EbertFest 2011: The Unfulfilled Women

I had the distinct privilege of interacting with two of the actress guests at EbertFest 2011. That would be the delightful Rachel Harris of Natural Selection and the estimable Tilda Swinton of "I Am Love".

I met Rachel Harris after Thursday night's movies as a group set off for an impromptu karoke night at Bentley's.

And I got to ask Tilda Swinton the very first audience question at the Q&A panel after the showing of her movie. From the 3rd row center. Yeow!

Perhaps uniquely, and certainly counterintuitively, it seemed to me that their very different movies had essentially the same plotline: unfulfilled woman leaves town and does something about it.

So let me group these two movies together for discussion.

1. Natural Selection

Rachel Harris is the star of this indie film, shot in 18 days and still seeking distribution. Roger Ebert was significantly impressed with the film's showing at SWSX in Austin and quickly added it to the schedule at EbertFest. First time director Robbie Pickering wrote and directed this impressive tale set in his home town in Texas, inspired by his mother's impending widowhood and her future of facing life on her own.

Harris plays Linda White, a faithful wife in a strained 25-year marriage. Strained, in large part, by her husband's strict religious view of sex, even within the confines of Christian marriage, as only for the purpose of procreation. A discovery made after her husband's unexpected stroke sets her off on a journey to find his son that she didn't know he had and bring the son home to him as a last request. Chased cross-country by their smitten married pastor, who clearly has a thing for her, events conspire against her. Hilarity and personal revelation ensue, culminating in a stunning late-night confessional scene. Moving and powerful.

I loved the movie, principally for how it framed two powerful issues: religion, and long-term marriage. I related to both topics, and it affects how I see the movie.

Director Robbie Pickering addressed the topic of religion in the Q&A session after the movie. His mother, knowing that the film was essentially about her, asked him not to mock the religion he grew up with or her church & friends. He wanted to respect that. I got to ask him about that the next night as we walked to the karoke bar. Was he picking on religion? "Of course I was. What's the point of making a film that doesn't pick at it some?"

From my point of view, he both picked at religion and respected it in a reasonably good balance. I wasn't quite sure as the story developed, and I was steeling myself for the standard Hollywood liberal mockery of religion, especially of the Texas bible-belt brand that Pickering grew up in. It wasn't looking good on its face. The too strict attitude on sex, for example. I go to church weekly in a conservative evangelical church, and I don't know anyone with that strict of a belief that sex in marriage is only for having kids and never for pleasure. That seemed a strawman setup. Also, the hypocritical strict pastor who clearly is lusting for his married parishoner.

What swayed me though, what told me the religious background of the plot had a ring of authenticity, was three things:

First, the music. There is a scene where Linda is driving and she puts in a Christian cassette tape in her car. She says it's "Sally Patty". Wow. That is authentic. An authentic reference to Christian singer Sandy Patty. If you're a Protestant Christian for the last twenty years or so you've heard Sandy Patty sing. I had just watched several videos of SP on YouTube over Easter, like "Via Dolorosa". I got the reference immediately. It locked in authenticity. I asked Rbbie Pickering about the "Sally Patty" reference. He said his mom was a big fan, and the first concert he went to was a Sandy Patty concert. Pickering had a good sport of picking at religion, but it was also clearly authentic to him, and he respected his mother's religious faith. I appreciated that.

Second, Rachel Harris's portrayal of Linda White respected religion and her family. Harris herself took a swipe at "batshit crazy" religion during the Q&A. But, she didn't in character, in acting out the script that Pickering had written for her. There were plot points where they could have had Linda rebel and take gratuitous swipes at her church and her upbringing and her husband. But, they didn't. Even when she felt betrayed, she didn't lash out and trash them. She played Linda with strength and grace, not shallowness and vulgarity.

Third, Linda White had a chance to renounce her religion. There's a pivotal scene where she arrives at the son's house and tries to talk to him through the door. He shouts aggressively "I don't want any Jesus shit!". Three times. It would have been so easy for Linda, with what she's been through, to say I don't either. But she doesn't, and she never does. This is purely my impression, but I think this scene is writer / director Robbie Pickering talking to his mother through his script. I get it. You don't want any Jesus shit. But you respect that your mother does, and there's enough of it still in you that you portrayed that authentically. I appreciate that.

