The King

Darn!! I missed the screening of "The King" and I really wanted to see it! Let me in!! Let me in!! But, there will be another screening, so I will be at that one, I hope! It's starring Mexico's Gael Garcia Bernal - "Motorcycle Diaries" - and looks to be something very different, in what I hope to be a good way. It's director James Marsh's first non-documentary film, so it will be interesting to see what kind of perspective he brings to the narrative. William Hurt stars opposite Bernal. Hmmm...Could be good...

If anyone reading caught this one, please let me know what you thought.

Pusher II

I wanted to see another one of the films from Denmark that everyone is hopping up and down about, so I saw "Pusher II".

This is another dark film from SIFF. But where Nick Cave's "The Proposition" was dark in a Dead End Street kind of way, "Pusher 2" from Denmark is dark in an altogether different way. I won't get into too many comparisons here, for they really are different films; one being a Western genre flick, and the other a modern criminal/psychological study film. But both were indeed dark, taking the audience places that are uncomfortable to say the least.

The Good: First off, the cinematography totally fits the piece. If I had to guess, I'd say it was Fuji filmstock, shot in low light conditions and slightly underexposed, then corrected in color timing. I may be wrong about the fuji (I suppose it could have been Kodak, and I also suppose I could actually research it and find out, but I'm lazy today. Hey, it is a holiday, so I'm allowed a little bit of slack. But the underexposing is a trick photographers use to get that gritty look, where the film looks alive, and at times a character's face looks to be crawling around on the screen. It makes the image look dark, scary. So, great job with the photography here.

The Bad: I'd say they went a little too far down the road of showing us how much of a loser the protagonist was. I kind of stopped caring for the guy. I wanted to like him, so I suppose I was still rooting for him, but, almost two hours of following a total loser around is a little trying at best. The ending makes up for a lot though, so I think other viewers could have just as easily loved the guy. I gave up on him after about an hour.

The Ugly: Everyone in the film! Actually, this is the film's saving grace. Everybody is a gross screw up or a criminal. Even the big boss guy that everyone reveres is kind of a loser. In a way, it makes the story believable, because we aren't going along with the best super criminals in the world, but rather, the screw up criminals that the real mob probably laughs at during their mob BBQ's. Or, maybe this is the real mob. Maybe the Godfather mob doesn't exist at all, and all there is in the world of car-jackers is these guys. No "Gone in 60 Seconds" slicksters here. I don't know. Whatever the case, the world created by the filmmakers is true to itself, and this gives the story a foundation to stand on. I didn't see the first "Pusher", so I felt I was missing a lot of the jokes that obviously others in the audience were getting. But, that's ok: I was along for the ride.

Franke Potente

German actress Franke Potente must be the hottest European actress right now. Amazing. Wait a second, let's get our definitions straight here. Because the French actress Ludivine Sagnier is the hottest as in hot-hot-hot & oo-la-la.

Whereas Franke is hot in a different way. Hard to explain really. Here's a few films, some of them great, that she has made possible, in the sense that any other actress couldn't have pulled it off like her. Check these out, a pretty decent cross section of her acting:

Run Lola Run (Of course)
Borne Identity (any American actress would have blown it)
I love Your Work (with Giovanni Ribisi - a great film, very strange, dark, and possibly Ribisi's best work)
Princess and the Warrior (amazing film!! - and often overlooked)
Anatomie (horror film - pretty creepy. Don't watch alone!)

If you are not familiar with this incredible actress, do rent a few of her films, and I'm certain you'll see what I mean!

The Proposition Review #2

Ok, I wrote my initial notes on this film just after I saw it, and I was very affected by the film's violence. Now that I have had the opportunity to get the blood out of my visual memory, and the buzzing of all those flies out of my head, I want to say one more thing.

Just as "Bonnie and Clyde"(1967), "The Wild Bunch"(1969), and "Night of the Living Dead" (1968) are now all seen as reactions to the graphic images coming out of Vietnam, I ask the question: does "The Proposition" have a modern equivalent? The violence in this film is gross, taken too far, with swarming flies living off the fresh corpses everywhere. In a decade or so, will we have other such examples like "The Proposition" to point to, as being the reaction in film to some of the things happening in the world right now? Does the frustration and fear and anger many people feel, brought on by acts of terror, have a reflection in this film? I don't know the answer, but thought I'd pose the question.

