When examining two artists’ work, writers rarely consider jumping across the media barrier to study themes and trends in art as a whole. Artistry isn’t limited to one form of multimedia, and auteurism can be examined between novelists, filmmakers, musicians, and/or playwrights. After listening to Kanye West’s The Life of Pablo and watching Terrence Malick’s Knight of Cups, I couldn’t help noticing similarities in the static energy of both projects, whose many moving parts turned into commotion. Although Malick and West’s creative processes are worlds apart, their evolution as artists can be seen as parallel as they explore spirituality, perfection and challenge the notions of art itself in their polarizing careers. But when comparing their recent output, it seems that they have taken one step beyond the apex of their highest artistic potential. The Life of Pablo and Knight of Cups are problematic works due to how involved they are in their own space, whether it be Malick’s cold, dreamy world or West’s personal heaven—empty of consequences. Both projects present a false sense of grandeur that falls apart on the principle of a weak foundation.

The titles of both The Life of Pablo and Knight of Cups allude to conceptually grand pieces doused in imagery and inspiration. After many assumed that West’s album was alluding to Pablo Picasso or Pablo Escobar, it was a bit of a surprise when West hinted that the titular Pablo may be St. Paul the Apostle. Yet, despite what the album promises, The Life of Pablo gives very little insight into the life of any Pablo, whether it be Picasso, Escobar, the Apostle or an alter-ego of West. In fact, the album meanders from track to track in a shallow and sometimes chaotic way. My first concern when listening to the much tighter 10-track album that premiered at Madison Square Garden was that Pablo wasn’t conceptually innovative unlike Yeezus or My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. That concern is even more grounded in the final album, which includes a lot of songs that feel like bonus tracks.

Knight of Cups central idea is much clearer, but not necessarily better in execution. Malick uses tarot card readings to characterize and split his film into chapters. The Knight of Cups tarot card comes from the “Minor Arcana” deck; when the card is upright it represents opportunities, changes, and new romances, but when the card is turned downward it represents recklessness and a person who has trouble distinguishing right from wrong. Knight of Cups follows Rick as he attempts to flip his attributes while meeting other individuals who represent different cards from the deck. Each of the first seven chapters, all named after a card in the Major Arcana deck, show Rick meandering between romantic flings and family members before finding his inner peace. His turmoil is cleared in the eighth chapter, called “Freedom.” Here, the tarot card concept comes to an abrupt halt—“Freedom” isn’t even a tarot card, yet many of the unused cards could’ve represented the same ideas of Malick’s final chapter. Ultimately, Malick captures the ideas of the cards as superficially as West creates a “Life” for any of his titular “Pablos.” Both works are sprawling and sometimes random, but they’re missing a central, cohesive idea. Though the works never hit a conceptual grandeur, they aren’t thoughtless and have some conceptual ingenuity.

When Knight of Cups and The Life of Pablo reach their thematic potential, they often focus on the same things: spirituality and a quest for perfection or redemption. These are some of the same themes that Malick and Kanye have tackled throughout their careers.

Malick’s work has always been upheld with inspiration from spirituality and religion. The Tree of Life is the epitome of his theological questioning, but To The Wonder and Knight of Cups also examine religion in their exploration of men lost in the worlds they inhabit. Knight of Cups’ spirituality and mystery doesn’t always lend itself to Christianity, but its opening lines come from The Pilgrim’s Progress, a Christian allegory written in 1678 by John Bunyan.

West isn’t unfamiliar to large productions sampling from a multitude of sources; speeches, sermons, and classic songs show up in some form or another throughout The Life of Pablo, along with dozens of other samples. The Life is Pablo’s opening track is “Ultralight Beam,” the most holistic and singular song of the album, which borrows from an Instagram post of a little girl saying, “We don’t want no devils in the house, God.” These words, which open the album, are unexpected from a rap album or a Kanye West album, but they mark a message that is revisited multiple times on The Life of Pablo. “Ultralight Beam” continues in a spiritual direction and, at times, nearly breaks into full gospel, whether it’s because of lyrical content or an actual gospel choir.

In relation to spirituality, West and Malick also explore a divinity in their own characters or personas. In the rap community, West is sometimes viewed as a god. This maybe indicates why The Life of Pablo features an enormous amount of other performers—work from his “disciples.” And while West has stated he’s a Christian, it’s a statement that comes with controversy after tracks like “Jesus Walks” and his album Yeezus, where West often paints himself as a false profit.

On the other hand, Malick takes no claim to be a god among men, but a theme throughout his work is a quest for perfection. This could manifest in striving for a perfect marriage in To The Wonder; a perfect walk with God in The Tree of Life; or Rick’s journey for divinity in Hollywood while finding redemption in Knight of Cups. At Malick’s best, his characters are human and their wonderings are relatable, but this theme of perfection actually provides ammunition to his detractors. Christian Bale wandering through Los Angeles meeting with countless women is, understandably, seen as pretentious and not insightful to the real everyman. Ben Affleck searching for true love through Rachel McAdams or Olga Kurylenko amid airy whispers in To The Wonder comes off as equally shallow and disengaged.

The Life of Pablo and Knight of Cups are hugely spiritual works, albeit in hugely different ways. West’s inward spiritual examination is more on the nose and ironic than Malick’s, yet it is clear that West and Malick take inspiration from a theistic entity—presumably a Christian one—that drives them into exploring divinity or the futility of perfection, respectively. As strong as these ideas were in previous Malick and West joints, it is hard for me to perceive their recent outputs as anything but slight.

Once upon a time, I wasn’t just a casual fan of West and Malick’s work, but their latest offerings have left me questioning their visions and career trajectories. My biggest complaints about their latest work actually relate back to the way the artists react with their audiences when they aren’t behind a camera or a microphone.

Malick’s dissociation from the public eye is evident in his most detached work yet. With Knight of Cups, Malick has lost the touch and understanding of the human condition that actually drove his earlier works. Instead of capturing a relatable story with real characters, Knight of Cups meanders and searches, but the exploration is never more than a surface deep perspective of an uninteresting man.

On the other hand, The Life of Pablo is an album of the moment that’s caught up in the zeitgeist. This is as much of reflection of West’s inward interests as it is a reflection of his every (unfiltered) thought. At times, The Life of Pablo becomes a misaligned musical rant that throws too many half-fleshed out ideas in the form of samples and guests instead of coherence and quality. The album, at its worst, could be compared to West’s twitter persona—scatterbrained, both musically and lyrically.

