Guys, I was so worried. The memory of a film festival, however excellent its selection, can be utterly tarnished by bad jury decisions (we see you, George Miller for Cannes 2016). And to be perfectly honest, I had DOUBTS about this year’s jury. But you know what? Ruben Östlund & Co. did good. I probably would have shifted some of their choices around a little bit, but overall they did not pick one bad film from an exceptional lineup, forever securing the legacy of Cannes’ 76th edition, and that’s more than you can say for most festival juries.
More thoughts below.
Best Screenplay
MONSTER
CALLED IT! As I mentioned, there are a lot of great scripts in contention this year, but there’s something undeniable about Yûji Sakamoto’s work on MONSTER. Complex in structure yet always relatable, insightful, humane, it’s an all-around remarkable piece of writing. Very glad the jury picked up on it. Considering its broader appeal as a mystery and the emotional payoff at the end, submission by Japan in the international feature category seems likely.
Best Actor
Kôji Yakusho (PERFECT DAYS)
Ok, so I over-thought this one. Yakusho carried PERFECT DAYS and delivered a soulful, moving performance largely without dialogue. In the wrong hands, this could come off as gimmicky but he absolutely nailed it. My theory that the film would go on to win a bigger prize proved unfounded and the actual best actor won the best actor prize. Delightful.
It will also be interesting to see if Japan ends up choosing this Tokyo-set drama – made by German director Wim Wenders – over MONSTER for Oscar consideration.
Best Actress
Merve Dizdar (ABOUT DRY GRASSES)
I included Dizdar on my list of contenders so it’s not completely unexpected, but this is still somewhat of a surprise because her role is a supporting one, despite the film being 3+ hours long, and the competition is stiff. Dizdar’s victory is NOT 2016 (where Jaclyn Jose infamously beat the trio of Sandra Hüller, Isabelle Huppert, Sonia Braga seemingly out of nowhere) all over again though, for her performance and especially the film are both strong. I didn’t get to write about Nuri Bilge Ceylan’s gripping, thoughtful opus, but I’m happy the jury made sure to include it on the winners’ list. It’s a definite highlight of this year’s selection.
Poor Sandra Hüller. After being hailed as the shoo-in in 2016 (for TONI ERDMANN) and delivering not one but TWO phenomenal performances this year, the best actress prize slipped through her fingers once again. But she’s probably not too sad about this seeing how the evening turned out.
Best Director
Trần Anh Hùng (THE POT AU FEU)
No question the biggest surprise of the night. I’m not mad at this though. THE POT AU FEU is 2 hours and 14 minutes of people cooking, eating and flirting. Aptly described in some corners as the MAD MAX: FURY ROAD of gastronomy, it is a period romance on steroids that’s relentlessly self-involved to the point of being kinda radical. It’s also the Frenchest film imaginable. I wouldn’t call it the best directed film of this lineup, but this movie is a lovely time. Submission by France for the Oscar race probably a done deal.
Prix du Jury
FALLEN LEAVES
My bet on CLUB ZERO didn’t pay off, but very pleased the jury made sure to recognize Aki Kaurismäki and his simply wonderful film. FALLEN LEAVES is about two people who are down on their luck and struggling to stay afloat. It also keeps reminding us of the bleak, war-torn world we live in. And yet by the magic of Kaurismäki’s singular cinematic language, it turned out to be the most joyous film of the lineup that will bring a smile to your face. Loved it.
Grand Prix
THE ZONE OF INTEREST
Ok so the best film of the lineup won second place. I can live with that. People need to remember that ground-breaking films like this always polarize and often get passed over in a jury vote. Glazer’s last feature UNDER THE SKIN, for example, famously won nothing at the 70th Venice Film Festival. In this sense, we should all be grateful the jury was not alienated/upset/offended by Glazer’s mad, frightening vision and that another masterpiece now has a firm place in Cannes history.
Palme d’Or
ANATOMY OF A FALL
Justine Triet’s film is obviously not my pick for the top prize but I did love it, especially for its tremendous writing and the top-notch performances. Using the investigative rigor of a murder trial to search for truth in a relationship, it’s riveting, thought-provoking and often surprising. A solid if not perfect choice in such a banner year. This is of course the third time a female-directed film won the Palme d’Or after THE PIANO and TITANE. I believe it’s also the first time the Palme Dog winner simultaneously won the Palme d’Or – wait ‘til you see what Snoop did in this, it borders on special effects.
And yes, Cannes is really trying to make Sandra Hüller the Queen of the Universe this year by awarding both films starring her the top two prizes. You won’t catch me complaining. What a mighty performer. The range she shows in THE ZONE OF INTEREST and ANATOMY OF A FALL is staggering.
So that’s it for another exciting, exhausting, rewarding trip to Cannes, signing off for now. Make sure to seek out the winner films when you can, this year they’re actually a bunch of absolute winners.
