Online Movie Station

With the absence of Amour it is not a surprise that Ulrich Seidl's Paradise: Love raised with most top awards as is a good movie, perhaps the best of Seidl's work up to date. Winners are in *BLUE.

1/4/13
Yesterday the Academy of Austrian Film announced their nominations for the current edition and most surprising is the absence of the film that is Austria's submission to Oscar, Amour. As the movie absence is top news let me share the reason why from reliable news sources.

Michael Haneke decided not to enter his French-language drama "after being told it would not be eligible for several top categories". Because is in French and does not meet other criteria (including an Austrian certificate of origin, delegate producer and evidence of "significant Austrian cultural influence") it would only have been considered for "directing, screenplay and editing prizes by AFA". Surprisingly, Haneke's decision is not being described as the result of a fit of pique: instead, the filmmaker has been praised for allowing other local movies a better chance of recognition and is being considered as "a very noble gesture" by his filmmaking peers. So, everyone is happy with the decision; but its undeniable that this situation seems to add more fire to those that question why Amour is Austria and not France's submission to Oscar.

Nevertheless the absence of Amour allowed Florian Fliker's Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries) to pick the most nominations -seven- and Ulrich Seidl's Paradies: Liebe follows with six nods. The AFA ceremony will take place in the ceremonial hall of Vienna's Rathaus on January 23.

These are the nominations.

Best Film
Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries), Florian Flicker
*Paradies: Liebe (Paradise: Love), Ulrich Seidl
Die Wand (The Wall), Julian Roman Pölsler

Best Director
Florian Flicker for Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries)
Julian Roman Pölsler for Die Wand (The Wall)
*Ulrich Seidl for Paradies: Liebe (Paradise: Love)

Best Actress
Martina Gedeck in Die Wand (The Wall)
Chirstine Ostermayer in Anfang 80
*Margerethe Tiesel in Paradies: Liebe (Paradise: Love)

Best Actor
Lars Eidinger for Tabu – Es st die Seele ein Fremdes auf Erden
Andreas Lust for Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries)
*Karl Merkatz for Anfang 80

Best Screenplay
*Florian Flicker for Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries)
Julian Roman Pölsler for Die Wand (The Wall)
Ulrich Seidl and Veronika Franz for Paradies: Liebe (Paradise: Love)

Best Cinematography
*Martin Gschlacht for Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries)
Wolfgang Thaler and Ed Lachman for Paradies: Liebe (Paradise: Love)
Carsten Thiele for Kuma

Best Costume Design
Cinzia Cioffi for Kuma
Birgit Hutter for Tabu – Es st die Seele ein Fremdes auf Erden
*Thomas Olàh for Die Vermessung der Welt (Measuring the World)

Best Makeup
Fabienne Adam and Brigitte Dettling for Tabu – Es st die Seele ein Fremdes auf Erden
*Monika Fischer-Vorauer and Michaela Oppl for Die Vermessung der Welt (Measuring the World)
Martha Ruess for Kuma

Best Music
Lorenz Dangel for Die Lebenden
*Eva Jantschitsch for Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries)
Judit Varga for Das Pferd auf dem Balkon

Best Editing
Karina Ressler for Grenzgänger (Crossing Boundaries)
Karina Ressler for Oh Yeah, She Performs!
*Monika Willi for Die Lebenden

Best Art Direction
Andreas Donhauser and Renate Martin for Paradies: Liebe (Paradise: Love)
*Katrin Huber for Kuma
Renate Schmaderer, Enid Löser, Petra Heim and Hajo Schwarz for Die Wand (The Wall)

Best Sound Design
Heinz K. Ebner, Philipp Mosser and Berhard Maisch for Das Pferd auf dem Balkon
*Nils Kirchhoff, Bernhard Maisch and Dieter Meyer for More than Honey
Dietmar Zuson and Tobias Fleig for Die Lebenden

Best Documentary
Evolution der Gewalt (Evolution of Violence), Fritz Ofner
Low Definition Control (Malfunctions #0), Michael Palm
*Der Prozess (The Trial), Gerald Igor Hauzenberger

Best Short Film
Hatch, Christoph Kurschnig
*Unser Lied, Catalina Molina
366 Tage, Johannes Schiehsl

To read info and watch trailers for each film use links at AFA's official site.