The Life of Pablo and Knight of Cups both reach moments of grandeur, but these moments only point to a greatness that is usually absent throughout the rest of their works. My initial response to The Life of Pablo was mixed, and as I continue to listen to the album I find it more problematic (but that still hasn’t stopped me from listening). Inversely, my only viewing of Knight of Cups was a chore that left me bored and irritated, but I find myself thinking about it more often than I anticipated.

At the heart of both works is a problem with auteurism. I have previously mentioned that both pieces serve as the strongest sense of vision from the artist, but this vision doesn’t translate into a language most audiences can understand or necessarily want to hear. Yet, on the other side of the spectrum, auteurism bolsters the careers of West and Malick, driving the creativity in both of their recent outputs. The Life of Pablo and Knight of Cups don’t work due to a lack of effort; Malick and West’s visions get lost on a large portion of their intended audience because they are too consumed in their own art.

In the world of filmmaking, every movie is a gamble, you never know which ‘may flower’, or which will burn to a crisp at the box office. There’s a cornucopia of bad films out there, but for every bad film is a sucker who loves it anyway. We are those suckers.

In this season of thankfulness, we show our gratitude for the under-appreciated (or straight-up hated) films of this world. Yes, we’re being corn-y, but this is one feast of ‘turkeys’ that won’t leave you five pounds heavier.

Way Too Indie’s Favorite ‘Turkey’ Movies

Man of Steel

At the risk of alienating all of my colleagues here at WTI, I’m standing up for a movie that’s everything under the sun, except indie. I walked into Man of Steel as someone who has very little admiration for Zack Snyder and his slow-mo-action antics. Not even talk of Christopher Nolan’s involvement gave me much hope. Superman is a boring know-it-all superhero, Snyder is a showboating director of music videos in disguise, and this is going to suck. That I walked out feeling none of the above was surprising, most of all to me. Critics beat on Man of Steel harder than Clark beats on General Zod, but for me; this movie was a helluva lot of fun.

This is as dark and gritty as a Superman story can get, and we do have Nolan to thank for paving the way with his supreme Dark Knight Trilogy. For the first time ever, the story of an alien with superhuman strength landing on earth and not knowing who or what he is, was directed and acted in way that made plausible sense. Henry Cavill acts like a confused, emotionless, alien. Good. That’s what Superman is. He’s plagued by flashbacks of his adoptive father (Kevin Costner, nailing this part in ways he had no right to), and inquisitive with his biological dad (another perfect casting choice in Russell Crowe). Good. That’s exactly the kind of thought-process I’d expect Clark to go through before realizing what he is. And it goes on and on; the background on Krypton, the exhilarating action scenes with Zod (Michael Shannon, effortlessly watchable as always), the realistic destruction of a city, one of Hans Zimmer’s greatest scores, etc. etc. I’ve got plenty of reasons to love, and very little reason to hate. [Nik]

Crank

Is it insane to say Crank is a masterpiece of action cinema? Not as insane as Crank actually is. It starts off with a simple premise: Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) wakes up to find he’s been poisoned, but as long as his adrenaline is high enough the poison won’t take effect. The concept is really just an excuse to hurl as much action and carnage at the screen as possible, and Crank more than delivers on that front. Statham is the ideal leading man for this sort of film, embracing every piece of insanity thrown his way. And by tying the need for action to the protagonist’s health (if there’s no action he will die), Crank is one of the most fast-paced action films ever made as well as one of the closest things to a live-action video game.

Directors Neveldine/Taylor also know how to shoot great, kinetic action on a low-budget. Crank certainly was divisive when it came out, but the concept paid off: it made over three times its budget at the box office, and despite the very conclusive ending a sequel came out years later (fun fact: Crank: High Voltage is even more maligned than Crank, but is also a good movie). Crank is one of the few movies that says it has “non-stop action” and means it. Other action movies only wish they could be this frenetic or creative. [CJ]

Batman Forever

For all the praise Christopher Nolan enjoyed for telling some of the best Batman stories ever, in any medium, Joel Schumacher has drawn just as much hatred for his two zanier contributions to the Dark Knight mythos, Batman Forever and its sequel, Batman & Robin. I share most people’s disgust for the latter, with its hideous puns and George Clooney mis-casting, but I actually have a lot of fun with the former to this day. It’s playful popcorn entertainment, built on spectacle and gags; but if I come across it on a lazy day of channel-surfing, I’ll watch the hell out of it, happily.

Aside from the splashy art design, with its elaborate laser light shows and sets that look like gothic-themed nightclubs, what I enjoy most about Batman Forever are its performances, particularly Jim Carrey’s as The Riddler/Edward Nigma. Val Kilmer plays a fine Bruce Wayne, but Carrey stuns with one of the most unencumbered, yet refined performances of his career. His androgynous, flamboyant take on the classic Bat-villain fits the movie’s fetishistic tone perfectly, and his double-team comedy schtick with Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face/Harvey Dent is a lot of fun, though both characters still maintain an air of danger. It’s as easy to dismiss silly superhero movies as it is to embrace gritty, reality-based ones. Batman Forever doesn’t want to make you think or depress you; it just wants to have a good time and zoom in on Batsuit nipples. Is that so wrong? [Bernard]

The Family Man

Sitting next to my growing library of Criterion Collection titles is a DVD which always gets the reaction, “Really? You have that movie?” when spotted by friends. That film is Brett Ratner’s 2000 rom-com The Family Man. Maybe it’s because the film stars Nicolas Cage, an actor a lot of people criticize for agreeing to star in just about any movie that asks him. Or perhaps people just thought the film was a little too cheesy, predictable, or feel-good at times (it’s guilty of all of them). But nevertheless, I don’t have any troubles defending this film as a charming heartfelt holiday film the whole family can enjoy.

The Family Man borrows the same basic premise of another Christmas movie It’s A Wonderful Life. Nicolas Cage plays a single wealthy businessman who gets a glimpse into what his life could have been when he wakes up one morning as a middle class husband and a father of two. Nicolas Cage haters might just be surprised by how good he is here, showing his range by playing two completely opposite characters with firm conviction. The universal message of the film is learning to love your own life, which might just inspire you to do the same. Though at the very least, The Family Man is a holiday movie worth watching despite what others might say. [Dustin]

Red Sonja

Before Rocky IV and before Cobra; before Beverly Hills Cop II, Brigitte Nielson debuted her tremendous Nordic height in Red Sonja. Originally planned to be a spin-off or sequel to Conan the Destroyer, Director Richard Fleischer failed to obtain the rights thus moving forward with what everyone just assumed was the sequel, even including a co-lead identical to Conan. As much as Arnold Schwarzenegger declared THIS to be the worst movie he ever made (that’s telling more than anything) it was MY favorite as a child. Bad parenting aside, Red Sonja was my first awakening towards female empowerment.

