That essentially wraps up Mao’s Last Dancer, which is based on the true story of Chinese ballet dancer Li Cunxin (played by Chi Cao).

During the oppressive Mao era, Li was selected from his small, hardworking village to attend dance school in Beijing. As the film suggests, everything one did in life was dedicated to China, Mao and the Red Army. Any deviation from complete dedication to the communist cause was not looked upon favourably. In the 1970s Li was allowed to travel to America to dance with the Houston Ballet Company under Ben Stevenson (Bruce Greenwood), and eventually defected from China in a dramatic stand-off in the Chinese Consulate. (Interestingly, today Li lives in Australia with his wife and three children.)

Cao performs admirably as both actor and dancer, while familiar face on the ballet-film scene Amanda Schull (Centre Stage) plays Li’s American love interest and first wife Elizabeth Mackey. Stevenson is also enjoyable to watch in his role of the Houston Ballet Company artistic director – the quasi-father figure he plays to Li seems to suit him perfectly. Other actors – and I say actors lightly, as most are actually dancers – do their job without fanfare.

In fact, I think it is fanfare that the film lacks. It is a compelling story, but at times it is just not told in a compelling-enough manner. The emotion is there – Li’s determination to dance, his insistence on staying in America, and his fear for his family –  but is often weak and awkward, much like Li’s adaption to American society. His naïve grasp of language and culture provides some light hearted elements in the film, and his fear of capitalism and speaking out against the government highlights the restriction indoctrinated into people under Chairman Mao. Yet difficult issues are dealt with lightly, while clichéd metaphors and flashbacks mar what could have been an incredibly insightful film. The story is deep and emotional, but the film lacks the drama and passion that would really elevate its status. It is not necessarily a bad film – it is just not what it could be.

That said, there was scattered applause in the packed out cinema as the credits started to roll. Maybe I just missed something?

Verdict:

I feel like if I was 30-plus and/or had gone through the ‘when I grow up I want to be a ballet dancer’ stage as a kid then I would appreciate this one more than what I do. The dancing is beautiful and the story is certainly there to be told – but perhaps reading Li’s autobiography will give you a more raw and compelling insight into his intriguing tale.

Black Swan (Review)

Step Up 3D (His Review)

Red Cliff (Chi Bi) (Review)

Step Up 3D (Her Review)

Fame (2009) (Review)

But We’re From The Future (My iz budushchego) does just that, looking at the realities of the Russian front line with quite literally a contemporary set of eyes. Four young men, living in modern-day St Petersburg, make their money by digging up and selling old war relics. They have no respect for the past, the sacrifice of their forefathers or the final resting places of the dead, and one even associates himself with a new breed of skinhead Russian Nazis.

The four have no qualms about what they are doing, which seems to be a common practice, until they stumble upon a set of old documents a battle site. Their own documents. Four Russian soldiers with their names and faces. Thinking they are hallucinating on cheap vodka, the group race down to the lake to swim off their trance, but find themselves surfacing in the lake over forty years earlier – Russia, 1942.

The men are thrust into battle and regiment life, and have a difficult time adapting to the harsh conditions – and, of course, explaining their situation. The few light-hearted moments of the film emanate from this dilemma, including an interesting beat-boxing scene which both stuns and impresses the old-fashioned Russian troops. Of course, there is a pretty, headstrong nurse involved and it is the romantic storyline that provides moments of respite from the hails of gunfire for both central character Borman, and the ladies in the audience.

But girls, don’t stress – We’re From The Future is a very easily watchable war film. There is little blood or gore, and no gratuitous violence – it is straight up rolling tanks, exploding grenades and falling men. I’m the sort of person who struggles to watch veterinary shows on TV without covering my eyes, but there were no flinching moments or ‘ugh, I didn’t need to see that’ thoughts during this film. In fact, if anything it gave me a much deeper appreciation of what war is like and what ‘our boys’ (because, at the end of the day, Russia was our ally) had to face at the front line in 1940s wartime. It is also interesting to consider the ideology that filmmakers in contemporary Russia present about their tumultuous past – it seems that the days of Stalin are almost considered as the glory days, and something that all Russians should hold close to their hearts.