First and foremost this is a Michael Haneke film, a 100% Haneke film very similar in almost every sense to his previous films. Yes there is love in this film but also there is illness and death. It's an extremely hard-to-watch magnificent oeuvre and know that as happens with all Haneke's films, each viewer will see what they want to see. The difference seems to be that this time many coincide in seeing love with some saying that is expressed with detachment and coldness. What all seem to agree is that is a great movie. I say no different, but then by now many of you know that I'm a HUGE admirer of master filmmaker Michael Haneke.

A very intense experience that crushed me into tears, exploded all kind of emotions in me and made me think about old age, illness and death, my own. After watching I experienced an intense sadness and took me days to overcome the feeling; but I'm grateful as was able to do an introspection into subjects that you tend to not think about, that tend to avoid. Yes, also saw love, the most realistic love I have seen in film, the one that celebrates qualities and defects, the one that exists when you are partners.

I'm so tempted to really dissect film but will stay out of it by saying that Haneke is as controversial as always with his excellent exploration on human dignity in the most difficult moments a person can live, when everyone wants to help the helpless, when outsiders have to help in the caring but for them is just work, when you see the person you have spend your whole life becoming ... a different being, but you still see that the person is still there, suffering. And all of the above applies to the ill and the caretaker.

This is a film so perfect that is impossible to talk about film as a film as you are absolutely overcome by what you saw, you felt and you are still thinking. You are overcome by images, performances, story and Haneke's mastery in filmmaking and storytelling. Still film is crafted very careful as much as a musician has to carefully interpret a masterpiece, with much work, much detail, much technique, much brain and at the same time with much feeling, much brilliance, and much emotion so those that hear the performance are moved beyond their self consciousness.

Some are talking about Haneke's rigorous, liberating unsentimental world view which I clearly understand what they are saying but absolutely disagree. I believe there is nothing unsentimental (or cold) in this and other Haneke's films as his work always make people feel something, make them think and make them to have "sentiments". Maybe he is very objective, his camera surely is, but unsentimental, no.

Subtle and moving performances by French cinema icons Jean Louis Trintignant and Emmanuelle Riva are breathless perfection with face expressions that say a lot more than what words say and sometimes contradict what they are talking reflecting the truth of the situation. Impressive. I am a huge follower of Trintignant and have seen almost all his movies, he has many where his performances are exquisite but in this "comeback" his performance has become one of the few that excel. Isabelle Huppert is magnificent as always in a role that is not like the ones she usually performs as she is not often only emotional in the screen.

Story is about Anne (Riva) and Georges (Trintignant), retired music teachers in their 80s, living in a handsomely furnished, book-lined Paris apartment; they are happy, affectionate, loving, active and content. We can hardly see them when they attend a concert (a magnificent scene where the concert audience is actually the film audience of unknowns) and see them coming back home to his life. One day Anne suffers a stroke, has a 95% success surgery and becomes one of the 5% unsuccessful cases. Everything changes for them and you know the end of the story as is the opening scene.

Filmmakers live from seeing his ideas materialized in the screen, perhaps that's their ultimate reward but they also live from recognition and viewers seeing their films. I believe this is Haneke's year and even when he already was honored with his second Cannes Palm d'Or for this film plus collected many more honors, is time the American Industry recognizes his immeasurable talent. This film deserves an Oscar (is Austria submission to foreign language category) and even a nomination in the Best Film category. Still, you never know with Academy members and its powerful influencers.

Truly believe that Haneke has to be seen in a very special mood, you have to prepare yourself to be surprised by whatever he selects to explore. No matter what you have read about story I strongly urge you to NOT skip this film, you only have to find the right moment to see it and you will have one of the most intense cinematic experiences of your life.

BIG ENJOY!!! PERFECTION!!!