With a particularly confusing plot (though no more so than either of the Conan films) and pretty memorable special effects, this won Brigitte Neilson a Razzie Award for Worst Actress in 1985. But don’t tell that to my seven year old self. It spent more than double what it made in theaters, but it’s not enough of a failure to completely shut down talks of a potential remake in the near future. Rumor has it they might already be thinking of who might fill those high Barbarian boots. Though I’m not sure I can see Zoe Saldana pulling off those red tresses in near the same way. [Scarlet]

Southland Tales

Richard Kelly followed up his hit film Donnie Darko with this ambitious, but deeply flawed film. Southland Tales was ripped apart by critics upon initial release and still it goes unnoticed to this day. Set in 2008 during the few days leading up the 4th of July in Los Angeles, Tales tells the story of a few individuals (a porn star, a movie star, a war veteran and a police officer) whose stories start to intertwine as they all seem to be a part of a vast conspiracy. Trying to describe what happens throughout the film is nearly impossible; the film is a complete mess. Kelly pulls influences from multiple genres and most of the time nothing works.

Beat-master Moby scores the film and Kelly sprinkles in hits from Jane’s Addiction, Elbow, The Killers, Blur and Black Rebel Motorcycle Society to boot. The film is a pulsating and vibrant black comedy that I’d liken to watching the Hindenburg crash down from the sky. You just can’t look away. Having said all these negative things about the film, I can’t hide my love for it. It’s weird, illogical, baffling and sometimes stupid. And yet, it’s like nothing I’ve ever seen before. [Blake]

Sleepaway Camp

Though Sleepaway Camp has fully achieved cult status, I still feel that there are too many of its supporters that would glibly throw away that it is nothing more than “so bad it’s good.” I would like to challenge that claim. That’s right, you should take the 1983 teen slasher seriously. If you want to sit back with your friends and a few adult beverages and laugh your way through all of its sillier traits, that’s fine, I don’t want to take away that experience from you. But I would like you to consider Sleepaway Camp’s genre innovation and way ahead-of-its-time sexual politics.

As a slasher, Sleepaway Camp is a particularly good one. The kills are incredibly inventive and appropriately gruesome. Whenever people aren’t being viciously killed, the tone is sweeter than the genre’s norm, with realistically-aged actors dealing with the relatable problems of growing up. What the film does really well, though, is center the kills around a mystery. In later years, slashers became less interested in keeping an audience engaged through a mystery and instead plopped the killer’s persona as the main attraction (the similar Friday the 13th series is a good representation of this). As for the transgender issues around the film, this is a touchy topic that deserves a much bigger platform. I will say, however, that no other film at the time looked at this issue with any sort of substance, and few have since. It’s potentially harmful to make a transgendered person the killer, as if Angela is some sort of monster because of her identity, but it makes me feel more sympathetic to the character. Sleepaway Camp’s famous final frame is shocking and horrific, but its perspective on Angela makes me consider the character and the film to be more than your typical twisted horror. [Aaron]

Unbreakable

I remember the first time someone told me that Unbreakable was generally considered a “weak” film. I was in film school and contemplating using a scene from Unbreakable for a project. My partner scoffed, he thought referring to this film would get us laughed out of class. A debate ensued. We used the clip. I think we got an ‘A’. I’ve been unabashedly supporting this film ever since.

As his immediate follow-up to the film that catapulted him into cult status, The Sixth Sense, M. Night Shyamalan’s shunning after Unbreakable’s release was swift and harsh. He had been pigeonholed, and when he ventured to move on to another admirable hero tale, this time drawing on comic-book themes, audiences held up the rubric they created just for him and immediately dismissed it as mediocre. What’s ironic about the public’s disdain for Unbreakable is that it incorporates many of the exact elements that made The Sixth Sense great. Once again we have Bruce Willis in the lead as a man desiring to do good amidst a failing marriage, and there’s a kid—his child Joseph (Spencer Treat Clark)—who helps him uncover a secret about himself that makes for an unexpected twist at the end. The action is slow but deliberate, the imagery bright and intriguing, and the character revelations satisfying. It was criticized as unconvincing and overdone, but perhaps with only a year between The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, the buzz was still too fresh in stubborn audience’s minds. To me it’s another example of all that Shyamalan is capable of. [Ananda]

Law Abiding Citizen

F. Gary Gray’s Law Abiding Citizen was maligned almost universally by critics and audiences, for lots of stuff: unnecessary, excessive violence; a plot with a stupid amount of logic holes; characters with far-fetched motivations. Why did I love it? Well, I just happen to enjoy tasteless violence in movies quite a bit from time to time. “Plot holes” and “low plausibility” almost never bother me (if they bother you, you’re a bore), and I find single-minded characters to be quite enjoyable if used correctly.

Gerard Butler plays a man hell-bent on avenging the deaths of his wife and daughter (whose murderer is set free) by killing law enforcement officials… while locked in a high-security prison cell himself. How he’s able to lead the hapless cops to their gruesome demises (via mechanized death machines he’s crafted himself) while trapped in prison is the film’s central mystery, which D.A. Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) intends to unravel before more innocent blood is spilled. The dialogue between Butler and Foxx is overblown, as are all other aspects of Gray’s explosive mystery-thriller, but that’s what I love about it. It’s an unbridled, gory vision of revenge that’s filthy as hell for a reason: when people are stripped of everything, there’s no limit to the ugliness they’re capable of. Many call Law Abiding Citizen tasteless; I call it honest. [Bernard]

Airborne

The 90’s were littered with teen sports flicks. Rudy, Little Big League, The Sandlot and The Mighty Ducks series are prime examples. Lost amid all of these popular and instantly quotable movies was Airborne; one of the few movies tough enough to tackle the cool it-sport of the moment, rollerblading. Cool Californian, Mitchell Goosen (helluva name) is sent to live with his cousin and his parents in cold and frosty Cincinnati after his parents have to leave the country for work. This wouldn’t be a problem except for the fact that Mitchell lives for surfing. No waves in Cincy, bro.