Time travel films have been done before, and there is a fine line between cheese and believability. But We’re From The Future manages to remain on the side of realism, despite the fact that a successful quest for the retrieval of a certain object becomes necessary for their return. It’s inevitable that they succeed, but their path there isn’t without danger, suspense and heartbreak. Like many leaving the cinema, the four return with a newfound appreciation for the men and women who served their countries, and a newfound sense of patriotism for mother Russia.

Verdict:

The official synopsis is a little misleading, but the intense battle focus is enlightening, to say the least. It is an interesting insight into both the mindset of Russians today, and the perils and realities of frontline war – without being too in-your-face bloody or violent.

5 Days of War (Review)

Hipsters [Stilyagi] (Review)

The Way Back (Review)

Paper Soldier (Review)

Interview: ‘Van Diemen’s Land’ director Jonathan auf der Heide and star Oscar Redding

And essentially, it is not. How can it be, when one of the parties does not even believe in the concept of love?

Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Summer (Zooey Deschanel) hit it off when they meet at the greeting card company where wannabe-architect turned copywriter Tom works. From here, they vie for the title of cutest movie couple ever – lazy days in bed, picnics in the park, shopping trips to IKEA, the works – with one major problem. Tom is head over heels in love, and thinks Summer is ‘the one’. But Summer doesn’t believe in love, let alone tying herself to a relationship, and maintains that their relationship is casual and friendly.

So far, this sounds like a pretty regular romantic comedy, right? OK, so the couple are arty and enjoy The Smiths, but their relationship issues could easily be translated to a Katherine Heigl film featuring Nickleback. Perhaps what sets their story apart, then, is the non-linear narrative. And the fact that only about half of the 500 days they are involved with each other are full of sunshine and rainbows.

(500) Days jumps all over the time period, as Tom starts in the middle after a break up to decipher just where the relationship went wrong and what he can to do win Summer back. He is helped out by his relationship guru team of all his little sister and his dorky but loveable friends.

But despite Summer coming across as the ‘bad guy’ who breaks Tom’s heart and then crushes it into the ground with a dainty ballet flat, all of the points she makes about relationships are truthful and logical. It’s easy to side with Tom, but her stance is ultimately not that unreasonable.

The film brings up relevant questions about destiny, fate and love, but perhaps the most pressing questions that arise is who designed the fabulous dress that Summer wears at their friend’s wedding and where can I buy it, along with which apartment is more divine: Tom’s or Summer’s?

But in all seriousness, (500) Days will be a winner for its mashing together of filmmaking fields and genres– Hollywood meets arthouse, while cheesy romantic comedy meets relevant, thought provoking drama. It is a perfect film to see with your friend who doesn’t quite share your love of indie film, or your boyfriend who wouldn’t be caught dead watching anything without guns. Its other strength is that it has a broad age-group appeal – fifteen year olds will identify with tales of unrequited love just as much as thirty-year-olds and beyond. Sure, there are some cheesy moments, including a rather humourous musical number, but at the end of the day the formulaic parts are not excruciating, but in fact, actually quite enjoyable.

Verdict:
Hooray! A rom-com out of Hollywood that has substance, style and a good soundtrack (including Aussie up and comers The Temper Trap)! But if you are after the traditional Cinderella ending, think again – you’ll leave feeling relatively satisfied, but perhaps not in the way you would expect.