29 Comments
One of the big questions is why the festival miscomunicated with Victor Erice and his comeback wasn’t in competition – even when Erice was meant to believe it was…
It makes wonder if Cannes’ traditional anti-Spanish cinema tendency (with few exceptions like Almodovar) in Competition, was aiming to avoid that Erice could win Palm d’Or in front of some other faves…
I am unsure if a Spanish film ever won Palm d’Or
To answer your closing point, does Viridiana count (I haven’t seen it yet so I can’t be quite sure)? But yes, the Erice situation was truly idiotic even if I don’t think they would have won the Palme had they been in competition
Viridiana is the only Spanish film to have won to date, yes.
Best Palm ever, in my opinion. And I mean it in the sense that it represents the innovation, the scandal and the poetry that I expect to see at Cannes.
he had the best narrative to win it, Ferdinand… in almost equal circumstances, it’s actually even likely that he would have won it, to close his directorial career – he’s been underawarded – and probably that’s the main reason the Festival tricked him to have his film but not in competition (even thought Erice would have only accepted if in Competition and not in a secondary frame)
I would also argue that Erice was not the big story of Cannes this year, the most talked-about and raved-about films of the festival seemed to specifically be the two films that won the Palme d’Or and the Grand Prix. Films outside the competition have captured the conversation much more forcefully in years past (the most obvious example from recent years is probably Faces Places) and thus I don’t think the Erice film would have been treated as a behemoth even had it been moved to the competition lineup.
it’s not what it would have happened but how the selection probably acted… I also think that’s a similar reason why Scorsese wasn’t invited to compete for Palm d’Or… I think no one saw The Zone of Interest coming, but any french film it’s an inmediate suspect to win (at least something big), so I shrugged when a french film upset Glazer’s unanimously acclaimed film
I don’t think Anatomy of a Fall winning was in particular an upset, The Zone of Interest was in its way slightly divisive (see in particular its performance at the various French polls) and it wasn’t shocking that one of the other films that seemed to be among the most acclaimed films of the competition (I’d say it’s in the top 3 along with The Zone of Interest and Fallen Leaves).
And beyond the statement that supposedly Scorsese and Apple specifically requested to not be in competition, I think something like Killers of the Flower Moon (like Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood and Joker before it) should never play in competition at these major European festivals because the festival won’t mean much to those films whereas even for established arthouse filmmakers, it can really change the economic prospects of their films. So, I don’t really care about Scorsese being in competition. If we want to point to directors and ask why they weren’t in competition, it’s much more meaningful to me to discuss why Erice wasn’t in competition or why Alonso wasn’t in competiton or why something like Inside the Yellow Cocoon Shell or The Delinquents wasn’t in competition.
Also, since rufussondheim also mentions it, what do people mean when they say “no one saw The Zone of Interest coming”? It’s a Jonathan Glazer film which meant that at least I was very much expecting it to get an intense reaction and since his topic was less scifi than his previous to movies, I imagined the reception might be more immediately positive. Just as Anatomy of a Fall being a big deal was not a particular surprise to me because Justine Triet is a phenomenal filmmaker (just see Sibyl and Age of Panic)
Narratives rarely work at Cannes (largely because I don’t think jury members are obsessed about them as film nerds looking at the festival) and considering the seeming general bent of what was being awarded, I’m not sure the kind of film that the descriptions of the film that I’ve heard (stylistically not that bold, very emotional, apparently quite old-fashioned, heavy on “the importance of cinema”). I’d also argue it wasn’t universally beloved, in certain critical circles the reception seemed a little muted compared (though with other groups it was incredibly well-received) and I’d argue this jury’s opinions about the competition titles leaned a little more towards the tastes of these groups where the reception wasn’t fully rapturous, which makes me think that maybe the jury wouldn’t have treated it as a priority either
The burning question I have is would Scorsese’s film won a big prize? The blazing question I truly have is “Is it possible Scorsese and Company learned of the excellent collection of movies and decided to dodge the possibility of losing and this having an early dagger pop it’s Oscar chances?”
I feel like The Zone of Interest is the Major Frontrunner for Best Pic. Like almost unbeatable. The Academy loves a good Holocaust film and this one seems to be not only Good but Redefining what cinema can do.
Agree completely about Zone of Interest ! Also found it strange that Sandra Huller who was the co – star of Zone and the star of the Palm D’OR winner didn’t win Best Actress ! In Friday’s L.A Times Calendar section n Justin Chang an d Mary McNamara also talked about Zone ! As for Marty’s latest Oscar grab with almost everyone falling over themselves praising it , I found Mary’s aside to Justin very interesting that she was even less of a fan of it than he was !
It’s their stupid rules that say that the Palm d’Or winner can’t win any other awards.
If I’m not wrong, after Barton Fink chaotic sweep you have to ask the Festival direction a special permission to give more than one award to the same film and it has to be vehemently defended by the jury.