Airborne is devoid of any kind of originality at pretty much any point in its 91 minute running time. Its plot is culled from many other sports films of the era. The film was largely ignored during its original release due to the market being saturated with similar releases, and yet, the film works in its own way. The actors, including early roles from Seth Green and Jack Black, bring a great energy to the material and Rob Bowman’s direction puts you right into the thick of the action. Airborne, might have never taken off during its premiere run, but for me it soars. [Blake]

Ace Ventura: Pet Detective

It’s easy to see why critics love to hate Jim Carrey movies, most of the time they’re idiotic, outlandish, and even insulting to its audiences. But they can also be downright entertaining. Fitting into all of those descriptions is the 1994 film Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, a slapstick comedy full of laughs, if you’re willing to turn your brain off first. Clearly Roger Ebert wasn’t able to (along with most other critics at the time) as he gave the movie a lousy one star rating and called it a “long, unfunny slog through an impenetrable plot.”

Hardly anyone will argue against Ace Ventura’s weak plot—a wacky detective who specializes in finding lost pets gets hired to find a football team’s mascot—but it’s hard to fault a film that only aims as high as lowbrow humor. Instead, Jim Carrey defines the meaning of physical comedy in every scene, contorting his body and his words in ways only he could express. His comedy knew no limits and he was willing to do just about anything for a laugh, including bending over to talk through his butt. While Ace Ventura was considered a flop at the time, the film made Jim Carrey a household name, and remains one of my favorite guilty pleasures. Just don’t feel obligated to watch the sequel. [Dustin]

What Lies Beneath

It may be that I find it incredibly difficult to dislike films that Harrison Ford is in (Crystal Skull excluded), or that I find the best psychological thrillers take place in the most ordinary of settings, but to me What Lies Beneath is a well-crafted and twisty tale. Michelle Pfeiffer is the star despite Ford’s presence, playing a mom with slight empty-nest syndrome and a Rear Window-style bad habit of peeking in on her neighbors. Robert Zemeckis’s sappy style is accused of weighing down the film’s thrills and its pacing regarded as glacier, but to me these are the sugar-coating on a poisoned apple. When the film’s finale hits and the plot’s mysteries mostly revealed, it becomes a true cat and mouse game, and I’m reduced to uncomfortable squirming every single time. I’ll admit the teasing of a ghost story seems distracting, but I just see it as the sort of diversion that tries to throw off the scent of real danger.

Perhaps films that hint at both psychological and supernatural thrills require too much to chew on for most viewers, but for me it’s just two elements I love. Pfeiffer makes the film. Her good nature and sweet demeanor as Claire Spencer just egging on my apprehension. It’s not the horror film anyone else will recommend to you for a Friday night fright, but it makes my Halloween playlist every year. [Ananda]

Cloud Atlas

With critics bemoaning the lack of originality in mainstream films today, you’d think Cloud Atlas would have been welcomed with open arms. Independently produced for $100 million, this ambitious adaptation of David Mitchell’s novel was (and still is) unlike anything released by a major studio. Spanning thousands of years through 6 storylines, using the same actors in multiple roles to highlight themes of reincarnation and redemption, Cloud Atlas is bold, daring and exhilarating filmmaking, earnestly exploring ideas and concepts other films wouldn’t touch. That earnestness sometimes worked against the film: the make-up, used to change actors into different races and genders, ranged from impressive to disastrous. The filmmakers understandably came under fire when they dressed up white actors to look Asian.

But the film still works in spite of its flaws because of how much its three directors (Lana & Andy Wachowski and Tom Tykwer) have the guts to go all-in with the kind of sincerity others would bristle at. And plenty of people bristled; Time and Village Voice declared it the worst film of 2013, and a poor marketing and release strategy by Warner Brothers guaranteed a poor box office performance. Hopefully time will prove Cloud Atlas’ naysayers wrong. It’s the kind of cinematic experience that deserves to be lauded, not laughed off. [CJ]

North

Having Bruce Willis as a guardian angel would satisfy a number of wishes on my list. And seeing him in a full size pink bunny costume would satisfy the others. So just imagine my surprise to find out North is pretty much considered one of the worst movies of all time. It couldn’t have been the completely flat and stereotypical portrayal of nearly every culture in the U.S., or the star-studded cast, each actor providing perhaps the cheesiest performance of their careers. This movie might have flopped with adults, but only because their children were all most likely demanding to see it so many times it gave them the chance to notice every little flaw. That hardly seems fair.

While Rob Reiner does seem to be the captain of corny, mostly his films do pretty well in theaters and among all of us romantics. And who wouldn’t melt at little Elijah Woods innocent dimples? But somehow, with all of its arsenal (Reba AND Dan Akroyd), it truly failed to deliver. In fact, Roger Ebert stood by his unequivocal hatred of the film naming it the worst film of 1994 and making his list of worst films of all time. It swept the Razzies that year, at least for nominations, being nominated for Worst Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor, Supporting Actress, Director, and Screenplay. Unfortunately it couldn’t even manage a win there. In spite of all of this, it will always have a special place in my heart. [Scarlet]

The Three Stooges

OK, confession time. I actually like Bobby and Peter Farrelly’s take on the classic comedic trio. I’m not going to try and convince you that The Three Stooges is among the great cinematic treasures, but am a little baffled by the masses completely writing it off. I can understand the cultural perception, considering the long and heavily publicized production, initially stacked with incredible actors in the title roles. What we got, though, is far from bad and worth a look for those seeking a silly comedy. The film is a 90-minute live-action cartoon, overstuffed with gags and slapstick. The Farrelly brothers built their careers on goofy comedies, and The Three Stooges is certainly that, but this film has more kinetic energy than they’ve ever had previously.

The film works almost entirely because of the three leads: Sean Hayes as Larry, Chris Diamantopoulas as Moe and Will Sasso as Curly. Their performances are so dedicated to the cultural memory of the original Three Stooges that it could certainly feel like mere impressions, but they are able to rise above this through sheer effort. Diamantopoulos is especially good, perhaps with the benefit that I don’t recognize the performer as much as the other two. More importantly, they work incredibly well as a team, which is important with the madcap timing of the action. They always feel in control of a purposefully out-of-control film. [Aaron]

To the Wonder

Terrence Malick is not for everyone, and since Badlands, his movies seem to go further and further out of their way to prove just that. His last film, To the Wonder, pretty much drove everybody away (except for us). Even people who loved The Tree of Life have a tendency to say “To the Wonder? Way too weird, not for me.” It has a small number of supporters, and I – a zealous Malick fan – count myself among them. I think people who expected more plot, narrative structure, and character development than Tree of Life were the most bitterly disappointed ones because To the Wonder gives less in that respect. It’s not a story, really. It’s a visual essay attempting to capture concepts and fleeting emotions, and it plays out like Malick’s most personal film to date because of how utterly unhinged it is, without a speck of exposition. (It’s also said that the thin plot involving a man stuck between two women, one from Paris, and one from his hometown in the States, is an autobiographical account of Malick’s own personal life).