Summer Hours (Review)

My Friends, My Loves [Mes amis, mes amours] (Review)

Our Idiot Brother (MIFF Review)

Going the Distance (Review)

Devil (Review)

The film begins in the late eighteen-hundreds with the young Chanel being literally carted off to an orphanage with her sister, and moves on to her life as a gaudy saloon performer whose real talents lie in dressmaking. From the outset it is clear that although poor, Coco is defiant, headstrong and really ‘something else’. She also displays a kind of elegance like no other, even the aristocratic women in their feathers and frills. The film slowly moves through her rise to high-end designer of simplistic, elegant clothing in a time where a) women didn’t work, and b) the phrase ‘less is more’ was not yet coined.

What really lifts the film, however, is Tautou. I’m happy to state my bias – I love her – but I seriously doubt if the film would work with any other actress. It’s a drama, it’s a love story, and there are poignant moments that rely so much on her facial expressions. It’s that quiet, press-lipped smile that she gives, her long hair pinned up around her face, her petite frame and delicate facial features. And most of all it’s that enchantingly perfected blank stare that she so often gives, which says nothing and everything all at the same time.

Director Anne Fontaine tries to draw on the whimsy and magic of Tautou and her previous films (most notably Jean Pierre Jeunet’s Amelie and A Very Long Engagement), but the film often lacks the same kind of sparkle. Of course there are a few goose bump moments – Coco seeing the seaside for the first time, her dancing debut in a gorgeous self-designed black dress, and a ponderous moment amongst fallen autumn leaves, dressed in a masculine blazer and blue and white striped shirt.

Benoit Poelvoorde and Emmanuelle Devos are admirable in support roles as lover and friend respectively, along with Allessandro Nivola whose performance, like his relationship with Coco and indeed the film itself, builds as the tale goes on. It is the development of this relationship that finally begins to shape the story as one would expect, as the encouragement the Englishman offers Coco leads to her becoming a fashion designer.

Her subsequent rise from Parisian hat maker to internationally-renowned designer is relatively glossed over, but is admittedly not the point of Coco Avant (before) Chanel. Yet the fact that we already know the ‘ending’ to the story means that the preamble which forms the basis of the film can at times feel drawn out and unnecessary. More dresses! More glamour! Less horse-riding, book reading and idle chit-chat! But of course, Coco was not born into her career as we know it, and it is this tale of her slow success, sacrifices, struggles and lovers that is presented in the film.

So instead of looking at the film as a story of the life and times of Coco Chanel, perhaps it is better to view it as a portrayal of character. And in this way, it is brilliant. Coco was a pioneer not just in the fashion arena, but for women and feminism in general. There is a sense of continual discontent and restlessness throughout her life, but in the finale a fulfilled feeling of proud achievement – albeit through heartbreak and sacrifice- is found, similarly rounding out satisfying viewing experience.

Verdict:
If you’re expecting a film filled with black and white tweed suits, layered pearls and quilted bags with chain-link straps, then buy your ticket and only drop in for the last ten minutes. This is all about Coco the woman, the lover and the fighter, and as always, Tautou is enchanting.

Coco Avant Chanel opens across Australia on June 25, 2009.

Competition: Win ‘Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky’ tickets + DVD pack!

Chanel No.5 – Advertisement or short film?

Interview: Jan Kounen, director of ‘Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky’

Bride Wars (Review)

Cinema Releases: 18 June, 2009 – Year One, The Proposal, Disgrace

Edward (Bill Milner) is a ten-year-old only child obsessed with mortality and the afterlife, a direct result of his house in the English countryside doubling as an old folk’s home. He despises his lonely life, the old people, and the fact that he can’t ‘have his room back’. His parents battle to keep the business afloat while the few senile residents totter around the house exhibiting their various elderly absurdities. It is only every now and then that Edward finds any sort of excitement, when one of the residents passes away and Edward tries to record their last breaths in the hope that he can hear their ghosts. He isn’t sad or scared about dying; he simply wants to know ‘what happens’.