I'm 30 years married this Summer, which is why I related to the authenticity of the White's 25-year marriage. People tell me that it's rare anymore to be married that long. I'm not sure that's true. It's not rare in my family. But, having that experience behind me helped me to appreciate the central crisis in the movie. To appreciate the authenticity of the tension of both strain and strength in a 25-year marriage. Perhaps that will go right by most movie-goers. Perhaps the writer/director hasn't yet experienced that himself but he faithfully transcribed it from his mother's experience. But, he got it right.

The central scene in the movie to me, besides the diner confessional, was a quiet scene with Linda White and her husband retiring to bed - with just these few lines:

Linda: "Why did you...

Husband: "Betray you?"

Linda: "...marry me?"

Wow. The whole weight of the movie is in those three lines. You know by her question that he didn't do her any favors by marrying her. Ouch.

I watched Natural Selection as a Christian man in a 30 year marriage. I saw it in that context. Said ouch a few times, but I loved the film.

I wanted to ask a question in the Q&A, and it would've been this: "What does the title mean, and does it mean the same to Pickering as it does to Harris?" Wish I had asked it. I'm asking it now.

2. I Am Love

This Italian film with English subtitles could not be more different in tone than "Natural Selection". It's sensibility is very European, and I am very not. Yet, it has the same essential plot: an unfullfilled woman does something about that.

Why is she unfulfilled? Well, it takes a long time to tease that out. The movie takes its time establishing the family and the family dynamics. Tilda Swinton's character, Emma - a Russian national in an Italian family, is both the wife and mother of succesor's to a rich industrialist's factory ownership. This is not fullfilling for Emma. Why? Well, because as it turns out - she doesn't fit in the family. Why that is is revealed in a brief conversation with the family chef:

Antonio: "How did you meet Tancredi?"

Emma: "He came to Russia looking for treasures for his home."

She was apparently one of the treasures that he brought home. An art piece, nothing more. Unloved, unfullfilled, she is willing to give that up even if it means going peasant Bohemian.

That's what I got out of it anyway. I didn't love it. I'm glad I saw it. And I enjoyed the setting in Milan - a city that I have been to and photographed.

My question to Tilda Swinton was this: "I loved the street scenes in Milan. You walked by the Duomo, by the Central Station, by the little church where Da Vinci's "Last Supper" hangs. Did you choose Milan as the setting, and how important were those street scenes to the film?" And she looked right at me in the 3rd row and answered wonderfully.

Two films with the same theme: an unfulfilled woman does something about it. One resonated with me, one was foreign to me. Which is why I say that "Natural Selection" told that tale better of the two.

And two great experiences with wonderful actresses & a director. That was me having the full EbertFest experience.

PostScript: Two further moments with "Natural Selection" Director Robbie Pickering

1. Robbie and Rachel Harris did not leave the festival after their film showing day, as I think a lot do, but stayed for much of the festival. I would see them kicking around the theater every day. On Thursday night after the showing of Richard Linklater's "Orson Welles and Me", I saw Robbie run down to the 2nd row in the VIP section to get a fanboy picture of Linklater onstage at his Q&A. Just like I do! That was fascinating, to see one director as a fan of another. So, of course I took a picture of Robbie Pickering taking a picture of Richard Linklater. Here it is:

2. I took several pics of Pickering and Harris onstage in the Natural Selection Q&A. As I was editing the sets, I saw this one with Pickering staring right at me as if to say "Dude, you're killing me with that camera!" As I probably was.

You can see my EbertFest photo galleries at http://www.lickcreekphotography.com/

EbertFest 2011: Metropolis!

Great films are the heart of EbertFest. I've seen three so far, so let's discuss the first.


1. Metropolis (1927 - clip at the end)

This is my first silent film ever, at 51 years of age. Wow. What an experience. I had the unbelievable privilege of seeing the reconstructed and restored two-and-a-half-hour version. A beautiful print, and a wonderful experience.