Though I’m no student of Heidegger, I appreciate Malick’s devoted attempt to grasp ethereal concepts like “being” and “experience,” trying to capture them on film like some kind of half-crazed lepidopterist chasing a reclusive butterfly, connecting them with the human emotion of love, and figuring out where faith stands in all of that. Lubezki’s luminous cinematography and Kurylenko’s graceful beauty complement each other wonderfully, and though it’s not my personal favorite Malick film, I still love it in more ways than one. To those who say “it’s way too weird,” I say, “no. It’s just way too indie.” [Nik]

Considering that Terrence Malick has never put out consecutive films less than five years apart, one time it was two decades, putting out a film only a year after Tree of Life is very uncharacteristic. Rumor has it that the prolific director is actually working on several films right at the moment. The sudden surge of urgency is unknown, but very welcoming. To the Wonder shares the same narrative style as Tree of Life by showing but never telling the story. Often situations are suggested or hinted at but never quite fully spelled out, forcing the viewer to read between the lines. To the Wonder is even more subtle and less cohesive than Tree of Life, so if you struggled with that on Tree of Life, this film will likely produce similar results.

At the beginning Neil (Ben Affleck) and Marina (Olga Kurylenko) wander the French coast madly in love with one another. They explore the beautiful cathedral at Mont St. Michel which they call the Wonder and clasp their hands together at what ends up being the pinnacle peak of their relationship. Shortly after that Neil must relocate back to the States and convinces Marina and her little daughter to move with him. The flat countryside landscape of Oklahoma is a stark contrast to the city life in Paris Marina is used to. Not only does Marina not fit in to her new surroundings but her relationship with Neil is unraveling with each passing moment.

The couple drifts away from each other for no specific reason other than they never quite seem to be on the same beat of the drum. Malick wonderfully symbolizes this in a shot when the couple are on different floors of their home walking into separate rooms. But they are not the only ones in a crucial crossroad in their lives. A local priest Father Quintana (Javier Bardem) preaches the word of God to others but seems to have little direction or happiness in his own life. What these characters have in common is that they are searching for something that is only felt and not seen. In Marina’s case it is love that she is searching for, while the priest is pursuing his faith.

To the Wonder borrows many of the aesthetics found in Tree of Life. The camera always seems to be moving along with the characters, rarely ever is it stationary. Many similar objects appear in both films such as; beautiful stained glass churches, plenty of nature shots of trees and water, and heavy focus on the emotional reactions of the lead actors. Also similar is that the dialog takes a back seat to the stunning visuals of Malick’s visual poetry that is set against a perfectly chosen score. Most of the dialog will cut out mid-way through a sentence, as if the words are not really worth hearing.

Like most of Malick’s films, To the Wonder will not be for everyone. In fact, it may not even be for most. What might frustrate some viewers is how elusive the film is. Being that it features detached characters that are all looking for some intangible item makes the film seem very distant. Malick mostly succeeds at the impossible task of capturing these intangibles such as being in love and being directionless, while rarely relying on words to describe what is happening.

Affleck barely has any lines in the film and none of them were all that important. His character is withdrawn and the fact he spends most of the time in the frame, but seldom in the foreground exemplifies that. I realize that the film purposely does not give much detail about Ben, but I cannot help but wonder if a little more time was spent getting to know him would have been more beneficial. Going with a lifelike approach to its characters and their circumstances yields split results. In its favor, the film captures human nature without dramatizing anything, but it is at the cost of not having much of an emotional punch.

To the Wonder is such an absorbing film that it is not easy to form an instant opinion about it because you must let the film sink in for a while. Essentially the film is a two hour visual masterpiece with a plot that could be summed in ten seconds. Yet, even with a rather simplistic overall story, the film explores complex areas such as the dynamics of relationships, love, and faith. To the Wonder is a visual marvel to look at but its ambiguous form makes it frustratingly impenetrable at times.

At the core, the cinema is the most powerful art form between sound and image. From his most direct, plot-driven narrative, Badlands, to his most abstract, polarizing film The Tree of Life, Terrence Malick has been progressively moving toward the highest form of pure cinema poetry. To explain: While many hail Badlands as his penultimate masterpiece–namely for its ingenious reshaping of a story of vagabond serial killers to a lyrical ode of unabashed human impulse–it ironically is as far removed as anything that Malick originally intended to be his masterwork. In fact, I don’t think we’ve seen his masterwork yet. The New World and The Tree of Life are both towering masterpieces. Both exercising improvisational scripting, the physicality of open body language acting, and the absence of generators or any manufactured “studio” lights. But they are merely precursors to a much grander cinematic opera of the soul that Malick is slowly chipping away at with his current cavalcade of prolific motion pictures. And that’s exactly the best way to describe the cinema of Malick: “motion pictures.” If anything, Malick has come closer than any filmmaker to breaking down and building up the very foundation of the cinema. In turn, he has shown us at our most feral, our most vulnerable and our most majestic. Malick’s moving image is the penultimate cinematic experience. Let it wash over you.

The Screen Poetry of Terrence Malick

To The Wonder is Terrence Malick’s uncharacteristically quick follow-up to his 2011 stroke of genius work of The Tree of Life. There were a lot of similarities in each of their trailers; both have excellent orchestra music accompanying characters that spend a lot of the time running through fields as if they are trying to escape from something. Malick appears to have made yet another visual masterpiece, one that could be a companion piece to his previous film.

Ben Affleck will likely be doing his more serious work of his acting career with his lead role as Neil. He and his girlfriend live happily together in Oklahoma until her visa expires, forcing her to return back to Paris. Making the situation complicated is when Neil’s childhood sweetheart (Rachel McAdams) re-enters his life.