But day after day there seems to be no paranormal activity, or as Edward writes in his notebook, “no recorded evadense”. That is, until the easily frustrated Clarence rolls into town in his colourfully painted caravan. At first Clarence too despises the home, the “jabbering simpletons” who live there, and also Edward, who seems to antagonise Clarence to no end. Predictably, however, the spite fostered between the two turns into a special kind of bond as Clarence teaches Edward magic tricks and tries to lure him out of his obsession with death. Edward reciprocates, trying to help Clarence come to terms with the loss of his wife and the regrets of the past. Clarence’s dementia becomes increasingly evident, which puts a strain on the relationship, but is resolved when Clarence comes out of retirement to perform a magic show at Edward’s eleventh birthday, albeit with near-disastrous results.

The pain of loss - both of loved ones and of self – is stressed throughout the film and climaxes when the confused Clarence is finally faced with his wife’s grave. Yet loose ends are tied and melancholic resolutions are found for the characters in the ‘you knew it was going to happen, but it still comes as a mild shock’ ending.

Visually the film has a whimsical autumn/winter kind of kind of feel, with plenty of granny-like elements including patchwork, crochet and lace. Interesting techniques are used to show past events that were recorded by Edward’s tape player, which adds a touch of quirk to the predominantly chronological storyline. There are enough comedic interludes and likeable old fuddy-duddies to save the film from coming across as overly morose and grim, but at the end of the day it leaves you pondering the fact that life is in no way permanent, especially not life as we know it.

At 76 Caine shows his age in the film, but this makes him all the more perfect for the role. Reports say that he agreed to do the film after seeing a friend battle with Alzheimer’s, and that Caine’s own wife struggled to watch the actor play the fading magician. For those who remember Caine’s glory days with films like Alfie (1966), it must be difficult to see the seemingly tireless actor appear as weary and bedraggled as he does in Is Anybody There? As a performer, however, Caine shows no signs of slowing down and some critics have touted the role as one of the best of his career.

Verdict:

There is plenty of magic in this story, most coming from Caine’s highly-regarded performance. But young Milner helps to provide some just as enchanting moments in this film that is as heartbreaking as it is heart-warming.

Cinema Releases: June 5-11 – The Hangover, Land of the Lost, Terminator Salvation

Twilight: New Moon (Review)

Abbie Cornish joins Vera Farmiga for Madonna’s royal scandal biopic ‘W.E’

The Fangs Are Out: Twilight vs Let the Right One In

Brooklyn’s Finest (Review)

Sometimes the combination of an actress and a director works magically across a number of films, but now these pairs have another thing in common – they have all played a part in the creation of extravagant Chanel No. 5 advertisements.

The latest Chanel advertisement, directed by Jean Pierre Jeunet, features Audrey Tautou in a fateful love story on board the Orient Express between Paris and Istanbul.

It is the third time the two have worked together, after Amelie and A Very Long Engagement. For Jeunet, Tautou was an obvious choice.

“It was clear we’d need an extremely expressive actress for the short shots,” he said.

The two and a half minute commercial is shot in true Jeunet style – sweeping pans from interesting angles, close ups of expression, lingering looks and plenty of whimsical symbolism, including the repetition of the number 5.

Likewise, Baz Luhrmann’s 2004 effort starring Nicole Kidman was a highly theatrical piece and loosely referenced Moulin Rouge with its star/bohemian-nobody love story and rooftop scenes.

For Luhrmann, the opportunity was to create “a two minute trailer of an epic motion picture that has never been made. A mini-movie.”

Jeunet agreed. “This is much more than an ad,” he said. “It’s like a patronage; a short movie financed by Chanel.”

“I had total freedom on the script, and was given their complete trust.”

The close relationship of director and actresses fostered through previous feature films is exactly what is needed and expressed in these intimate and detailed commercials.

“Recreating with pictures the emotions induced by a scent was an interesting challenge,” said Jeunet, but that the film gave him “the chance to go into the minutest detail and make something accomplished and highly polished.”

Tautou will fittingly be starring as Coco Chanel in Coco Avant Chanel due for release in late June.