You can find a description of the plot online that are better than my ability to describe it. Let me simplify it to this briefly:

Joh Fredersen (the mind) runs the teeming futuristic - staggeringly futuristic for 1927 - above ground Metropolis. His son Freder, beset by a vision of a beautiful woman, sets off into the Worker's City undergound to find his "brothers", the workers. The question is whether the worker drones, represented chiefly by the mechanic Grot (the hands) at the Heart Machine, will rise up under the quasi-religious figure Maria and overthrow the privileged in the Metropolis above. Make sense? Try figuring all of that out without dialogue for the most part.

Note: The fact that the movie has a plot has apparently not been apparent for many of the years since it's release. My new friend Peter, who I met at the Virginia theater in the hour before the showing, tells me that he has seen the film many times over the last 30 years in Germany - but always much shorter and chopped up versions. He frankly thought it was an expressionistic film, and was surprised Wednesday night at the full version that it did in fact have a recognizable plot. It totally changed how he looked at the film.

There are periodic cue cards and "interstitles" to guide you along with the very physically dramatic silent film acting style. Big movements. Physical risks. Arched eyebrows. And such. What I noticed most about the silent film was the silence. I could hear myself thinking throughout, without dialogue coming at me. I Tweeted that I could "hear myself imagining".

To cut to chase: the tagline at the ending of the film is this:

"The mediator between the Mind and the Hands is the Heart!"

To translate that into plot: the Mediator (Freder) between the Mind (Joh Fredersen, the leader of the Metropolis) and the Hands (Grot, the representative of the Workers) is the Heart (Freder/Maria). There, that makes sense now.

To translate it into my understanding of my first silent film:

The mediator between the silent Film on the screen and my film-going Heart was the Score by the brilliant live Alloy Orchestra.

3 guys in the pit. One guy on keyboard. Two guys on percussion. Playing and banging continuously for 2.5 hours. Wow. Brilliant. They really added to the emotional experience of the film. I would go through phases of not being aware of them being live. But, then I would see the mallets striking the metal and be thrilled again that this energetic and moving score was being played live. They set the mood. Brooding, scary, kinetic, hopeful. The brought it all home in a way that was more than just song clips juxtaposed to set a mood in a typical movie. It was a wall of sound throughout. I will hear those drums in my head for days.
 
 Kudos to the Alloy Orchestra - the Heart of this viewing of Metropolis!

The best part! I had a moment Thursday morning to share this experience with our host himself, Roger Ebert in a brief but meaningful chat. I told him that I enjoyed my first ever silent film. That I "could hear myself imagining". Roger wrote me two notes on his notepad during our chat. "Silent movies bring on a reverie" and "They are in the head". Yes. Absolutely. What an experience it was - both the movie and the chat with Roger. I'm having the full EbertFest experience!

And now, a clip of Metropolis!

 

Immersed at EbertFest 2011

I had a wonderful time last year at EbertFest 2010 and, though a long and traumatic year has passed in between, arriving this year is like stepping right back into those moments. I'm back. And, I'm taking the opportunity to immerse myself in film culture for a week at EbertFest 2011. what a week it will be!


I have 4 goals for the week:

1. Spend a moment with Roger Ebert.

It is EbertFest, after all. His week. His movie choices.



Roger Ebert has become my friend, in the last two years. I was going to say my virtual friend. My internet friend. But, Roger is very gracious at extending himself to everyone who will engage in civil dialogue with him and so I will just say "my friend". I'm just a guy, often with an opinion to share on his blog, and he has reached out and befriended me. And he's become my social media role model as I have engaged on Roger Ebert's Journal and on Twitter. He's made me feel part of the community that he's built.

I had that moment Thursday morning at the Ebert Club breakfast. Roger visited with us. Had us each introduce ourselves. And eventually patted the seat next to me for me to sit down with him. I got to say to him "I appreciate you." I got to have a brief but meaningful chat about my first experience on Wednesday night of seeing a silent film. 5 minutes, with Roger "chatting" with me on his notepad. A moment. An eternity of time.

2. Immerse myself in film.

I say "film", not movies. I see movies every week of my life. EbertFest is a chance to see quality films and to interact with their actors, directors, and critics. These are films that I would not ordinarily see in a year's time and I am better for having seen them.

I am not of the film culture, as many of the attendees here are. This is either their business or their passion. Not only the professionals in the ranks of the invited actors and directors. Not only the film company professionals and the University media folks. But the bloggers / critics who eloquently their passion for the art of film.