Watch trailer @MOC

A movie that polarized audiences after the premiere in competition at 2012 Cannes with some highly disliking film and others highly liking film; but seems that no matter whether they like/dislike it, all agree that film is grotesque.

Was a bit concern about watching this film as Ulrich Seidl's previous film Import/Export was one that I stopped watching when couldn't take anymore whatever was happening in the screen. But to my surprise, this time his film was engaging and easier to watch even when I also consider film to be grotesque. Why? Mainly because he portraits "something" not often seen in any cinema.

Because of the story many relate this film to Laurent Cantet's Vers Le Sud (Heading South) but in my opinion films have the same story essence, sex tourism, however they are two very different films; so different that have to remind you that I did not liked much Cantet's film while I liked Seidl's "ugly" portrait more than whatever I imagined.

In this "ugly" sense I relate this film to Carlos Reygadas' Batalla en el Cielo (Battle in Heaven) that has some very "ugly" and grotesque scenes; the basic difference is that Reygadas shows us a man with a younger woman while Seidl shows a woman with younger men. The not often seen "something" that Seidl shows in an almost documentary style are the many scenes with naked older, overweight women, which obviously many tend to consider "ugly" as doesn't fit contemporary and mainly cinema standards of "beauty". So perhaps now you will understand better when I say that this is not an easy to watch film for most general audiences as they are not used to watch "ugliness" in the screen.

There you have it, I said it as clear as I can. So with this issue out of the way, let's talk about the movie.

On the surface Paradise: Love tells the story of a flabby, divorced, lonely 50-year-old woman, Teresa, that for her milestone birthday goes to a beach paradise in Kenya looking forward to indulge in what a friend told her she will find there: sex. But with what seems like naiveté she was expecting more love than sex, more caring about her than plain physical contact, which obviously she will not find at a place with young men living out from the "white mamas". She was expecting love and was not able to play the sex-game. But film is more complex and layered than the surface story mainly because Seidl's storytelling/filmmaking style that show us scenes that contain what could be considered as humiliating, racist, blur between exploited/exploitation which recalls colonialism and more.

Film is visually outstanding, especially in indoor scenes, with fantastic use of color, light and very detailed static compositions; some definitively inspired by paintings, like one scene that absolutely recalls Manet's Olympia. Fantastic as absolutely eases whatever we are watching in screen. Then narrative is rooted in improvisation which along with some camera takes gives film the almost documentary style where film purpose is to document situations more than telling a story. But let me be clearer, there is a story here; a story that deals with complex emotional truths about sadness, cruelty and the search of happiness. Last, this is the best example I have seen that clearly illustrates the now famous "Ulrich Seidl Method".

Film tells only Teresa's perspective, so don't expect to see development in any other character played by actors and non-actors; but Margarete Tiesel (Teresa) performance is outstanding in every sense, from carrying on the entire film to what many non-European viewers/critics comment, daring to undress in the screen. The last comment I consider very superfluous and tied to their "beauty" and/or what is acceptable to be shown in the screen concepts; but include it as yes, I was caught off guard the first time she was in any state of undressing, but honestly soon enough I forgot about it. That's how good Tiesel performance is.

Absolutely understand why this film was in competition at 2012 Cannes, understand why audiences are polarized and definitively understand that film is NOT for general audiences. My best reference to recommend watching the film is that if you saw Reygadas' Battle in Heaven and the grotesque scenes did not bothered you, then maybe you will enjoy this film as much as I did.

Film is the first installment of a trilogy called Paradies (Paradise) about three women form one family (you will see them together at the beginning of this movie) with one exploring Love, another Faith and the last one Hope. Paradise: Faith, the second installment about Teresa's sister, was premiered in 2012 Biennale to "better" reviews and the last one, Paradise: Hope is about Teresa's daughter that somehow I imagine will premier at a major 2013 festival. Yes, I'm looking forward to the next installments but truth is that the first is a film that I could watch only once, so no Paradise marathons for me.

Enjoy!!!

Watch trailer @MOC