Toronto 2005: Day Four - Confessions of a Festival Junkie

Day Four

Tommy Lee Jones had directed a television feature prior to The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada, Which premiered at the Cannes Film Festival in May. It received a couple of awards for its script and Jones's performance and the critical buzz ranged from respectable to raves. It just seemed like it would secure U.S. distribution as quickly as the ink might dry on a contract. Many believed that a deal had been struck with Sony Classics but though negotiations may be on-going, no one was willing to make an announcement during Toronto's opening weekend.

Three Burials was bankrolled by Luc Besson's EuropaCorp and he may well have expected via his association with Fox that something could be hammered out with Searchlight to handle the movie in America. A film of this profile and pedigree doesn't often linger in the marketplace for months unless the sales agent is holding out for some outrageous advance and no one in the acquisitions community is painting that scenario. Rather, the word is that Sony Classics would like Jones to go back into the editing room and trim about seven minutes of the two-hour Cannes cut. To date, Jones has been steadfast about the integrity of his version and it just might take Toronto audiences to bring the two parties to an amicable compromise.

With the opening weekend a wrap, it appeared that very few films emerged as potential alternative or niche hits. For months theater operators have been wondering where this year's Sideways was on the release schedule and concluding it would have no equivalent. But it's going to take several more on the order of Crash and the current The Constant Gardener to make up the slack. Stricken from the list altogether were Terry Gilliam's Tideland and Guy Ritchie's Revolver that many were comparing unfavorably to his infamous remake of Swept Away.

Conversely, Capote, Neil Jordan's Breakfast on Pluto and Mrs. Henderson Presents with Judi Dench and Bob Hoskins are now being viewed as having broader appeal than initially expected following their festival exposure.

As opposed to other major events, Toronto is actually one festival where it's easy to make an excuse to drop in. It seems like everyone has at least one relative in the city and with a slate of more than 300 international features one's bound to have dealings with someone legitimately in attendance. I bumped into Barbet Schroeder in a hotel lobby and he claimed to have three co-production projects that allowed him to make a single stop in Toronto and conduct business on all three in the space of 36 hours.

Certainly one aspect of a large film festival such as Toronto or Sundance or Cannes is the extraordinary degree of collegiality that permeates the environment. People that would not give you the time of day in Los Angeles will extend themselves without provocation. The same person that has not returned your phone call in the prior six months will cheerily invite you to a meal or an intimate event. And the largesse and candor makes one wonder momentarily whether this personable and seemingly accessible man or woman ever received your message. Perhaps a secretary decided not to put you on the call sheet … ever.

Of course the reality check will come a week or two later when your new found buddy once again becomes elusive back in the security of his corporate lair.

For many in the industry, not being available is a potent weapon. Executives wield it for many reasons. It allows them not to have to confront questions or inquiries or to respond to whatever might be tossed in their direction. They never have to say "no" and after weeks of the great mute repose, the negative becomes tacitly understood.

Of course, not everyone behaves in that fashion. But for the many that do, entering into the festival milieu has to be a mixed emotional bag. Whether exec X has arrived in support of some film or to get an early glimpse of something by someone he might want to be in business with or to scout for new product, he's absent the protective armor he's so carefully put in place back at the office. I like to think that the experience is liberating for the two or three days when it occurs. He can be charming, flattering and personable and without making a single promise, give the impression of being encouraging and nurturing.

It is an m.o. that's all too familiar for those that reside in the greater Los Angeles neighborhood. But for the independent filmmaker or the Asian director experiencing a mild jolt of media attention it must seem like awfully bizarre behavior.

The majors per se aren't really in the festival business in any significant fashion. The reason for a studio to do a festival premiere is in no way related to altruism or as a responsible corporate promoter of the seventh art. Obviously the primary concern is that the exposure will be positive. With that understanding, other factors become important. Will the event generate a level of publicity for the movie that would otherwise be prohibitive to buy outright? Can it employ the venue as a junket function? Is the timing of the festival advantageous to an award campaign? So, with the exception of an insistent star, festivals are strategic when it concerns what might be deemed its upscale roster.

Acquisitions are for the specialized divisions and with any luck might be sufficiently successful to catch the notice of someone in the mother studio looking for an up and coming talent.

by Leonard Klady