I'm just a guy, with a day job as a quality engineer in a factory. I watch movies. I have since I was a child who walked a long walk downtown on a weekend to watch "Jeremiah Johnson". Since my first job as a teen which was as a cinema usher who got to pause as he walked the theater and watch "A Star is Born" scene by scene many times over the course of it's run. I'm just a guy. Here to watch films.

3. Be human.

Last year I was overwhelmed and star struck at Ebertfest. Last year I met people. This year I know people, having talked with many over the course of the year online. I had a delightful conversation with my friend Omer Mozzafar - one of Roger's Far-Flung Correspondents - this morning at the Ebert Club Meet-n-Greet. Omer is the most resonable and learned voice on Twitter and the Journal. Omer's advice to me this morning - which I cherish - was that the most important thing on a venue like Twitter is to come across as human.

I want to be human at this event. Not just immersed, but engaged. Interested in the sea of my fellow film goers. I am delighted at the conversations that I am having at the Virginia Theater and the Illini Union. A discussion in line outside with Gary, who has come for all but two years of EbertFest. With Maggie, who sat down on the aisle behind me and eyed me warily to size me up for how tall I would sit in my seat! With Peter, my new German film and a Champaign townie who was also a festival regular and who shared the experience of the German silent film "Metropolis" with me. With Brett, my fellow Ebert Club'er, who shared the moment of wonder with me as the room filled up this morning with film luminaries. With my friend Ali Arikan, who hailed me in the hallway of the Union dripping wet from his morning run! And with my good friend Tom Dark, who affectionately calls me "Ran" on line and with who I had a deep conversation this morning on film and science and on how real the people on line that we spar with are.

Me, with my friends Omer and Gerardo:

4. Survive

I'm down in my back this week. In extraordinary pain, for me. It will take a good measure of will and strategy to survive the grueling week that is a film festival. I will intentionally miss 3 of the 13 films strategically, and do my absolute best to make the rest. I missed two today to lie on a heating pad with hopes of making the best of tonight's feature and then some blogging.

Here's my friend Tom Dark sharing an excercise with me at breakfast that might help. Grab your ankles and roll around in a ball like we did when we were kids. Thanks Tom! I tried it today.

I'll be back later to share my thoughts on the extraordinary films that I am seeing at the out-of-body experience that is EbertFest. Tonight, save the aisle seat for me.

New Orleans - in and out of the Vieux Carre

New Gallery on my companion Lick Creek Photography photo website. New Orleans.

I had a quick business trip in there this week. Flew in on Thursday afternoon. Evening in the French Quarter. Business Friday morning, flight out at 5pm - into a driving rainstorm in Chicago and lengthy flight delays home.

I think I captured the French Quarter and the outskirts well in my brief time there. Check it out. Try the slideshow. Leave a comment if you see a picture that you like.

Inception: Multi-faceted Sleight-of-Hand

Christopher Nolan's "Inception" is more than the movie that I thought it was when I first viewed it. It is a story of resolution of emotional pain wrapped up in an action-adventure team-heist caper.

I know that, because I watched it twice. In one day. Back-to-back. I saw it, walked out to the ticket counter and bought a ticket for the next show, and watched it again. Transfixed both times, but comprehending the 2nd time.

I'm not a movie reviewer and I'll leave it to those capable folks to describe Inception to you in their inimitable way. For Roger Ebert's stellar review of Inception click here, and for his Journal entry on the controversy of the negative criticisms of the film click here.

But, I do think that my marathon double-feature of Inception gives me perhaps a different insight into the movie. Here's how I described on Roger Ebert's Journal how I perceived the movie in those two viewings.

First viewing: I recognized instantly that this was a movie that I would just have to let unfold in front of me. Hang with it. See how it played out. Enjoy the acting, and puzzle out the plot later.

2nd viewing: Ah, now it's making sense. I'm seeing the setups. Understanding the dream layers. Hearing a couple of laugh lines that I missed in the first showing. Completely understanding the inceptions, both of them. Wow.

Inception is intricate. Layered. Precise. Just trying to keep all of the layers, and their differential timing, in my head was stimulating.