Charles Bronson - 70's tough guy

Have I ever mentioned my fascination with Charles Bronson? He's awesome. He comes from the tough guy era of the 70's, where men were men and something... I'm not sure how that sentence ends. Anyway, I've always thought the best three way fist fight between 70's actors would be Charles Bronson, Clint Eastwood, and Steve McQueen.

So, I'm watching Murphy's Law, a Bronson classic, and marveling at how almost alien he is by today's standards. Nobody looks like this today. For instance - the way he squints. It's kind of like Clint Eastwood, but not quite. Eastwood looks like he's squinting into the sun, whereas Bronson looks like his brow has simply invaded his eyes. He's not squinting at all, this is how he looks at you.

Today I just noticed how he runs. It really is amazing. It sort of looks like he just ate a huge meal, and doesn't want to make his stomach ache worse. This is how a real man runs, well, in the 70's at least. You have to remember that feathered hairdo's on guys were cool, so a lot of things were different then.

In Murphy's Law, (which is actually from the 80's, but a lot of stuff from the 70's crossed over - that's really what the 80's were- weird 70's leftovers) Bronson approaches a known cocaine kingpin in a restaurant, doing the old, "We're on to you, buddy," routine that was also a big 70's thing in plot lines. The bad guy asks, "You ever heard of Murphy's Law?" and warns Bronson that a lot of bad things can happen to a guy, if they're not careful. Bronson (Murphy) replies in classic Bronson (and true to form 70's tough guy) fashion, "The only law I know, is Jack Murphy's law: don't f%#@k with Jack Murphy." Classic.

Oh yeah, fair warning on this one - there's more bad language than you can shake a stick at. If you can get past that, and the terrible way women are treated, and the somewhat predictable psychotic killer, and the stoopid bad language insults from Bronson's sidekick, well, actually the only reason to watch it is for Bronson. Murphy's Law isn't really a good film, but it's worth seeing as a kind of crazy time capsule of sorts. And to watch Bronson run.

The Proposition

"The Proposition", which was written by Nick Cave, (who you may recall as the brilliant musician behind 'Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds') is truthful, real, dark, and horribly violent. Violent to such a degree, that the film suffers by it. On my way out I overheard someone say, "It could have been a great film," and they were right.

I was shocked by the violence, riveted to my seat, with my only defense being that I had my hand over my eyes during many scenes. But that wasn't enough. I probably won't sleep tonight. Seriously. If you are like me, and have a vivid imagination that holds images in your mind for a long time, then I suggest you don't see this film.

Now, I cover my eyes in most horror films too, so, admittedly, I'm a bit of a sissy. I suppose I just don't like seeing so much blood. But the saving grace of horror films is that it is all so obviously fake, and usually it's so overblown that it becomes somewhat comic. Jason or Freddie just can't be taken seriously at a certain point, and therefore the violence is, basically, unreal. Also, in horror films, the violence is usually a metaphor, for either something else or for another kind of violence. "Night of the Living Dead" has often been equated as a byproduct of the terrible images seen on TV from news footage of Vietnam. Even the Western genre, such as Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch", was influenced strongly by the images coming out of Vietnam. No longer could the cowboy in the white hat shoot the bad guy in the black hat, and conveniently leave no blood on Main Street. As 1970 approached, the violence in film was now the terrible violence of blood and pain and senseless cruelty. (Remember the scorpions thrown into the ant pit by the children in Wild Bunch?).

Books on writing will often say that the writer needs to be true to the story. To push the story as far as it can go. To not hold back. So many films, (and I would suggest most big Hollywood films) do not abide by this rule of storytelling, and instead of telling a real story, we are given some kind of formulaic story where we all know what's going to happen in the first five minutes.

Well, the one absolutely positive thing I must say about "The Proposition" is that as a storyteller, Nick Cave does not wimp out. He takes this story so far down the road, that there really is no coming back. The story is indeed true to itself, and the characters are true, doing what they have to do, driving the story forward. They are a mix of criminals, cowards and lunatics; abusive, vindictive and cruel; living in a hard, harsh Australia which is in so many ways like what we know from our own wild west. But where Peckinpah would cut, director John Hillcoat not only lingers, but moves in for a close-up. The scene where a young man is brutally whipped to near death is so real, and so much like a terrible rape scene that I wanted to run out of the theater screaming, but like I said, I was glued to my seat. The film has more flies in it than I think I have ever seen in my entire life, total, not just at one time. And the flies are happy, because there's so many dead bodies and blood everywhere, laying around in the hot sun, that I was itchy, and fidgety the whole time. The film gave me the creeps so bad that I think I may just have to rent a few Disney films tonight, just to even things out.

