tordiway

Probably the best film I have seen so far this year. We recently screened it for our Film Festival Selection Committee and the response was near-unanimous - four stars. The previous commenter's accusations of "terminal cuteness" baffle me - this is the best good-old-fashioned solid three-act structure Hollywood movie I have seen in a long time - and it was made in France. The distributor claims that they cannot find an American distributor who will meet their terms - therefore, there are no plans for American release. If you can find it playing at your local Jewish Film Festival (about the only place you are likely to find it in the US - a shame, really, since it is not a film only for Jews)by all means buy your ticket and go.

Upon director Pennell's death last year (2002)the news media reported that Robert Redford credited this film as his inspiration for creating the Sundance Institute. An affectionate and often funny look at two losers who nevertheless refuse to give up on their dreams of striking it rich. Pennell and cast shot this on weekends using short ends b&w film stock and borrowed equipment. Everybody worked for free, including Pennell's brother who provided the guitar soundtrack. Film was a minor sensation on the festival circuit - Pennell followed it across the USA and Europe and was offered work in LA as a result though things did not turn out as everybody had hoped. Leads Sonny Carl Davis and Lou Perry (Perryman) moved to LA immediately afterwards and have worked playing character parts / small parts ever since. Prints have been unavailable for many years now.

The first challenge facing any film of this type is that the audience already knows how the story is going to end before they enter the theater. It starts high, it ends low; we know that already. And let's face it, we are interested in the film because we are morbidly fascinated with the low part. So the filmmaker's task is not to deliver the usual story arch, but instead to both show the character's descent AND to give us new insight into the character, causing us to feel for him and understand his story in a way we did not know before seeing the film. Otherwise it is a documentary or a Biography on the History Channel. On this our group agreed: we left the theater feeling like little more than passive observers into Bob Crane's life. Instead of character development we are treated to a series of vignettes and asked to connect the dots ourselves. As a result, we never cared that much for him (he was shallow, smarmy) and we were not given enough of the people in his life to care for them, so we were never torn apart when he began his descent into hell. The filmmaker's alternate approach is to force us, the audience, to become voyeurs too. Our group sat through the movie both repulsed and attracted to what we saw, but, with no emotional insight gained, we were no better for the experience. Ask yourself this; if the film had been about the life and death of sex addict John Doe would it have worked? No - it would have been booed off the screen. Lacking any real depth, the film requires the audience's obsession with celebrity in order for it to succeed. Movies about descent can be fascinating; just look at "Lost Weekend" or "Double Indemnity" for two classics that come to mind. But "Autofocus" ain't in that league. I don't know about you but I left the theater feeling like I needed to take a shower.