Intricate, yes. Layered, yes yes. But in more than one direction. Not just deep, but wide.

"The inceptions, both of them". The key to understanding the movie.

Let me just cut to the chase. Inception is to me much more than the layered action heist-caper that I struggled to hang with in the first viewing. It is a rich emotional character study, driven by emotional pain. The sleight-of-hand that Nolan employs is keeping you so engaged in the caper that the emotional heart of the movie is the gem to be discovered in the second viewing.

By now you've seen or heard enough to understand the Caper. A techological mercenary team lead by DiCaprio's character "Cobb" excels at dropping in to their target's dreams to steal corporate secrets. Their challenge, to do it in reverse. To plant an idea in their target's mind through dreams, and dreams within dreams, to achieve a corporate end. "Not strictly legal", he says. Will Cobb's team succeed in it's mission, and Cobb achieve his yearned for reward?

It's all you can do to hang on and comprehend this aspect of the plot. To track the layers "deep" into the dreams, each layer with it's own timescale. You are inundated with the details of the reverse-heist. With the makeup of the team, and their various roles. With the other-worldness and physics-defying complexity of the mazes created by Ariadne, the Architect. By the parallel actions in the different layers of the dreams.

Questions abound as you watch. How do they team-dream? Can inception be done? Who is the dreamer at each level, and who are the dream-sharers? Will Cobb and his team succeed in their mission and earn Cobb his payoff? Or will Cobb's increasingly threatening subconscious projections derail his success?

I say "derail" on purpose. But, I'll come back to that.

It is entirely understandable as you do all you can do to keep up with the intricate layers of the Caper plot hold a criticism that I am hearing that the negative critics have espoused - that Nolan's movie lacks emotion.

I disagree. I think that Inception is driven by emotion. By emotional pain to be precise. And, ultimately, the resolution of that pain.

Perhaps it is because I can relate to emotional pain quite well at the moment that I think that. That I'm sensitive to that. But, it is there.

The line of dialogue in Inception that is key to understanding the core of emotional pain in the plot mostly escaped me in the first viewing. Said by Cobb's main teammate to the Architect, it is this:

"He knows it can be done, because he's done it before".

Forget the caper plot. Focus on that. The first Inception. Follow those plot elements. What does Cobb's elevator ride with Ariadne mean? The hotel room? The train? The 50-year limbo? Why does Mal show up so often? Focus also on Cobb's face, which is a character study in emotional pain.

I said "derailed" earlier. Why?

Why did the train suddenly appear in the first chase sequence out of nowhere? Because the train has significance in the emotional core of the movie. Significance that is coded in this oft-repeated phrase that ties layers together:

"You are waiting for a train. A train that will take you to your destination. You can't be sure that it will, but it doesn't matter. Either way we will be together forever".

Or the second repeated refrain:

"I am an old man, filled with regrets, waiting to die".

The movie is filled with emotion. Mal & Cobb's love. Ariadne's wonder at "pure creation". Primal emotions: Loss. Separation. Disappointment. Guilt. Most of all, guilt.

It's a sleight-of-hand of sorts. While you are distracted with the deep up-down layers of the Caper plot, the emotional core of the movie is unfolding in the back-and-forth past-present layers of the First Inception. That's what leads to resolution, and payoff.

What a rich and fascinating movie. Worth seeing, I think. Definitely worth seeing twice!

Note: photo from Cleveland.com, via Google.

A Bonus EbertFest 2010 Moment

I received this great photo of me with Roger Ebert, taken with Omar Moore's camera, after I got back from EbertFest 2010. Here's the story of the photo.

I arrived early at the Ebert Club Meet n Greet at the Illini Union. Before Roger arrived I mingled with the small group and met a few folks whose names I recognized from participating in Roger Ebert's Journal. Sean, Paul, Brett and I were standing together when Roger came into the room. I jokingly said to Chaz and Roger that we were "holding up the blogger corner". (meaning, commenters on Roger's Journal, rather than bloggers ourselves like the Far Flung Correspondents - who were also present).

Roger recognized me as he approached our small group for handshakes. He wagged his finger at me, as if to say "there you are". Or "you!". A positive greeting at any rate.

Eventually, Roger sat down on a couch in the middle of the room and held court for a while, as people sat with him to talk and have their picture taken with him. I was hoping to get over there myself.