All that said, the film is very well done. For what it is, for the story being told, the film goes all the way, doesn't hold back one bit, and that seems to be such a rare thing that I have to give high respect points. But I'm afraid I have to ask the question (and I realize this would likely make the filmmakers really mad): could the story still have been told, and not been so horrific? Did it have to go so far?

I think that unfortunately for the film, the shockingly real, graphic nature of the violence takes such a front seat that the underlying stories of lost, broken men, misguided justice, and the complicated, twisted love and hatred between two brothers, all gets kind of lost. Which is too bad. It could have been a great film.

Water

Today we open the acclaimed and controversial Indian film "Water." The film centers on the way widows have been traditionally treated in India, not allowed to remarry and considered bad luck and even shunned. By questioning these traditional values, the film has created an uproar from certain fundamentalist factions in India. The film set was protested during production, where in January 2000 Hindu nationalists claimed the film was anti-Hindu. The film set was ransacked and production was shut down for four years.

This is the third film of a triptych of films from director Deepa Mehta. "Water" completes the previous two films in the series, "Fire" from 1996, and "Earth" from 1998.

George Lucas took out an ad in Variety Magazine to lend his moral support to the director, because of the negative reaction she was receiving in her home country during production. "I think it's slightly naïve for me to think that films make a difference," says Ms. Mehta in a recent New York Times article. "But what it can do is start a dialogue and provoke discussion."

"The sorrowful film is nonetheless a triumph of conscience over blind faith, and a powerful message about how much, and how little, has changed in India," says the New York Times,- May 3, 2006.

"Water" is absolutely beautiful on so many levels. I hesitate to say more, for I feel that this film must be experienced first, then talked about later. I'm sitting watching the credits roll right now, and am truly in awe. And I need a tissue to wipe my eyes. Sob.

-----

"Water" comes to us with such timeliness too, because at the end of June, the Grand will have its first ever Bollywood film series!! Four great films from India, all of them recent releases and big hits in India, will be screening over the course of one week. Much more info to come, so stay tuned!!

A-Side, B-Side, Sea Side

Sometimes I really enjoy a film which doesn't tackle huge issues, but rather is a look into the relationship between a few people, how they relate. I dislike the term "slice of life" because it makes me think of apple pie, and then I get off track, and start looking for a diner. Mmm, apple pie. There, see how easy it is to get sidetracked? So, what could be the new term for "slice of pie", er, life? How about "personal look into the daily lives of individuals...?" Doesn't roll off the tongue very easily. Oh well.

"A Side, B-Side, Sea Side" is a film which shows us how two young-adult girls each have different experiences in a small seaside village. I particularly liked the dynamic between one of the girls who has been in the big city for a time, and a couple of her friends who have stayed behind in the little village. They start to realize their friendship has faded, that their different experiences have created a distance, and they find it difficult to realize they don't relate like they once did.

The film works for me because despite being about girls in a little village on the other side of the world, I felt the relationships were universally true, and that a boy in a big city thousands of miles away could recognize some of the same feelings about his own friends. By first time Hong-Kong Director Wing-Chiu Chan.

Grand Staff Blogs

Check out the newly created blog at the Grand. Everyone at the theater has a keen interest in film, and with so many points of view, we created a special blog for the Grand staff to discuss films. Just go through the Grand's website to find the link.

Denmark 's new films

SIFF is bringing a great array of films from Denmark. A while back, we became used to equating Denmark with Dogma films. Of course, there is more to the country's film output than the dogma style. (Like the way the Pacific Northwest made more than Grunge music in the 90's). It just becomes easy to label a place with whatever becomes popular. So, SIFF's spotlight on other films from Denmark besides dogma films, is something to keep an eye on.

My first Danish recommendation at SIFF is "Voksne mennesker" ("Dark Horse") from director Dagur Kari. I cannot help but love this film, with its black and white 'tribute' to New Wave films from the 60's, and reminding me at times of one of my favorite directors, Jim Jarmusch. I also liked the film's humor, and the almost improv feel to many of the scenes. One of those films where good writing and acting combine to make believable characters that you can't help but like, even though they are such losers!