—

The Chanel No.5 “films” can be viewed here:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTO4FHf8MBs httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-ngh-9eeMo

Coco Avant Chanel (Review)

Competition: Win ‘Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky’ tickets + DVD pack!

Interview: Jan Kounen, director of ‘Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky’

Cannes Interview: Sam Holst, director of Meathead

Cinema Releases: 18 June, 2009 – Year One, The Proposal, Disgrace

Firth as WWI veteran and father of three Jim Whittaker loses none of his Darcy-ish aloofness and mystique, but in this role he also displays endearing acceptance and a kind of beaten-down softness not as evident in the Darcy characters. But it is matriarch of the family, Mrs Whittaker, (Kirsten Scott Thomas) who wields all of the power over Mr Whittaker, their three adult children, the servants, the dog and anybody else she can manipulate and control. But her carefully controlled life goes into meltdown when her son John (Ben Barnes) returns home from a jaunt abroad married to his ‘floosy’, and the ensuing power struggle between the two women becomes the focus of the film.

But it is not just a struggle between the women, rather a struggle between old and new, traditional and modern. The ‘floosy’, Larita, (Jessica Biel) is from the new breed – young, fast, liberal, pant-wearing and (gasp) American. The successful female racing car driver and widower greatly contrasts the stuffy and uptight English aristocracy that she marries into, who are all trying desperately to hold on to family legacies and a world of titles, hunts, balls and little actual work.

Larita couldn’t have been a worse fit into the refined country life that John seems destined for, and can’t put a foot right in the eyes of Mrs Whittaker and her two vindictive daughters. Mr Whittaker, however, can see elements of himself in Larita and becomes her ally at every turn.

The film continually uses windows, mirrors and other reflective surfaces to literally reflect and pause upon life both past and present. At times, however, it struggles with humorous interludes that drag on too long, although it’s comedic value is saved by the absurdities of the upper-class coupled with snide remarks from various characters, with Kris Marshall often threatening to steal the show in his minor role as the butler.

Despite the increase in frustration on all sides of battle between Mrs Whittaker and Larita, the resolution of the film is not quite a resolution at all. Easy Virtue is an adaptation of a Noel Coward play, and its meandering nature makes it easy to see why it is not one of his most popular. Despite a winding but enjoyable build up, it seems to never really reach a satisfying climax and takes a kind of ‘easy way out’ to apparently solve the problems of the central characters. Minor subplots are left unexplored and unanswered, with mere hints of secondary storylines and alternate possibilities. Although I do not know the original play myself, from all reports it is not a failed adaptation, unlike Alfred Hitchcock’s 1928 silent version. But had the plot been tailored more to suit the medium of film and had firmly focussed on being a poignant drama instead of a watery comedy, it may well have ended up much more concrete and satisfying.

Verdict:

Colin Firth may have moved on to father roles, but glimpses of his sex appeal break through in the tango finale, and the film is worth seeing if only for this and the breathtaking 20′s dresses and hairstyles. A reasonably enjoyable couple of hours at the cinema though – take your mum along. (I did!)

La Regazza Del Lago/The Girl By The Lake (Review)

The X-Files: I Want To Believe (Review)

The King of Ping Pong [Ping-pongkingen] (Review)

Degrassi Junior High: Season 1-3 (Review)

Push (Review)

Scandinavian films aren’t exactly known to portray the world from a joyful, lighthearted perspective. Maybe it’s something to do with the short and grey winter days, or the hardworking social welfare systems that end up keeping everybody sort of ‘same-same’. Denmark and Sweden usually rank highly in lists of suicide rates, Finland hosted it’s latest in a spate of school shootings a few months ago and semi-Scandi Iceland is in economic turmoil.