I was standing over near the coffee bar, making small talk. Tom Dark and director Charlie Kaufmann were chatting next to me. I wanted to meet both, but couldn't find a moment to break in to their animated conversation. About that time Roger's wife, Chaz, came over next to me to get coffee.

"Chaz, I have a question for you. Do I ever get Roger agitated when we are disagreeing over politics on his Journal?"

Chaz looked at my name tag, which just said "Randy - Ebert Club".  "Randy", she said - puzzling it out. "What is your last name?" When I told her, she lit up. "Randy, you're that brave conservative on the site! Oh, you have got to meet Roger!"

Chaz took my hand and raced me over to the couch where Roger was, and introduced me. Again, I was honored and thrilled. Meeting one of my heroes, Roger Ebert, in person after a year and a half of virtual conversation on his excellent Journal.

Roger patted the couch beside him, and I gladly sat down. A quick picture, from someone using Omar's camera. A chance for me to thank Roger again for his grace and civility and generosity with me on his blog. And then I was up to let someone else have their chance to meet this great man.

Thank you Omar, for sending me this special photo of my moment with Roger Ebert. I will not forget it. Such a gracious man.

And what a week it was at EbertFest 2010.

Best Supporting Character at EbertFest 201

While the Far-Flung Correspondents and invited VIPs were all awesome, my nomination for "Best Supporting Character" at EbertFest 2010 is....The Virginia Theater itself!

What a gorgeous theater to see a movie in! Especially to see multiple movies over several days in...

I got quite familiar with the theater over the multiple viewing days. Seats down front 2nd row for opening night, in the balcony for Friday, and in various places on the main floor on the other days. Several views - all great. True, my seat was an ordeal for the 3 1/2 hour viewing of Apocalpyse Now Redux with a deleterious effect on my eroded backside. Overall, a great experience.

Entered in evidence for my nomination, my pictures of the Virginia:

- My view from the balcony on Friday:

The beautiful architecture of the Virginia main floor, Roger & Chaz onstage:

The balcony, as seen from the orchestra pit railing:

Milling about outside between movies:

Decorative detail in the lobby:

Decorative detail in the lobby:

The office door. I first thought - unfinished? 2nd thought - Art!

The other wall of the Virginia main floor:

Full moon rising above the balcony:

Stage lighting for a panel:

Panel discussion, with ambience:

Of course, the huge screen at the Virginia, the only way to see Apocalypse Now Redux:

Stage lighting:

Different stage lighting for a panel:

My last shot of the theater floor before departing:

Lastly, the men's inside joke during the festival: urinals with a view of Randolph St. Traffic. Really.

Faces in windows. See that upper left window? See the last picture.

Yeah.

To the Virginia Theater: Best Supporting Character of EbertFest2010!

My EbertFest 2010

Attending a four day film festival by yourself - alone - is an intensely personal experience. Unavoidably a lonely experience. A melancholy and reflective experience. But rich and thrilling too. All of the above.

In the end, I saw 10 of the 13 films screened at this Roger Ebert's EbertFest 2010 in Champaign-Urbana.  Achieving, for the most part, my primary objective at a film festival. I was also able to attend a Meet-n-Greet for the Ebert Club at the University of Illinois Illini Union as well as watching several panels of the festivals VIP's. I met six of the eight Ebert's Far Flung Correspondents, including Ali and Omer and Omar. I spent quality time with several of my fellow Roger Ebert's Journal commenters: Grace Wang, Dave Van Dyke, Tom Dark, Brett, Sean,  and lurker Kassie! I had conversations before movies with long-time festival goers about festival culture. And, I tweeted relentlessly through a Twitter login on the Ebertfest website.

I did it all. Made the most of my solo festival experience. Very few regrets of missed moments.

Most of all, I had my camera as my companion. I think that I captured the spirit of the festival from my POV as best as I could. You can see my full gallery on Lick Creek Photography:

http://www.lickcreekphotography.com/   (Please leave a comment on any picture that you especially like.)

What I wasn't expecting from the my first full EbertFest immersion was this: not just "watching" movies, but experiencing movies. Experiencing the full emotional impact that the rich eclectic blend of movies that Roger had selected was capable of delivering.

