Z

By MCN Editor editor@moviecitynews.com

CHICAGO FESTIVAL ANNOUNCES AUDIENCE CHOICE AWARDS

Feature film TRUST and documentary LOUDER THAN A BOMB share 2010 Audience Choice Award

CHICAGO, October 22, 2010 – The 46th Chicago International Film Festival proudly announces the Audience Choice Awards, presented by Buick Regal, and the juried Chicago Award. Audiences received ballots at every public screening during the two-week Festival to rank films on a five-point scale. Votes are tallied and weighted based on attendance so each film has an equal opportunity to win the award.

Audience Choice Award, presented by Buick Regal
LOUDER THAN A BOMB (USA)

Who ever said poetry was boring? Four teams of supremely talented Chicago high school students harness the ecstatic power of words as they prepare to compete in the world’s largest youth poetry slam right here in Chicago. The film also received the Chicago Award, Special Jury Prize. Directors: Greg Jacobs and Jon Siskel

TRUST (USA)
After carefree teenager Anna’s life is shattered by an online sexual predator, her parents (Clive Owen, Catherine Keener) struggle to help her pick up the pieces. As anger and disbelief drive her father’s desire for revenge, Anna is left to contend with her feelings of guilt and shame. Commanding performances by an ensemble cast drive this fiercely honest look at the devastating aftermath of rape. Lilana Liberato was awarded the Festival’s Silver Hugo for Best Actress (photo attached). Director: David Schwimmer

Audience Choice Award – The Human Condition

The Audience Choice Award in our 60-second film competition The Human Condition goes to BOIL, directed by Chicagoan Darren Davidson. BOIL is a comedy about the importance of taking action.
Chicago Award
Designed to honor the best film from the Festival’s Illinois[e]makers program of short, feature, and documentary films, the Chicago Award goes to TONY & JANINA’S AMERICAN WEDDING, a heart-wrenching film that puts a very human face on a current and painful political issue by intimately and expertly telling the story of one family’s American Dream-turned-nightmare as they are torn apart by a flawed U.S. immigration system. Director: Ruth Leitman

The Special Jury Prize goes to LOUDER THAN A BOMB, a meticulously crafted and inspiring film that celebrates with vitality and good spirit a spectrum of American youth—Chicago youth to be exact—at their most creative.

The Chicago Award jury consisted of local filmmakers James Choi, Emily Hart, and Dan Rybicky.

Led by Presenting Partner, Columbia College Chicago, the 46th Chicago International Film Festival’s sponsors to date include: Premiere Partners – American Airlines, Buick; Producing Partners- Stella Artois, DePaul University, AMC Theaters; Major Partners – Allstate, WBBM and theWit as the returning Headquarters Hotel.

ABOUT CINEMA/CHICAGO

Cinema/Chicago is a not-for-profit cultural and educational organization dedicated to encouraging better understanding between cultures and to making a positive contribution to the art form of the moving image. The Chicago International Film Festival is part of the year-round programs presented by Cinema/Chicago, which also include the Summer Gala, the Hugo Television Awards, CineYouth Festival, INTERCOM Competition, International Summer Screenings Program and Education Outreach.

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“To be a critic is to be a workaholic. Workaholism is socially conditioned: viewed favourably by exploiters, it’s generally ruinous to a worker’s mental health. When T.S. Eliot said criticism was as inevitable as breathing, he failed to mention that, respiratory problems notwithstanding, breathing is easy. Criticism is reflexive before reflective: to formalise/industrialise an involuntary instinct requires time, effort and discipline. The reason we seek remuneration, as opposed to the self-hatred of being a scab, is because all labour should be waged…

“Criticism, so the cliché by now goes, is dying. None of the panel discussions on its death agony, however—including those in which I’ve formally participated—come at it from the wider perspective that the problem surely needs. They defend the ways in which criticism functions in relation to the industry and to the public, but they fail to contextualise these relationships as defined by ultimately rotten and self-harming imperatives.

“Criticism was a noble profession so long as only a few could practice it for money; when the field expands, as it has with a so-called ‘democratisation’ of our practice, those few lose their political power. Competition grows and markets are undercut: publications are naturally going to start paying less. Precarity is both cause and effect of a surplus workforce: the reason you’re only as good as your last article is because there are plenty of other folks who can write the next one in your place. The daily grind is: pitch, or perish.

B”ut criticism, so a counter-cliché goes, is not dying. An irony: this is an elite sport that is no longer elite in terms of who is able to practice it, but in economic terms it’s clutching to a perverse and outmoded hierarchical structure. It’s more meritocratic than ever, now: which is to say it isn’t meritocratic at all. That’s a paradox in bad need of a resolution…”

~ Michael Pattison Manifestoes Film Criticism

“It’s easy to forget when you’re reading a critic every single week or multiple times a week, that most of us who do this job, and have been doing it for a long time, understand that this is basically a parasitic profession. I don’t mean in the sense that we’re evil bloodsucking creatures, but we couldn’t exist if we didn’t have something to analyze. And I’m always conscious of that. So whether I like or don’t like a particular thing you do, my point of view is always that of an appreciator. I just like to be in the world that you create.”
~ Matt Zoller Seitz To Sam Esmail

Z Weekend Report