Posted on 05/24/2004 7:00:08 AM PDT by Valin
CANNES, France -- The jury of the 57th Cannes Film Festival insisted Sunday that it awarded its top honor to Michael Moore's anti-Bush documentary not because of its politics, but because of its quality as a film.
"We were dealing with reels of film, not politics," said jury president Quentin Tarantino. "We all agreed that 'Fahrenheit 9/11' was the best film."
Tarantino and his eight fellow jurors were breaking with 56 years of festival tradition by explaining and defending their selections at a press conference the day after the awards were named. This was not the jury's idea but the festival's, Tarantino said, after Toronto critic Bruce Kirkland observed that past juries had operated with the secrecy of a Masonic lodge.
Some critics of the Palme d'Or for Moore interpreted it as a slap by the French against President Bush and his invasion of Iraq, but in fact the jury had four American members and only one French member; the other jurors were from Finland, Hong Kong, Belgium and the U.K.
"I knew this political crap would be brought up," said the outspoken Tarantino. "I think judging a film by its politics is a bad thing. If this movie was saying everything I wanted it to say, but not saying it with the best filmmaking, I would have opposed it."
The film, which received the longest standing ovation in Cannes history, charges that Bush has bungled the war on terrorism and sent U.S. troops to Iraq under false pretenses. One of its most talked-about scenes claims Bush remained in a Florida classroom, reading a book to children, for seven minutes after learning of the attack on the World Trade Center, until aides finally had to ask him to leave.
When an Italian journalist complained that the film had "only one point of view," juror Tilda Swinton, an actress from Scotland, replied "We've heard what Bush has to say. We live with it. It's not a fair fight. This film helps to redress the balance." And juror Edwidge Danticat, a Haitian-born American novelist, said, "Moore starts by saying this is his view of the world. He gives voice to people who are voiceless."
Every one of the jurors said they supported the award. American director Jerry Schatzberg said, "Before I got here, I was thinking, I hope the other jurors are not going to be sympathetic just because of the film's distribution problems. Quentin told us on Day One to keep politics out of it and just judge the films."
The movie generated controversy after Disney president Michael Eisner ordered his Miramax subsidiary, which produced it, not to distribute it in America. Miramax head Harvey Weinstein says the film has distribution in every other country in the world. Ironically, Eisner's decision may help the movie; the Palme d'Or has raised Weinstein's asking price for U.S. rights.
Tarantino's famous temper was revealed at one point in the press conference when a journalist questioned the "cinematic qualities" of "Fahrenheit 9/11."
"You're talking about pretty pictures," Tarantino said. "This film is made of images. When a U.S. soldier is shown with an [Iraqi] captive whose head is in a hood, that is not a pretty picture, but it is a powerful image." When the journalist tried to argue, Tarantino said the discussion was over and took off his earphones so he could not hear the translation.
The jury did not reveal individual votes but hinted at some differences. Its jury prize for the Thai film "Sud Pralad," which sharply divided Cannes audiences, also split the jury, "but some of us were moved by that film to a staggering degree," Tarantino said, and so dissenters on the jury respected their passion.
He defended the Grand Prize (second place), which went to the violent Korean revenge thriller "Old Boy." "The most exciting films in the world are coming out of Japan and Korea right now," he said. "It took 10 years for the genre pictures of Hong Kong to be recognized; it's great that a film like this can play in Cannes." Fellow juror Tsui Hark, whose own Hong Kong genre pictures, like "Chinese Ghost Story," took years to win recognition, kept a poker face.
The press conference was the closing act of what many of us thought was a return to form for the festival. Its new director, Thierry Fremaux, cast his net wide by including two animated films and two documentaries in the competition.
And he closed the fest on a traditional note with the new MGM musical "De-Lovely," based on the life of Cole Porter. As thousands of guests, from "Star Wars" creator George Lucas to Microsoft billionaire Paul Allen, partied on a jetty out beyond the Palais, there was a concert of Porter's songs by such as Natalie Cole, Sheryl Crow, Alanis Morissette, Robbie Williams, Kevin Kline and Ashley Judd. Backed by a full pop orchestra, they were shown on a vast video screen flanked by high-powered speakers, so that everyone on the beachfront, the Boulevard Croisette and all of the oceanfront hotels could see and hear the performances (whether they wanted to or not).
I don't suppose Cannes has ever been away, but it's certainly back.
What eats hollyweird is that Gibson's file, with whatever film flaws may be claimed, made record amounts while a partisan poison pill like moore is only a niche maker with limited appeal in the best of circumstances.
Hollywood does not want to accept the fact that not only are their views a far left minority, they have also been proven consistenly wrong for society time and time again.
My favorite scene involving Quentin Tarantino is the one where George Clooney backhands him.
so will Miramax distribute it overseas?
Looks like Weinstein and Moore share a love for Krispy Kreme donuts as well as a hate for America.
I'm hearing all this bs rhetoric from the lefties that Moore's film will influence the election. I'm not buying it. I can't imagine any decent American paying to see this tripe. He's preaching to his insane choir.
I have an idea.
Michael stay in France
Do one of your patient ed documentaries on how France surrendered during WWII.
On second thought, maybe the doc not such a good idea, you would find a way to blame bush & 50% of the people would believe your fat sorry A$$
Re your post 24, I too am puzzled as to the audience for such tripe. I suppose there is--probably aging hippies and college professors (I repeat myself)--but I'll bet all I have that it is very, very small.
Lies, and the lying Franken's who tell them.
Tilda Swinton in another movieland name to boycott. (She was in "The Beach" with Leo DiCaprio.)
If you look up the history of this fest on the net you'll find that some pretty good films got the top award in the past. Still, the US dominates (18 awards total) which says something since the US hasn't in the past 40 years produced as much art cinema as many other small countries. We put out "commercial vehicles" and "products", and even this forum judges films by their attraction to the mob (i.e. the box office receipts.) And the presence in Cannes of such "giants" of art as Sheryl Crow and Larry Ellison, with his yacht in tow no less, tells you it's become a totally americanized county fair for the rich.
It's a shame though that Bush hating seems to trump everything else.
I don't know. I doubt it, for two reasons:
1. Ebert already repeated the Big Lie I cited above, so little else in his story is to be believed.
2. I recall that a different (non-Miramax, non-Disney) firm is distributing it in the UK.
Perhaps Miramax has some minor rights in countries where it can get no big bidder, i.e., a right to distribute if no native company will do so. But the short answer is "no," I'm betting.
What a joke. The "voiceless" people in this country are the ones who support President Bush! And when it comes to the film industry, even Mel Gibson, who has a consistent track record of making hit movies, couldn't get his movie funded by Hollywood.
The funniest thing about this article is how Tarantino is self-righteously proclaiming that politics had nothing to do with Moore's award. Meanwhile, his own jurors are contradicting that proclamation. And Roger Ebert doesn't even call them on it.
Tarentino just went off my list.
I love his films; own a few. But no more.
Abyssal is proper.
Abysmal has a more descriptive connotation, but is overused.
sorry I took so long to reply.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.