I wasn't expecting to be confronted with myself.

That emotional impact was heightened by virtue of being back on the campus of the University of Illinois. This beautiful campus is the scene of both one of my proudest times of my life (being accepted and enrolling as a freshman in the fall of 1978) and also of the deepest regret of my life (having to leave before completing my degree - finished 14 years later at a university elsewhere). I have such deep and mixed emotions when I am inevitably drawn to stroll on the Quad. Always, inevitably, ending with pain. If I could have those years to do over again, could I do it so much better than I did? Of course I could.

The movie-emotion and the campus-emotion collided when I went to Steak and Shake Friday night after the powerful screening of Synedoche NY. I was hoping to find EbertFesters there, and found none. Instead, I found a restaurant filled with students, many in dress for a formal. All students, plus me - feeling infinitely old. Stewing in my thoughts on Synedoche NY and my campus regrets. Hazel's words to Caden on the night before she died echoing in my head: "I wish we had this when we were younger, and all the years in between". Wow. Ouch. Damn.

Thoughts on my 10 movies, plus shorts:

a. Short: musicians throughout the world singing one continuous song "Stand by Me". Thrilling and beautiful. A masterpiece in the duration of one song.

1. Pink Floyd's the Wall:

2nd row was two close for this chaotic madness. I enjoyed the music though, including the rich texture of the guitar.

2. "You, the Living" from Sweden with subtitles:

I didn't expect that a movie with 50 vignettes about depressed people would be so funny. Rich laughter in the theater. Repeating themes (Swedish military band, last call at the bar) tied the vignettes together in an unexpectedly sentimental and funny movie.

3. "The New Age"

A Hollywood movie from 1993, with recognizable Hollywood talent from writer / director Michael Tolkin. The jokes about the real estate recession seemed prescient and magnified in today's recession. A quality story well acted. "How are your morals?" was the thematic question of the film to me, and in life...

4. "Apocalypse Now Redux"

Wow. 3 1/2 of a masterpiece on a huge screen in 70mm. It was an ordeal to get through in the Virginia's old seats, and well worth the struggle. The movie brought home again that war is a chaotic and terrible thing for everyone involved. I marvelled at the Kilgore character (Duvall). I saw Brando in a new way. And I was struck mostly by Captain Willard's pain, which he kept at bay only through "mission" - as do many...

"Apocalypse Now" was a formative movie for me when I first saw it as a 19 year old student on the campus of the U of I. I had registered for the draft. I had lived through the Vietnam years as an impressionable teen. I was primed. Little did I know that I would volunteer for the Air Force a few short years later and serve 11 years.

5. "Departures"

This is simply the most beautiful and moving film that I have ever seen in my life. A film about the "encoffinment" profession in Japan, and the deep respect with which they care for the deceased. A perfect relationship development with the husband & wife characters. Humor and pathos perfectly delivered. A well deserved standing ovation for the director at the Q&A.

6. "Man with a Movie Camera"

Not for me. Oh well.

7. "Synedoche NY"

I hated this movie when I first saw it - alone late at night in my living room on DVD. Given Roger's naming it his movie of the Decade, I owed it a 2nd chance.

I had missed much of the humor in the movie. Seeing it with 1500 people laughing will correct that. Still it is a deeply unpleasant and irritating movie about a grumpy hypochondriac who is deeply and profoundly unhappy.

I was offended when the studio head said during the Q&A that the haters "were people who did not know how to watch the movie". Such is the arrogance of Hollywood - people defending why their art project made little money. Because it's a depressing and unpleasant and irritating movie, that's why.

Still, I was struck during the movie by Caden's frequent expressions of loneliness. Sad. True.

I got more out of it on the 2nd viewing. There will not be a third viewing.

b. Short: world musicians playing one continuous song. I don't know the song - seemed to be a Bob Marley song called something like "we don't need troubles" with Bono and others. Beautiful. I could watch these musical shorts all day long.

8. "I Capture the Castle"

A sweet British romantic comedy with strong echoes of the much better "The Other Boleyn Girl". Better than I expected.

