highly comic portrayals.

This is more in the spirit of "Venice/Venice" and his earlier, more confessional films with the difference being that Henry's not onscreen. Still, his longtime collaborator Zack Norman gives his best performance ever, Anouk Aimee and Maximilian Schell fully embody both the mystery and deluded romanticism they're meant to evoke and a fine array of new faces (especially Alex Craig Mann and the two female writer/producers) step up to Jaglom's "process" and execute it more seamlessly than ever before. Henry's somewhat distracting habit of arhythmic cross-cutting within dialogue scenes has been almost completely cured -- "Festival" has gorgeous long takes that allow the scenes to completely develop their internal tensions. The production values are also the best ever for one of his films; he and his crew really conveyed the spirit of a festival that is really a market.

My main quibble is that his ending is not as satisfying as those of his last films; it, too, harks back to the looser wrap-ups of his earlier work -- even a bit more certainty about the resolution of a couple of the storylines would have helped this feel a little grander in conception.

I saw Festival in Cannes this evening in my film class and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was far from a documentary (as was posted earlier), but rather an interesting insight into some of the things that can go on at this, or any other festival. The characters were fun to watch and to follow through their few days in Cannes. I found the film interesting and the end was extremely satisfying -- it all made sense. It was beautifully shot and made me wish I could see Cannes in person. Of course it showed how people can be wooed with simple words, but it showed so much more than that. The cast was superb. If you enjoy movies, see this one. It was a treat.

This is a highly interesting movie and to put it in simple words it is a MOCKUMENTARY. The cast is excellent and it is a satire on what reading too much into a movie can do to the general viewing of the movie. It makes a pretend documentary into a kind of black comedy of what Critics and their in depth reading "into" movies of so much; that the absurdities of the movie industry comes to light. Especially when it comes to movie awards. Watch it like a documentary but think of it as a comedy.