-----
What are Dogma films? - Established in 1995 as the "Dogme 95" group, several Danish filmmakers put together a set of 10 rules, to be followed in the making of these new films. The basic premise behind Dogma is to produce films without all the trappings of a big budget Hollywood production. Hand-held cameras give a documentary feel to the cinematography. The classic three light set-up established in Hollywood productions is disregarded, and only "available light" is used, either using daylight or the lights already on location.

Dogma films fall into the realm of 'Realism,' a theoretical approach to filmmaking established very early in Cinema history, (which I outlined in a newsletter essay from last year, called 'Realism vs. Formalism'). The clear similarity between Dogma and Realism is that they both approach filmmaking by 'respecting' reality, believing that lights, rigging, color correction, dialogue replacement, several takes on set, etc. would take away from the integrity of the film. By treating the film almost like a documentary, Dogma films are believed by some to be the most 'honest' style of filmmaking.

A very practical aspect of Dogma films is that they are much more cost effective, and filmmakers are able to shoot considerably more scenes by not having to move the cumbersome camera crew and lighting set ups for each shot. This saves time, streamlines the crew, and saves money.

Director Lar von Trier is a most notable Dogma filmmaker, and Denmark's most recognized filmmaker. For more info on Dogma, and for the 10 rules as listed by the Dogme 95 group, follow this link:

http://www.dogme95.dk/the_vow/index.htm

Al Gore the Entertainer?

Last night on Saturday Night Live, Al Gore was on 'Weekend Update.' And it was really him, not an actor playing him. Coincidentally, he is starring in a soon to hit theaters documentary called “An Inconvenient Truth,” delving into the subject of global warming. Now, some people may remember Mr. Gore as the not-so-exciting fellow running for President a while back, and my first thought of him as the driving force behind a film was that it would be, well, kind of boring to watch.

Not so with this film. He really does present a compelling, engaging and not-at-all boring case on global warming and what we need to do about it. But Saturday Night Live?

Actually, this isn’t his first time on the show – he hosted in 2002. He’s not the funniest guy in the world, but it looks like he’s making a serious effort at changing his image. I thought his segment last night was pretty good, though I suppose it must be difficult to be on stage, competing in a way, with comedians who are doing this every week, and whom we have become used to laughing with (at).

Anyway, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him pop up a few more times in the media, as the promotions for the film gear up for it’s release. We are scheduled to play the film right after the Seattle release in mid June.

Classic Films at the Grand

Today was our screening of the classic Marx Brother’s “Duck Soup” from 1933, as part of a collaboration with the Tacoma Art Museum. What a great film, listed as #5 on the American Film Institute's list of 100 funniest films. It’s funny on the surface, and if you look a little further and put the historical context into the mix, you can see some of the deeper implications of the humor. I wasn’t there during the depression, as far as I can recall at least, but they tell me it was a pretty tough time. A kind of desperation emerged in the comedy during this period – the light-hearted gaiety of the 20’s didn’t really apply anymore.

An interesting story element in “Duck Soup” is that the country of “Freedonia” is bankrupt, and Groucho is brought in as the president/dictator. Of course, bankruptcy was a common subject of the time, but what is also of note is that Freedonia declares war, almost flippantly against their neighbors. A few years later, towards the end of that decade, Germany is building up for war. I wonder if this is just a coincidence, or if the future political climate was being anticipated in a way.

I have always appreciated the humor of the Marx Brothers, despite living the better part of a century later. Perhaps the humor is universal enough to still apply to today.

“Modern Times” (from 1936) is playing next week – Charlie Chaplin’s classic comedy, where he tries his best to fit in with the quickly evolving modern era. We see this quite a bit in films of the first few decades of the 20th century. Within such a short time, people went from riding a horse to driving cars and flying in the sky. Many films of the time show people almost getting run over by cars in the city, or the frantic pace of the assembly line.

“Modern Times” is hilarious, and I think one of the better surviving silent films. It’s interesting to note that the film was made after the advent of talkies. Maybe this was Chaplin’s final defiant gesture in favor of silence. The film has a great score, and lots of sound effects to help out the humor onscreen. Don’t miss this rare opportunity to see classic Chaplin on the big screen!!