9 "Vincent: a life in color"

As powerful a documentary as I've ever seen, about a colorful character indeed. It explained a lot about Vincent Falk - the "Riveraci" & Fashion Show Man who greets Chicago tour boats daily with his colorful dress and spin moves. We learned what makes him tick. What is behind his armor of puns and wardrobe.

As a former foster parent of years, I was deeply moved by Vincent's broken childhood in orphanages, just seeking parents who would love him. "St. Joseph's Home for the Friendless" is the saddest name for an orphanage that I've ever heard.

I met Vincent earlier in the week at the Ebert Club Meet-n-Greet, and got my own pun from him when he asked me where I was from.

I'm from Pekin. Instantly - "Oh, did you stop by the festival to peek in?" Clever.

c. Short by Ramin Bahrani: "Plastic Bag"  Simple and beautiful personification with a message, with Werner Herzog as the narrator.

10. "Trucker" 

Michelle Monaghan's virtuoso performance of a female trucker with a "just hanging on" edge whose unexpected confrontation with parenthood softens her. Sweet and perfect film.

I made one last trip out to the restroom right before the show, and was surprised to find her in the lobby talking to an excited fan. He wanted a picture with her, so I volunteered to take it for him. "Would you return the favor", I asked and got my picture with her. What a treat. She is radiantly beautiful and very sweet in real life (IRL)! Thank you, Michelle for the picture.

I also met the delightful Nell Minow, and got my picture with her as well. I appreciated her input on the panels.

The highlight of the festival for me: why, meeting one of my heroes Roger Ebert twice during the week.

First, at the Ebert Club Meet-n-Greet where he patted the couch next to him and had me sit for a picture. Earlier, as he entered the room and walked around shaking everyone's hand, he approached me and shook his finger at me as if saying "There you are!". That handshake was memorable.

Later, at the Far-Flung-Correspondents panel. I attended with my friend and sparring partner on Ebert's Journal - Dave Van Dyke - who I met through Ebert's Journal. I took Dave over to meet Roger. Roger looked at us and wrote something like "You two are here together?". He had us shake hands, and then put his hand over our clasped hands. Priceless.

I'm home now. I'm exhausted. And I had the experience of a lifetime at EbertFest 2010.

Selected pictures:

Me with Ali Arikan and Grace Wang:

2. Me with Omer Mozzafer and Tom Dark

3. Me with Dave Van Dyke and Roger Ebert, hands clasped:

 

4. Me with Michelle Monaghan:

Me with Nell Minow - "Movie Mom"

Me, nestled in for another showing:

You can find my festival tweets at www.twitter.com/rmasters78

Published!

Many thanks to Mr. Roger Ebert, expert film critic and Journalist extraordinaire, for choosing my photos to illustrate this week's article "The autumn leaves of red and gold" on Roger Ebert's Journal!

I'm honored.

My first photo credit!

I love Autumn...

Charleston - Part 1 of 3: The Tourist Photos

I was thinking today as I was looking through my photos at Lick Creek Photography about a particular fondness that I have for Charleston, South Carolina. It has an attractive combination of history and beauty and Southern charm. And it was formative in my travel photography interests.

I did a lot of travel with previous employers, and Charleston came up early in the rotation. I had just picked up the Canon Powershot and was looking for a place to use it, when my boss called me in the office. He needed me short notice in Charleston for a month-long project. I'm there!

Charleston has a beautiful historic district nestled down against Charleston Bay. In my first week or two there I settled in as an evening photo-tourist, learning my way around. Heading down the main drag - Meeting Street - and running into Battery Park, which looks out over Fort Sumter. Here's a house right at that intersection - my "big tree" picture:

I went downtown every evening, learning my way around town, joining many others on the sidewalks - taking shots of the same scenes, but trying to get an interesting angle on them. I came back several times to this wall, for example, trying to capture it:

Up and down Meeting St:

to a theater on a side street:

To the charming pastel-colored houses on the "rainbow" drive along the bay:

to the many churches in the historic district:

up close and far away:

I got to know and love the historic district of Charleston.

The first weekend there I stayed over instead of flying home to save the company money. (Why did I do that?) The weather was nice, so it was out to the beach! Out to the Isle of Palms:

I caught this picture in one of the harbor towns - where I must have disturbed the pelican! - on the way back from the beach:

Next, Part 2, getting closer....