Watch the official trailer for To The Wonder:

This year will be my fifth time heading out for the Toronto International Film Festival (or TIFF for short). The festival, which takes place over 11 days throughout downtown Toronto, has become more influential after the last several years. Back in 2008 TIFF premiered Slumdog Millionaire which went on to dominate the major award shows. In 2010 TIFF premiered The King’s Speech which, like Slumdog Millionaire, went on to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards. Now TIFF is seen as the starting line for the Oscar race, with studios premiering their films hoping for a breakthrough hit.

Don’t get the impression that TIFF is just a collection of celebrities promoting their Oscar hopefuls. This year there are 289 feature films playing at the festival, with the bigger premieres (Argo, To The Wonder, Hyde Park on Hudson) taking up a small percentage of that number. Films from all over the world play every year, and whether you’re interested in a certain country, genre, venue, etc. you should be able to find a line-up of films that will cater to your interests.

The festival starts today, but I will not be attending until tomorrow. Cameron Bailey, the artistic director of the festival, has admitted that people tend to think the festival starts on the second day which is basically true. The festival has tried to combat that this year by selecting Rian Johnson’s Looper as its opening film, but Thursday only has a handful of screenings that are all sold out. While I wait to become a part of the madness, here are some general pieces of information about TIFF that I’ve learned over the years.

You are a slave to the schedule (AKA You can’t always get what you want) – There are plenty of films I would have loved to see this year at TIFF but timing and scheduling end up becoming my worst enemy. I plan on seeing more than half of our most anticipated films at TIFF, but the perfect world where I can watch them all simply doesn’t exist. Like Someone in Love conflicts with The Master and Cloud Atlas. To The Wonder conflicts with Berberian Sound Studio. Other films I would have loved seeing, like Pablo Larrain’s No, conflict with other screenings. While it’s unfortunate I have no reason to complain, I’m perfectly happy with my current line-up. The fact that I have to make these kinds of tortured decisions goes to show how much content TIFF really has. It’s better to have an embarrassment of riches than a shortage.

Emotion versus Logic – There’s a debate that usually goes on between TIFF-goers every year that can be summed up like this: Is it worth the extra money to see a popular film at TIFF, even if it comes out in theatres shortly after? The ‘Emotion’ side says yes. With the cast and crew attending, a Q&A, and an audience of hundreds of enthusiastic fans watching it certainly feels like it would be the ideal experience to watch a movie. The ‘Logic’ side doesn’t consider those factors worthy of the premium pricing, and that time at the festival is better spent checking out something that won’t get a major theatrical release. Personally I sway back and forth between both sides of the debate. The reason why I won’t be checking out Argo at TIFF is because it’ll be out in theatres shortly afterward, but seeing Cloud Atlas at TIFF appeals to me a ton even if it’ll be out in October. And this point brings me to…

See something different – A trip to TIFF or any other film festival wouldn’t be complete without stepping outside one’s comfort zone. Every year I make sure that I see one film I know little to nothing about. The greatest opportunity that TIFF brings to viewers is discovery. It’s no surprise that out of 289 films some of them will be duds, but there are plenty of hidden gems as well. There’s something exciting about discovering a great film no one else knows about, and in a lot of cases no one ever gets the chance to see these films again in theatres. Some people might see it as risky to spend their money on a film they don’t know about, but the reward would be something worth remembering for a long time.

Besides the Looper premiere today should be relatively quiet at the festival. Jason Reitman is hosting a table read of American Beauty, while Rust and Bone and On The Road will screen for North American audiences before Dredd 3D kicks off the festival’s Midnight Madness programme. It should hopefully be a nice start to another great year for TIFF.

Coming up tomorrow: I start my festival trip with one of the weirdest double features in my life, starting with Harmony Korine’s Spring Breakers followed by Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master.

The staff at Way Too Indie narrows down the Top 10 films that we are most excited for at the Toronto International Film Festival this year. The task of narrowing a list down to only 10 is not an easy one considering that there will be over 300 films playing at the festival. Way Too Indie’s CJ Prince will be there to cover the festival and plans to review some of those that are listed below Listed below are Way Too Indie’s Top 10 Most Anticipated Films playing at Toronto International Film Festival 2012.

The Master (director Paul Thomas Anderson)

I think it is fair to say, even setting aside my complete biased opinion, that P.T. Anderson ranks up there among one of the most prominent American directors of today. That being said, it is easy to see why The Master, his follow up to 2007’s There Will Be Blood, is a highly anticipated film. At the helm as one of the lead characters is an Anderson veteran Philip Seymour Hoffman. Hoffman plays a charismatic intellectual who starts up a faith organization and recruits drifter Joaquin Phoenix. Just from the trailer one can see how berserk Phoenix’s character goes and if anyone is fit to play that role it is Joaquin Phoenix. The other reason The Master is getting a lot of attention is that it is being shown in 70mm widescreen format that is suppose to look drop-dead gorgeous. [Dustin]

Spring Breakers (director Harmony Korine)

No one ever thought that they’d hear the words ‘Selena Gomez in a Harmony Korine film’ in their life, but here we are. The director of films like Trash Humpers, Mister Lonely and this disturbing Black Keys music video, Korine would seem like the last person in the world to team up with stars from Disney and Glee (Vanessa Hudgens, Dianna Agron and Korine’s wife Rachel round out the rest of the female cast). The casting may sound like it came straight out of Hollywood but the plot, about a drug dealer (James Franco aping the look of rapper Riff Raff) who hires the four bikini-clad girls to be his hitmen after they rob a fast food restaurant, sounds bizarre enough to fit in with the rest of Korine’s films. Now, with all of the crazy set photos and news of Skrillex getting involved with the score, Spring Breakers sounds like Korine has managed to capture the zeitgeist. [CJ]

Cloud Atlas (directors Tom Tykwer & Wachowski brothers)

The Wachowskis, directors of the Matrix Trilogy and the underrated Speed Racer, team with Tom Tykwer, director of Run Lola Run and The Princess and the Warrior, team to make this centuries spanning film involving actors playing different roles over the course of those centuries. As soon as the film was announced for TIFF a stunning trailer set to M83’s ‘Outro’ was released. The film looks to be a shoo in for technical awards at next year’s Oscars. It is not known whether or not the film will be a mess, though we’ll have a clearer picture in a couple of weeks. [Blake]

To The Wonder (director Terrence Malick)

It has been rumored that To The Wonder is even more experimental than Terrence Malick’s last film, The Tree Of Life, which seems hard to believe but if true we could be in store for another Malick masterpiece. The film is being billed as a romantic drama about a man who is reconnected with a woman after his marriage falls apart. It will star Rachel McAdams, Ben Affleck and Javier Bardem. The only thing that has me a little worried is this will be the first time that Malick has ever released films in consecutive years. [Dustin]