Swedish film The King of Ping Pong is no exception to this trend in Scandinavian film making. The Sundance 2008 winner for cinematography is indeed beautiful, but in a bleak way. The spectacular long shots of northern Sweden’s ice and snow covered terrain, and scenes of long walks home on darkened days highlight the loneliness of central character, teenager Rille (an intriguing Jerry Johansson). The desolate, almost foreboding landscape mirrors Rille’s emotions, while the repetitive use of whites, greys, greens and blues depress the mood even more.

Rille is older than the other kids in his isolated area, including his brother Erik, but holds little social power over them except for when it comes to ping pong. Rille is better than the rest, holds the coveted key to the racket cupboard and rules the roost when organising tournaments at the local community centre. But while ping pong may be the only area in which he commands any sort of power or respect, he maintains that it is “the last remaining egalitarian sport”. With a virtually absent father, Rille and his brother are more or less all that each other have, apart from their well-meaning but struggling mother who is romantically involved with the laughing stock of the town, sport store owner Gunnar.

The re-introduction of their father and his fast-rotating lady friends shakes up their world in different ways, with Erik thriving on the contact and Rille retreating away. As Rille repeatedly explains, the differences between he and his brother couldn’t be greater – Erik is small while Rille is big; Erik is impulsive while Rille is more deliberative, and as even more differences are revealed, their relationship shatters.

It’s too much for Rille, and the constant victimisation he is subject to – both direct and indirect – pushes him over the edge. It is here that the film dives into it’s darkest moments, and it becomes difficult to see a happy ending emerge from the coldness and desperation that hangs both literally and figuratively over the film and its characters.

But just like all is not lost for the seemingly depressing and hopeless Scandinavian countries (which are actually lovely places*) neither is it for Rille, although a perfect, summed-up Hollywood ending is nowhere to be found in this thought-provoking piece of cinema.

Verdict:

Don’t expect anything fast-paced or flashy from this Swedish drama – just settle yourself in for a meandering, aesthetically and emotionally intriguing film that touches upon issues of family, loneliness and hierarchy through an adolescents eyes, but in a way much deeper than any child could fathom.

*The author wishes to note that she has lived in Scandinavia and that it really is a beautiful, happy place (except for maybe in the winter when it gets dark early and the sun hides behind clouds for weeks on end)

Bigpond Adelaide Film Festival 2009 Launches!

He’s Just Not That Into You (Review)

Easy Virtue (Review)

Happy Feet Two (Review)

Trailer Talk: X-Men: First Class

Risking the prospects of a successful career here, I’m going to reveal myself a little. For a journalism student, I’m not particularly well read. US Presidential campaigns? I wouldn’t say I passionately followed the last one. Bikie gangs? Boring, let’s go and grab a coffee. Seminal works like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas? It’s probably on that long list of books I should read/movies I should see but never get around to. Hunter S. Thompson and gonzo journalism? Oh yeah, that’s vaguely ringing a bell.

I’m watching Gonzo: the Life and Work of Dr Hunter S. Thompson. I don’t read any reviews before it and am surprised to discover that it is a documentary, mashing together file footage, previous documentaries and expositions Thompson’s life, interviews with ex-wives and colleagues and excerpts from films, notably Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas starring Johnny Depp. Depp also makes an appearance in this homage to the late journalist, acting as narrator to the documentary.

The film runs chronologically, documenting his early days as a struggling freelancer, his year with the Hells Angels resulting in a book of the same name, his close bid for Sheriff in small-town America, the basis of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and his behaviour and influence during the 1972 McGovern presidential campaign. In a nutshell, Thompson’s ‘gonzo’ style saw his own persona and views inserted into the otherwise bland and objective recounts that were being published as ‘news’ at the time. Rolling Stone magazine acted as the platform for Thompson’s articles, as the man who was continually embroiled in a rock star lifestyle – sex, drugs and more, including guns – became arguably bigger than the stories themselves.