The Illusionist

SIFF's opening night film will be 'The Illusionist,' starring primarily Edward Norton and Paul Giamatti. I just saw the film's preview this afternoon, and think it will be a great way to open the festival this year. Not only is the film loaded with fine acting and excellent visuals, but also something more, something less tangible. In a way, the story of 'The Illusionist' escapes the confines of the screen and visits us in our seats. Ok, that sounds weird, but stay with me for a moment. (This is one of those films we were asked to hold full reviews on until it opens, but what I can say is this):

Edward Norton plays an illusionist in Vienna, circa 1900. We see much of his illusions taking place from the perspective of the audience, so it feels like we are there. I suspect that some reviews of Norton's acting will suggest that he doesn't give a lot to the role, or that he underplays his character. I think his subtle treatment of his character is incredibly well done, where a lesser actor would have over-acted the part. Paul Giamatti plays the Vienna Chief of Police, shadowing the Illusionist, trying to see if the illusions are real, or a fraud. There is much more to the story - love, lost love, a dubious and jealous Crown Prince, love found again, and lost again - 'Romantic Thriller' - that's the term I'm looking for. But it turns into a mystery along the way, and we are left to wonder about the illusions - are they in fact real?

The films' writer/Director Neil Burger does a great job transporting us back to a time not so long a go, when theater was THE form of entertainment, cinema was just being born, and people were much more apt to believe what they saw. The 'Phantasmagoria' illusions and magic lanterns which pre-date cinema were still very much alive back then. I suppose what made me love this film is that I really felt like I was in that audience, crowded into an old theater with gas lamps, waiting to see what illusion would come next. Did I mention that there is lots of action? And a love story? I really cannot write much more about it, but I will leave you with something I was reminded of - a scene from Cocteau's 'Orphee' - where Orpheus steps over to the other side to look for his lost love Euridice. That feeling of longing, and the desire to believe that love could really transcend the boundaries of time and space, even defy death. 'The Illusionist' worked for me because from the opening scene, we are led to believe that it might not be an illusion at all, but that what we are seeing is real magic. For me, that's what films are all about.

SIFF Press Launch

This morning was SIFF's annual Press Launch (and a nice little brunch) - the official kick-off to the festival for the press. I've mentioned it before, that the lovely folks at SIFF have been kind enough to allow me the opportunity to attend the press screenings and functions, so once again, bravo to SIFF. For me, this is great, having the chance to see the films ahead of time, and rub elbows with the various writers for the press, from the Pacific NW and also from far and wide. It makes me feel so cosmopolitan.

Along with the privilege of my press pass comes the duty of respecting and abiding by the rules. So, with some of my 'reviews' (I use quotes because I will not go so far as to presume to be a journalist or movie reviewer, but let's say, rather, that I am simply sharing my notes with you), when requested by SIFF, I am not allowed to divulge certain plot elements or give too much away. So, if some of my entries seem brief, this is why. But when allowed, I will let you in on the skinny (I've always wanted to use that word like that! Maybe it's the film I just saw, but more likely the 20's music in the cafe right now) of what films are great, which not so great, and give you my best advice on which films are worth the drive up to Seattle.

I will be seeing as many films as I can over the next several weeks, as SIFF is my yearly peek into many of the films I will be looking to book at the Grand in the coming year. So, farewell to sleep for the coming month or so, but no worries there - I've always maintained that to forego sleep for films is not only an honorable endeavor, but really not that much of a sacrifice. Spending hours in dark theaters all day long is kind of like sleeping anyway, and the films are like dreams, some with subtitles! Here we go!!

Crossing the Bridge

Faith Aiken has given us a beautiful look into Istanbul with these 'interviews,' gorgeous black and white photographs, some cool camera set ups (hard to describe, it's a subtle touch that just 'feels right', you know?), and music, music, music.

What makes it stand out in my mind is that is is made by a German/Turkish director living in the west. It seems only appropriate that a musical documentary shot in the historically divided and tumultuous city of Istanbul (Constantinople, renamed Istanbul by the Republic of Turkey in 1930) be done by him.

