Howell vs. Burton (and Boonmee)
Forgive the tardiness (which I’m blaming on Sicilian distractions), but Peter Howell‘s 5.27 Toronto Star piece on the decision by Tim Burton‘s Cannes jury to hand the Palme d’Or to Apichatpong Weerasethakul‘s Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives is delicious stuff.
“In the same week that Burton’s box-office champ Alice In Wonderland hit the $1 billion mark globally, one of just six movies ever to do so, he presided over golden laurels for a film so resolutely uncommercial, even Thais can’t figure it out. The gesture struck me as one of the most political and cynical moves ever from a Cannes jury. Burton and his crew, acting on his cue, wanted to show how cool and cutting-edge they were.
“Many critics at Cannes, who are used to seeing challenging material, found Uncle Boonmee to be a shapeless mass of wacky images masquerading as a spiritual journey. I predict that a lot of people will be saying, ‘This won the Palme d’Or?’ when Uncle Boonmeescreens at TIFF this September, as it most likely will.
“I don’t completely disparage Uncle Boonmee [in my review]. I was impressed by the vivid cinematography and by Weerasethakul’s inventive use of special effects, which he achieved with a tiny budget. But did it deserve the Palme, a prize second only to Oscar’s Best Picture for prestige and previously awarded to such classics as La Dolce Vita, Apocalypse Now and Kagemusha? No way.
“As a cinema experience, Uncle Boonmee is about as gripping as watching a variety store security video. There is no acting to speak of, only rote line readings of mystical babble.
“Burton said he was simply enraptured by Uncle Boonmee, precisely because it was so unlike the Hollywood fare that Burton personally chooses to make. He’s delighted to see other people taking chances that he’s afraid to take himself.
“If Burton is so thrilled by such avant-garde experiences as Uncle Boonmee, why doesn’t he try making one himself instead of always swinging for the multiplex with movies starring Johnny Depp, his favorite A-lister, and proven stories like Alice in Wonderland?
“Even better, why doesn’t he use some of his Alice loot to help promote, distribute and champion independent films like Uncle Boonmee, instead of just handing out golden goodies before jetting back to Hollywood for his next Johnny Depp power breakfast?”
What a weird takedown. If you look at the list of past Palm winners, this is exactly the sort of film that usually wins, no matter the judge/jury. As for Burton, I mean, who says he has to make movies like those he admires? He’s no different than, say, Scorsese, who is similarly resigned to making big budget entertainments. Look at Scorsese’s list of favorite films, and they couldn’t be more different in character or execution from his own films. That Burton makes crap is irrelevant to the issue.
Has Howell actually ever seen a Tim Burton movie?
Because of course he went with the film with the whacky images and lack of cohesive narrative. Burton is world’s most frustrated production designer; it would have been shocking if his jury had picked a film with a traditional narrative structure.
A cynical piece attacking Burton for being commercial and the Thai filmmaker for being esoteric and then issuing a faux challenge to Burton to help get films such as UNCLE BOONMEE distributed in the US. The writer seems to hate cinema.
Yeah, so delicious, this stuff. Your commenters seem to be eating it right up, Wells!
Tropical Malady is one of my top ‘greatest films of the 00′s” – and is maybe at the top of the list.
I have not seen “Uncle Boonmee” – but that and “Tree of Life” are now my most anticipated upcoming films.
As per the article you cite here, it’s nice to be reminded that America does not have a monopoly on proud know-nothing types. Reminds me of all the Americans I know who proudly proclaim Shakespeare is a ‘waste of time’ because they’re so used to being spoon-fed their entertainment that having to do ANY work to understand something is to them like a grievous insult.
I’d like to know who these “many critics” are. Most every review I came across was at least fairly positive toward the film, if not an out-and-out rave.
As Howell notes two of Weerasethakul’s other films won Cannes honors, so he’s not a come-from-nowhere Palme d’Or winner. It’s a silly way to fill column inches with something “controversial”–and the ranks of Palme d’Or winners include head-scratchers and obscurities like DANCER IN THE DARK, ETERNITY AND A DAY, UNDERGROUND, and UNDER THE SUN OF SATAN.
I love the bogus hyperbole of calling the pick of a challenging Thai movie “one of the most political and cynical moves ever from a Cannes jury.” Yeah, whatever you say.
And what does “even Thais can’t figure it out” mean?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VViTfSmpYtI&playnext_from=TL&videos=8hc6HnUZvoA
“Even better, why doesn’t he use some of his Alice loot to help promote, distribute and champion independent films like Uncle Boonmee, instead of just handing out golden goodies before jetting back to Hollywood”
Terrible line. Tim just did use his clout on the panel, earned by the success of Alice, to promote and champion Uncle Bonmee, by giving it the golden goodie, which the author previously declares second only to the Oscar. WTF?
It’s always a party when resentment sits in for actual critical thought. If only Howell had gone on to proselytize about how the Very Holy “Biutiful” should have gotten the prize, it would have upped Jeff’s “delicious” verdict all the way up to “orgasmic.”
Stupid Thai movies and their stupid lacks of narratives!
More like Blissfully BORES! Amirite?
Yeah, no. Stupid article.
This is a horrible article. Uncle Boonme received enormous amount of praise from critics.
This guy is talking agaisnt Hollywood standard fare but can’t fathom how a film that goes agaisnt those sentiments won. What a load of crock.
What a stupid, pandering article. I don’t recall coming across a single critic who didn’t love Uncle Boonmee.
“previously awarded to such classics as La Dolce Vita, Apocalypse Now and Kagemusha?”
This whole argument is stupid. First off, you could say the same thing about The Oscars. “Does Slumdog Millionaire belong on the same list as Gone With The Wind, The Godfather, and Lawrence of Arabia?” “No, probably not, but what about the other list, the one with Driving Miss Daisy and Chariots of Fire and The Sting? Or what about the really crappy list, with The Greatest Show On Earth and Around the World in 80 Days?”
But, second, because the classic version of ‘Apocalypse Now’ didn’t win; a somewhat rougher cut tied with another movie, one which, forgive me for saying so, also isn’t a classic on the level of the other three movies cited. Or, if you’re a big ‘Tin Drum’ fan, ‘Elephant’. ‘Wild At Heart’. ‘The Mission’. Again, these are fine movies — but are even *they* worthy of ‘La Dolce Vita’?
As many other commenters have already pointed out, this is a confused, contradictory and pretty much brain-dead article. This sentence really bears repeating, it’s such a head-shaker: “Even better, why doesn’t he use some of his Alice loot to help promote, distribute and champion independent films like Uncle Boonmee, instead of just handing out golden goodies before jetting back to Hollywood.”
Weerasethakul is a great fillmmaker and it’s amazing the jury “cynically” decided to award his film. The backlash smells like intellectual insecurity. I used to have some respect for Peter Howell, for whatever reason, but he’s lost it completely with this piece.
Boonmee is actually fairly typical of the type of film that wins the Palme. And I am not surprised that Burton liked it so much. It is not a commercial film at all. Most of the Cannes winners are not. I look forward to seeing it along with Biutiful, Another Year, Certified Copy. Fair Game, Of Gods and Men, Poetry and others. There is room to enjoy many kinds of films.
I forgot to add Tournee to that list.
Also the function of the jury is to pick the best film out of the competition, not to compare films with previous winners.
What’s this? Publicity stunt?
Jane