Argo (director Ben Affleck)

The last time Ben Affleck came to TIFF it was for The Town, which went on to snag an Oscar nomination along with a surprisingly big haul of $92 million at the box office. Two years later, Affleck is hoping to repeat his success with Argo. Based on a true story, Argo follows a group of CIA operatives who go to Iran posing as documentary filmmakers in order to free six Americans trapped in the country. Unlike The Town, Affleck only takes on directing and acting duties this time (he doesn’t have a writing credit) but he’s assembled an impressive cast with names like John Goodman, Bryan Cranston, Victor Garber and Alan Arkin to name a few. It’s hard to tell if audiences will be interested enough in the story and 70s period setting, but Affleck has proven himself to be a strong enough director that Oscar buzz is building around the film. With a theatrical release right around the corner after its TIFF premiere, it won’t take long before we find out if Argo will be a serious contender in the awards race. [CJ]

Like Someone In Love (director Abbas Kiarostami)

Abbas Kiarostami last wowed audiences with his masterfully crafted Certified Copy starring the lovely French actress Juliette Binoche as a woman walking the Italian country side with a man she may or may not have a past with. Kiarostami’s new film is rumored to be a semi-sequel to Certified Copy. This film takes place in Tokyo and involves a relationship between a young woman and an old man. [Blake]

Room 237 (director Rodney Ascher)

After receiving both high praises and concerns over possible copyright issues, Room 237 made a splash at Sundance Film Festival this year. This documentary aims to explore theories about the hidden meaning in Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining. The three decade old film is still being studied by scholars and hardcore fans as well as debated which is what this documentary shows. Of course, this documentary will only appeal to people who enjoyed The Shinning but you can count me in as it is my all-time favorite horror film. [Dustin]

Leviathan (director George P. Cosmatos)

Directors Lucien Castaing-Taylor and Verena Paravel focus their cameras on the ocean in Leviathan, a new documentary about a fishing boat. Castaing-Taylor and Paravel spent two months aboard as the ship traveled around catching fish, but their goal wasn’t to do their own version of The Deadliest Catch. Sharing multiple GoPro cameras with the fishermen on board, footage was captured from the bowels of the ship to under the ocean. We talked about the incredible trailer on here earlier, and the film received rave reviews (along with many walkouts due to feelings of nausea) at its premiere in Locarno. Leviathan looks like a truly original experience that will take its toll on viewers mentally and physically, but hopefully it should be something no one will ever forget. [CJ]

Berberian Sound Studio (director Peter Strickland)

I have a soft spot for Italian horror films. This new film by Peter Strickland looks to go behind the scenes of these horror movies to see how they are made. The film looks to be about a British sound engineer (Toby Jones) who is hired by an Italian director to do the sound for his newest film. However, it seems that life soon begins to imitate art as his job starts to get deadly. The film looks to be a great throwback to the 70s filmmaking era, especially the Horror genre. This could be a sleeper hit in the making. [Blake]

Penance (director Kiyoshi Kurosawa)

Director Kiyoshi Kurosawa established himself early in the 2000s with the terrifying horror film Pulse. Since then he spent several years trying to re-capture his success at scaring people with films like Loft and Retribution but his output was uneven. In 2008 Kurosawa (no relation to legendary director Akira Kurosawa) changed gears with Tokyo Sonata, a drama about a family in crisis after the father is laid off. It was another masterpiece from Kurosawa, but he hasn’t made another film since then. Now, four years later, he makes up for his lost time with the 4.5 miniseries Penance. Taking place over 15 years, the miniseries follows a woman who tries to get vengeance for the unsolved murder of her daughter. Kurosawa’s filmography may be uneven, but he’s proven himself capable of making truly great films. Hopefully Penance will be the sign of a terrific comeback. [CJ]

Venice Film Festival announced the 2012 lineup this morning which will feature a premiere of Terrence Malick’s To The Wonder starring; Ben Affleck, Javier Bardem, Rachel Weisz, and Rachel McAdams. Malick is one of the 17 directors that will be competing for the Golden Lion trophy at this year’s Venice Film Festival. One of the other directors that will be representing the United States is Harmony Korine with his film Spring Breakers featuring James Franco, Vanessa Hudgens, and Selena Gomez.

The biggest surprise was the absence of Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master. According to many rumors the film was going to premiere at Venice and when it was left off the TIFF announcement two days ago that only made it more likely to appear here. Variety even made the mistake of initially reporting The Master making the lineup.

The 69th annual Venice Film Festival will run from August 29th through September 8th.

See the full Venice Film Festival lineup below:

Opening Film (Out Of Competition)
The Reluctant Fundamentalist – Mira Nair (U.S.,Qatar)

Competition
To The Wonder – Terrence Malick (U.S.)
Something in the Air – Olivier Assayas (France)
Outrage: Beyond – Takeshi Kitano (Japan)
Fill The Void – Rama Bursztyn and Yigal Bursztyn (Israel)
Pieta – Kim Ki-duk (South Korea)
Dormant Beauty – Marco Bellocchio (Italy)
E’ stato il figlio – Daniele Cipri (Italy)
At Any Price – Ramin Bahrani (US, UK)
La Cinquieme Saison – Peter Brosens, Jessica Woodworth (Belgium, Netherlands, France)
Un Giorno Speciale – Francesca Comencini (Italy)
Passion – Brian De Palma (France, Germany)
Superstar – Xavier Giannoli (France, Belgium)
Spring Breakers – Harmony Korine (US)
Thy Womb – Brillante Mendoza (Philippines)
Linhas de Wellington – Valeria Sarmiento (Portugal, France)
Paradise: Faith – Ulrich Seidl (Austria, France, Germany)
Betrayal – Kirill Serebrennikov (Russia)

Out Of Competition
L’homme qui rit – Jean-Pierre Ameris (France-Czech Republic)
Love Is All You Need – Susanne Bier (Denmark-Sweden)
Cherchez Hortense – Pascal Bonitzer (France)
Sur un fil – Simon Brook (France-Italy)
Enzo Avitabile Music Life – Jonathan Demme (Italy-US)
Tai Chi 0 – Stephen Fung (China)
Lullaby To My Father – Amos Gitai (Israel-France-Switzerland)
Penance (Shokuzai) – Kiyoshi Kurosawa (Japan)
Bad 25 – Spike Lee (US)
O Gebo e a Sombra – Manoel de Oliveira (Portugal-France)
The Company You Keep – Robert Redford (US)
Shark (Bait 3D) – Kimble Rendall (Australia-Singapore-China)
Disconnect – Henry-Alex Rubin (US)
The Iceman – Ariel Vromen (US)

