Toronto 2005: Day Nine - Confessions of a Festival Junkie

Day Nine

Many moons ago I was having a conversation with David Cronenberg and our discussion segued to the topic of the Toronto Film Festival. His upcoming film at that particular moment was Dead Ringers and he'd been offered either opening or closing night. Without hesitation I advised him to take closing night and I recollect him being taken aback by the alacrity and assurance of my response.

I hadn't seen Dead Ringers but I was well aware of the story. It was a favorite project of Cronenberg and he and Norman Snider had worked and reworked the screenplay many times. The picture didn't really fit what an opening night crowd wants to see. Film festival first nighters tend to be weighted toward corporate sponsors, patrons and a smattering of politicos from the various strata of government. In most instances these people aren't regular cinema goers and, when they do attend, opt for mainstream entertainment.

The ideal opening night film is a heartfelt human drama with movie stars that manipulates the audience shamelessly to laugh and to cry. I offered up Steel Magnolias as the sort of film that was made to order as a curtain raiser. And, while closing night can be a bit of a let down because the spotlight has dimmed on the event, one has a much better shot at attracting a hipper crowd up to the challenge of a film that demands more than passive engagement.

It was a reasoned, sober perspective and Cronenberg listened attentively, appreciated my thoughtfulness and elected to take opening night.

Toronto has a long and curious history of movies that have bookended what over the years has been an otherwise impressive movie showcase. I'm not positive when the decision was made to always open with a Canadian movie but when it made an exception in 1991 and selected Married to It (admittedly directed by Canadian expat Arthur Hiller), the policy was already well known. It also fudged the rule when it chose Fly Away Home, a Canadian story filmed in Canada but otherwise financed by an American studio. There have been notable openers such as The Barbarian Invasions and The Sweet Hereafter and totally forgettable fare including Whale Music and Perfectly Normal.

Closing nights are harder to recall but last year it was Jiminy Glick in LaLaWood and I also recall Seven Years in Tibit among past finales. This year's offering is Edison, a yarn about bad cops and a young crusader journalist that brings them down. The cast includes Morgan Freeman, Kevin Spacey, Justin Timberlake and LL Cool J and the only reasonable explanation for its presence as Toronto's 2005 swan song would seem to me selection by lotto. It's an unremittingly hackneyed effort with the sort of serious bent that elicits unintentional laughter. Ninety minutes of black leader fares better by comparison and one has to wonder whether a monumental lapse in judgment or a big pay off contributed to its high profile inclusion.

I mentioned in an earlier column that I was part of the jury that chooses the best Canadian feature and best first feature Canadian screening at the festival. This year had a record slate of 27 movies to digest and while it would be difficult to wholeheartedly endorse such a massive outpouring of celluloid, I did come away with a more positive overall response than the one I've had in recent years when I wasn't part of the panel.

Entering into the jury process ought to be done with a fair dollop of blind faith. One never knows what sort of chemical reaction will result from putting together a group of idiosyncratic opinionated folk or what exactly one will confront during jury projections. I've been on panels where the mix was less than pleasant while others have been genuine bonding experiences. The current outing was generally quite pleasant even though the five judges were rarely able to attend the same screenings.

We had our final deliberation Friday and propriety demands my silence until winners are announced mid-afternoon Saturday.

What surprised most of us was that the final session was done in the presence of festival programmers and our jury coordinator. I've never been on a jury where anyone other than a panelist was in the room. In fact, the mere suggestion that an artistic director might have dropped in during a deliberation has set off alarms at such diverse events as Cannes and Montreal in the past.

The suggestion that the non-jurors depart was met with shocked surprise. That's the way they've always handled the process and no amount of suasion was going to change their minds. The attitude on their part was that they were there to assist not to interfere. However, they were dictating our process and while there was no attempt to tilt opinions, the periodic reminders to give movies their due certainly prolonged the amount of time involved in making our selections.

Other major festivals (and countless minor ones) want to steer clear of any implication of meddling. The jurors sequester themselves for however long it takes to come up with their award selections and eventually emerge from behind closed doors with "winners." Why festival programmers would even want to be part of that deliberation I cannot say. But it kind of felt like that over protective parent confronted with a child leaving home for a job, college or start their own life.

by Leonard Klady