ripping reality

(from SHADOW BILLIONAIRE, “perhaps the festival selection best primed for a Man On Wire-like breakthrough,” according to the Star’s Jason Anderson.)

The world premiere of OUTRAGE at Tribeca this week generated attention that I assume will gather momentum into its commercial opening on May 8th. This film has some work to do in the world, and I think it will do it quite effectively. Director Kirby Dick will be at Hot Docs for the International Premiere of OUTRAGE on Thursday, May 7. Check out Indiewire’s preview, AJ’s first look, and, via Movie City News, pieces in Variety and Movieline.  And, one more, from L.A Times.

DEFAMATION had its North American premiere last night at Tribeca, and I except to see similiar editorial appearing in the new future. In a side-bar to his Hot Docs preview in today’s Toronto Star, Jason Anderson anticipated that DEFAMATION would be “one of the festival’s most provocative docs.” Though perhaps not as provocative as GRAPHIC SEXUAL HORROR, which Anderson describes as “exactly as advertised and therefore very, very difficult viewing.” Now that we’re seeing coverage of the programme, its interesting how things play out. GRAPHIC SEXUAL HORROR was a very late selection, and prior to its inclusion we assumed that our other trangressive sex film, AKA ANA (which probably features even more difficult sexual imagery than GRAPHIC SEXUAL HORROR), would be our sole shock doc. Now we have two! And, guess which are the top two most viewed films on our website?

From his NOW piece, it seems that Norm Wilner also apparently had to cover his eyes during GRAPHIC SEXUAL HORROR (in perhaps a Freudian slip, he replaces the “Horror” in the title with “Violence”). I really like the way this piece captures the eclectic spirit of the programme, and like Anderson, Wilner points to our desire to mix the global and the local (and everything between).

Often there are characteristics of the programme which are deliberately conceived, but never get noticed. These first two preview pieces are quite satisfying in that they’re both perceptive about some of the curatorial nuances and goals that we discussed in programming Hot Docs.

(look, my first widget from SnagFilms….this one for the Hot Docs 2007 title WHAT WOULD JESUS BUY?)

Yesterday SnagFilms announced that it had entered into “Founders’ Alliances” with several organizations, including Hot Docs. This means that soon there will be a Hot Docs Channel on SnagFilms.com, which seems to be the early leader among sites specializing in the online distribution of documentaries (at least in the U.S., though it’ll soon be available globally).

Its an interesting time for festivals, as we are being cultivated by the brave new world of distribution for what we do best….identifying and championing quality films and filmmakers. Along these lines, I’m looking forward to the What’s Next For Film Festivals panel at Hot Docs, where I’ll discuss the future of festivals with TIFF’s Cameron Bailey, Tribeca’s Geoffrey Gilmore (he of Sundance fame), sxsw’s Janet Pierson and Sky Sitney of Silverdocs.

(A still from HUNTING DOWN MEMORY, to be presented in the International Spectrum, a competitive programme, at Hot Docs. Curating a competitive programme isn’t a science, but there does need to be a framework to guide these decisions.)

Last year at the Hot Docs Awards Ceremony the respected British filmmaker Molly Dineen asked me why her film, LIE OF THE LAND, wasn’t in the Competition (it was in the World Showcase programme). It was a blunt, direct and perfectly reasonable question. The worst kind. However, Molly assured me, she wasn’t angry. She just wanted to know what was behind the decision. I mumbled through a defensive, inarticulate response while assuring Molly that it wasn’t necessarily a judgement on her film, which it wasn’t. Really. Its, umm, kind of an organic, intuitive process, was the gyst of my reply. Molly politely accepted the non-explanation, but I didn’t. So, a year later (I’m a slow learner), and just in time for Hot Docs 2009, here are some clearer thoughts on how the Festival Competition is curated. Continue reading…

(a still from DEFAMATION…sure to be one of the Festival’s most compelling, controversial films)

One of the buzzwords that we all employ, perhaps to a fault, in reference to certain docs each year is that such and such film is very “controversial” or “political”. As I do my annual media rounds in advance of Hot Docs 2009, I find myself lazily using these terms as a kind of short form promotional tool. As in, “OUTRAGE may be one of the most controversial films of the year,”; or “DEFAMATION is sure to very controversial.” While, on one hand, I do believe that both films will stimulate discussion, and that this discussion will be distinctly polarized, I do cringe slightly when I label a film “controversial”…as I do when I call a film “compelling” (why?) or “evocative” (of what?) or “powerful” or “political” or “moving” or any of the other hackneyed short cuts we make to cue an audience that a certain film is a “must-see.”

In fact, last week a journalist for CBC radio “called me” on my declaration that DEFAMATION will be “controversial?” Why? “Ummm, well, because, it kind of asks questions about about anti-zionism and anti-semitism.” What kind of questions? “Just questions, good questions. A good question is sometimes better then, ummm, answers, because they raise other questions and stuff.”….Okay, I wasn’t this bumbling, but I felt like it. After the interview the journalist remarked that one does indeed have to choose words quite carefully on such matters as anti-semitism.

Indeed, in these interviews I find myself name-dropping revolutions in Burma, the Palestine occupation, gay rights in the U.S., dolphin slaughters in Japan, the phenomenon of viral videos, hardcore fetish websites, the end of seafood, prison life, Afghanistan, tiger captivity, oil sands, design culture….somebody stop me, please.

Hot Docs 2009 Press Conference Slideshow from seafar on Vimeo.

For better or worse, here is the Slide Show which I presented to close our annual Press Conference on March 24. I recorded my script over it later, likely with embarrassing results. Some of it seemed to be mildly entertaining when delivered live, honestly. After the Press Conference  a kind elderly woman told me, seemingly without irony, that she truly enjoyed the way I tripped over words! Anway, the general idea was to give a feel for the programme, and point to a few themes in this year’s Festival.