"Crossing the Bridge - The Sound of Istanbul" continues with some of the themes he posited in his 2005 award-winning film "Head On" (which raised a minor scandal when it was found out that the lead actress was a former porn-star), where the German/Turkish young lovers are trying to navigate the problems of eastern values clashing with the west. But here in Istanbul instead of a tangled young romance, we are seeing and hearing the east/west differences and harmonies via traditional Turkish music playing right alongside western music - hip hop, rock, even 'jazz' from a group of Romanian gypsies. Wow. This is a cool film, and personally, I believe it's bridges like these that can bring us a little closer to the east, maybe in a small way understand a little better, get past the walls which have divided us for two thousand years. A little overly-dramatic? Yes, I suppose. But I guess I still believe that film, as such a powerful artistic medium, has a hopeful potential to bring us together.

Evil Aliens

hahaha - I'm still laughing from the SIFF press screening I saw earlier today. A very funny Comedy/Horror/Sci-fi film from Brit director Jake West called "Evil Aliens." If you follow my opinions on film, you'll know that I cover my eyes when I see gore, and usually don't like horror films which rely on gross-out tactics.

That said, "Evil Aliens" was gross-out gorey yuk stuff, and I covered my eyes a lot, and I loved it!! It worked for me, and most of the audience it would seem from all the laughter and light-hearted screams, because it was so silly and funny. The film seemed to have just the right balance of self-reflective teasing of the genre (like the nerd greeting the aliens with a Vulcan hand signal, or while they are trying to steal the alien's ship, the girl says "I have a bad feeling about this..." - the recurring line from Star Wars), mixed with some genuinely weird and unique characters. It was hilarious to me when I realized how much I was cheering for the freaky Welsh farmer with the one dead eye, who early in the film is set up as a possible villain. But when the evil aliens show up (and they are indeed evil, nasty aliens) the creepy farmer who refuses to speak English (or can't) suddenly seems like a pretty cool guy.

To be fair, the film is super-gross, with a few scenes I personally would rather have not seen. But for any horror genre fan, "Evil Aliens" is a must see. It's (appropriately) part of SIFF's midnight series called Midnight Adrenaline.

Rental of the week

Occasionally I run across a film that I want to recommend for rental. The recent release of Woody Allen's 'Match Point' is the rental of the week. Though the visuals were more impressive on the big screen, I believe the film holds up on a TV monitor just fine.

I suppose everyone has a preconceived notion of what a Woody Allen film is whenever the subject comes up. With 'Match Point' however, Allen has done something very new, well, new for him. The silent moments in the film seem even more silent and even lonely, when I reminded myself who was running the show. The wry, witty dialogue marathons we have come to expect from him are not at all present, and instead we are treated to a film of passions, weakness, betrayal, breakdown. And yes, I'm still talking about Woody Allen.

A certain plot devise is used in a very clever fashion. The opening scene narration illustrates that in tennis, a ball can at times hit the net, bounce straight up, and go either way, determining the outcome of the match as if by pure chance. At the end of the film, something similar happens, and pure chance swings someone's luck in a very different direction, and in a way I didn't expect at all.

The visuals are complimented by a great score and performances from actors who seem happy to be given the freedom to do something powerful, challenging. 'Match Point' is definitely worth renting - especially if you haven't seen it yet, and certainly worth seeing again - especially if you have a crush on Scarlett Johansson.

SIFF screenings are underway!!

Stay tuned for this year's first reviews of SIFF. Once again, the cool press office at the Seattle International FIlm Festival has given me a press pass for the festival. Which means I'll be seeing lots of films at the press preview screenings, and will be able to give you a peek into what's happening up in Seattle. (You know Seattle, it's that town you drive through to get to Canada)

If you can't make it up to the festival, don't worry, because we will likely be playing many of the films screening there. That's one of the functions of film festivals - to give new films a platform which anticipates their theatrical release, or not. Sadly, many films will only get this one chance to be seen onscreen. But perhaps that's not so sad. The films chosen for the festival have already made a big step by having made the cut for the festival in the first place.

So, to all the films which are quirky, strange, foreign (in more ways than just language) oddball or otherwise not mainstream enough to be considered for alternative art-house theatrical distribution, to you I say bravo. For this festival will be your 90 or so minutes of fame. Hey, that's not bad - it's more than an hour extra fame than Warhol alloted. Now, if you followed that thread of thought, you deserve a prize.

Anyway, I'll do my best to be a good lookout at the festival, and take great notes, which I shall of course post in this blog!