Out Of Competition: Special Events
Anton’s Right Here – Lyubov Arkus (Russia)
It Was Better Tomorrow – Hinde Boujemaa (Tunisia)
Clarisse – Liliana Cavani (Italy)
Sfiorando il muro – Silvia Giralucci and Luca Ricciardi (Italy)
Carmel – Amos Gitai (Israel-France-Italy)
El impenetrable – Daniele Incalcaterra and Fausta Quattrini (Argentina-France)
Witness: Libya – Michael Mann (US)
Medici con l’Africa – Carlo Mazzacurati (Italy)
La nave dolce – Daniele Vicari (Italy-Albania)

Orrizonti
Wadjda – Haifaa Al Mansour (Saudi Arabia-Germany)
The Paternal House – Kianoosh Ayari (Iran)
I Also Want It -, Alexey Balabanov (Russia)
Gli Equilibristi – Ivano De Matteo (Italy-France)
L’intervallo – Leonardo Di Costanzo (Italy-Switzerland-Germany)
Winter of Discontent – Ibrahim El Batout (Egypt)
Tango Libre – Frederic Fonteyne (Belgium-France-Luxembourg)
The Cutoff Man – Idan Hubel (Israel)
Fly With The Crane – Li Ruijun (China)
A Hijacking – Tobias Lindholm (Denmark)
Leones – Jazmin Lopez (Argentina-France-Netherlands)
Bellas Mariposas – Salvatore Mereu (Italy)
Low Tide – Roberto Minervini (US-Italy-Belgium)
Boxing Day – Bernard Rose (UK-US)
Yema – Djamila Sahraoui (Algeria-France)
Araf – Somewhere In Between – Yesim Ustaoglu (Turkey-France-Germany)
The Millennial Rapture – Koji Wakamatsu (Japan)
Three Sisters – Wang Bing (France-Hong Kong-China)

The lineup for the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival has been released (thanks to Variety) ahead of the official announcement from TIFF (which is suppose to be later this morning). The first set of films for this year’s lineup this morning is a doozy. Leading the pack as the opening film of the festival (which is also its world premiere) is Rian Johnson’s new Sci-Fi thriller Looper. Other films getting world premieres are Argo (Ben Affleck), Cloud Atlas (The Wachowskis & Tom Tykwer), The Silver Linings Playbook (David O. Russell) and A Place Beyond The Pines (Derek Cianfrance).

Perhaps the most welcoming news was that Terrence Malick’s To The Wonder would play although since it is not under the world premiere category we can assume it will play elsewhere first. Other notable films that will be making either an International or North American premiere are; The Company You Keep (Robert Redford), Anna Karenina (Joe Wright), and The Reluctant Fundamentalist (Mira Nair).

Below is the full list of the films announced so far. Expect plenty of more films announced over the coming weeks as TIFF usually showcases around 300+ annually. The festival runs September 6th through the 16th this year. This year C.J. Prince will be attending the festival and reporting back for Way Too Indie so stay tuned.

World Premieres:
Looper – (Rian Johnson) – (Opening Film)
Cloud Atlas – (The Wachowskis & Tom Tykwer)
Argo – (Ben Affleck)
The Silver Linings Playbook – (David O Russell)
Love, Marilyn – (Liz Garbus)
Free Angela And All Political Prisoners – (Shola Lynch)
The Place Beyond The Pines – (Derek Cianfrance)
Midnight’s Children – (Deepa Mehta)
Hyde Park On Hudson – (Roger Michell)
Great Expectations – (Mike Newell)
Inescapable – (Rubba Nadda)
Twice Born – (Sergio Castellitto)
English Vinglish – (Gauri Shinde)
The Perks Of Being A Wallflower – (Stephen Chbosky)
Thanks For Sharing – (Stuart Blumberg)
End Of Watch – (David Ayer)
Imogene – (Robert Puccini and Shari Springer Berman)
A Late Quartet – (Yaron Zilberman)
Much Ado About Nothing – (Joss Whedon)
Frances Ha – (Noah Baumbach)
The Time Being – (Nenad Cicin-Sain)
Writers – (Josh Boone)
At Any Price – (Ramin Bahrani)
Venus And Serena – (Maiken Baird)
Byzantium – (Neil Jordan)
Quartet – (Dustin Hoffman)
Ginger And Rosa – (Sally Potter)
A Liar’s Autobiography – (Ben Timlett, Bill JOnes, Jeff Simpson)
Foxfire – (Laurnet Cantet)
In The House – (Francois Ozon)
The Impossible – (JA Bayona)
Hannah Arendt – (Margarethe Von Trotta)
Mr. Pip – (Andrew Adamson)
Capital – (Costa-Gavras)
The Attack – (Ziad Doueriri)
Zaytoun – (Eran Riklis)
The Deep – (Baltasar Kormakur)
Dreams For Sale – (Nishikawa Miwa)
The Last Supper – (Lu Chuan)

International/North American Premieres:
To The Wonder – (Terrence Malick)
Anna Karenina – (Joe Wright)
The Reluctant Fundamentalist – (Mira Nair)
The Company You Keep – (Robert Redford)
Jayne Mansfield’s Car – (Billy Bob Thornton)
A Royal Affair – (Nikolai Arcel)
Dangerous Liasons – (Hur Ji-Ho)
Thermae Romae – (Hideki Takeuchi)
Caught IN THe Web – (Chen Kaige)
Dormant Beauty – (Marco Belloccchio)
Everybody Has A Plan – (Ana Piterbarg w/Viggo Mortensen)
Kon-Tiki – (Espen Sandberg
Reality – (Matteo Garrone)
A Few Hours Of Spring – (Stephan Brize)
The Hunt – (Thomas Vintenberg)
The Iceman – (Ariel Vromen)
Lore – (Cate Shortland)
No – (Pablo Larrain)
OUtrage Beyond – (Takeshi Kitano)
Rust And Bone – (Jacques Audiard)
The Sapphires – (Wayne Blair)
Tai Chi O – (Stephen Fung)

Canadian Premiere:
The Sessions – (Ben Lewis)