Like the Thompson’s own style, the film is brazen, honest and at times ironic. A 70s soundtrack keeps the story moving along, as does the almost unbelievable accounts of his antics. The man seemed to be constantly skirting the boundaries of both journalism and life, and while Thompson took his own life (via a gun) in 2005, his legacy lives on in both his words and in documentaries like this, leaving me wondering what his view would be on the events of today, notably the global financial crisis and the 2008 Obama/McCain run for the Whitehouse.

Verdict:

A good piece of media, be it film, article or otherwise should help you think for yourself and question the world around you. This doco does all that and more, and whether you agree with the man’s morals, ethics and journalistic style, Gonzo is likely to keep you entertained and intrigued to the very end.

Carey Mulligan signs on for biopic ‘Effie’

Frost/Nixon (Review)

The Hurt Locker (Review)

The Troll Hunter (BAFF Review)

The September Issue (Review)

They’re a bit like short films, really.

Adelaide goes a little bit crazy at this time of year, and the festivals that are unleashed on the city seem to just get bigger and better every year. The city pulses with a kind of vibrancy like no other. In amongst the myriad of events you can find Flickerfest and Tropfest, two of Australia’s premier short film festivals.

Flickerfest was held in the beginning of February, screening for one night only at the Mercury Cinema. Tickets were cheaper than your average movie screening, beer, wine and nibbles flowed fast and free, and each seat was surprised with a Jurlique goody bag (which, let me tell you, was pounced on by the lads in my company)

The touring show mixes animation with regular films, Australian with international, Cannes Jury Prize winners with Australian premieres and Natalie Portman’s debut as writer/director in Eve with lesser-known names that we may hearing more of in coming years. Highlights included the Oscar-nominated On the Line (Auf Der Strecke) out of Germany, about a security guard who witnesses an attack on the metro and the impact on his conscience and life, Vicki Sugars’ locally shot Past Midnight in which a girl escaping a relationship finds a strange sense of peace in a tiny fishing town, and an engaging This is Her, a narrated film switching between a present-day birth and what the future holds for those involved and finally. The Australian Jerrycan, exploring the pursuits of five small-town boys and the near-fatal consequences, has also been recognised at film festivals both locally and overseas (Cannes 2008, Australian Film Institute 2008).

More recently was Tropfest, the world’s largest short film festival, which is held in Sydney and screened simultaneously around the country. Adelaide’s version was held in the gorgeous Garden of Unearthly Delights on a balmy Sunday evening. Winning the festival was Genevieve Clay’s Be My Brother, starring winner of best actor Gerad O’Dwyer, which shined the spotlight on disabilities and prejudices in a loveable, heartwarming way. Second prize was awarded to industry regular Abe Forsythe’s (who you might remember from Always Greener and as director/star of the feature-length Ned) humorous Being Carl Williams, in which Underbelly’s Gyton Grantley plays himself with disastrous consequences, while Fences, where a young boy finds himself at a crime scene with his detective father, took out many of the other awards.

Other enjoyable films included the quirky Notes From A Scaresmith, Bargain!, which keeps you questioning the motive until the end, One In A Million featuring a clever twist and Jackie’s Spring Palace, filmed right here in Adelaide.

Short film festivals are just like tapas: they can satisfy you instantly, cause a nasty taste in your mouth or simply leave you wanting more (a bit like that fried brie I had in Barcelona…mmm). They are perfect for those with challenged attention spans, those looking to discover the ‘next big thing’ in acting, screenwriting and directing, or those looking for a quick glimpse into another life, a short piece of cinematographic beauty or a fast lesson to be learned.

**Various short films are screening at the Adelaide Film Festival, including Past Midnight as part of Made In SA and Jerrycan as part of Snapshot. And lucky for you, if you missed Tropfest you can catch all of the finalists HERE.

2011 Shorts Film Festival Opening Night

Schadenfreude (Short film, review)

2011 Alliance Francaise French Film Festival Opening Night

Competition: Win preview tickets to CAIRO TIME in Adelaide!

Cannes 2011 – The Lowdown