Remember 2013, both Léa Seydoux and Adèle Exarchopoulos were included in Blue is the warmest color’s Palm instead of a 2nd prize for the film (best actress)
you’re disoriented, THE film that probably could have won Palm d’Or was Victor Erice’s Close your eyes… just check out reviews and consider this was Erice’s 4th film and all previous 3 had been underrewarded universally praised masterpieces… even Erice himself publicly outed Cannes for misleading him, making him think that he would be competing for Palm d’Or only to suddenly find out he wouldn’t. Reason why he didn’t attend the Premiere… the combo of being a great film and probably his final film, with such a 3/3 previous masterpiece track record (The Spirit of the Beehive, The South and El Sol del Membrillo) plus Close your eyes actually playing as a mirror to his career, would have been difficult to resist. He would have taken Palm d’Or or Director at the very least
But I kind of agree that some films that probably should have been no-brainer choices to compete for Palm d’Or were suspiciously not selected for the main competition.
Has it ever been considered a loss or a failure when a film fails to win Cannes? Nobody really goes in expecting to win. There are just too many films to choose from.
I tend to agree, but merely showing it there forces the comparisons. This way allows the film to get out in front of Oppenheimer and because it’s in English any real Cannes competition. But man, I don’t know if anyone saw Zone of Interest coming.
The “German language art film” aspect will hold it back. Holocaust doesn’t equal an automatic win, even with great reviews. Reminds me a bit of Tree of Life’s reception. I think it will get into International Feature, possibly director, and maybe one tech, leaning towards score.
Hooray! A New Person to DIsagree With!
It´s also interesting to see which films – despite great reviews and festival-established arthouse directors – got snubbed. “La Chimera” and “May December” somehow didn´t land with the Jury but admittedly the line-up was very strong this year.
Besides, nada for “Youth” is also a bit baffling to me since it was really high on the critics surveys I was checking. But okay, a 3 hours + documentary about Chinese factory kids is quite something else…
Thanks for this wonderful dispatch and reviews.
Also congrats to all the winners.
Can’t wait to watch the top 2 prize winners and lament the fact that Ms Hüller has once again missed the award.
It’s crazy how competitive International Feature can be already if these films are all chosen:
The Zone of Interest (UK/Poland) – Metacritic 98
The Delinquents (Argentina) – Metacritic 92
La Chimera (Italy) – Metacritic 90
Close Your Eyes (Spain) – Metacritic 86
The Pot-au-Feu (France) – Metacritic 83
The Settlers (Chile) – Metacritic 82
Monster (Japan) – Metacritic 80
About Dry Grasses (Turkey) – Metacritic 80
Fallen Leaves (Finland) – Metacritic 79
Four Daughters (Tunisia) – Metacritic 78
And Better Days (Japan) is also at 77 and Anatomy of a Fall (France) is at 88 (but France will probably not choose it and/or it might have too much English).
you can already discard Close your eyes for being the Spanish submission… it’s a long film, slowburn, almost 3 hours long and while really good it seems (some say total masterpiece) that has a great ending (no idea, haven’t seen it) but Erice’s films never got nominated (not even El Sol del Membrillo, totally acclaimed, as Documentary), and I highly doubt Spain would submit it… Spain’s submissions are inconsistent and questionable most of the times, that’s why despite having one of Europe’s most important cinematographies, it won the Oscar only 4 times (Volver a Empezar, Belle Epoque, All about my Mother and The Sea Inside). Spain’s submissions are heavily influenced by politics and nepotism (whatever is popular at the Spanish Academy) and many times don’t even consider what actually would have the best shot at actually winning. I doubt it will be even nominated for any Goya, Best Director aside.
Who do you think is the frontrunner right now for Spain?
I think the rule on English is 50/50. Not sure how that’s determined. Word Count? Time Speaking? Number of Lines?
It’s gotta be tedious figuring it out.
It´s also interesting to see which films – despite great reviews and festival-established arthouse directors – got snubbed. “La Chimera” and “May December” somehow didn´t land with the Jury but admittedly the line-up was very strong this year.
Besides, nada for “Youth” is also a bit baffling to me since it was really high on the critics surveys I was checking. But okay, a 3 hours + documentary about Chinese factory kids is quite something else…
Btw how did a Firebrand do? I didn’t hear anything about it.
It’s Tomatoes & Metacritic score are rather disappointing but it’s the new (& first English language) film from Mr Ainouz starring Mr Law & Ms Vikander so regardless of awards recognition or reviews, I believe it’s a must watch (& hopefully it delivers).
People seemed mostly bored by it. Since there were few outright disasters in competition this year by the general perception (Black Flies, maybe A Brighter Tomorrow and Club Zero), it landed near the bottom of most polls but I don’t think there was strong hatred for it either. And in terms of historical prestige dramas, I think eventually The Pot-au-Feu being received extremely well drove the film even further out of the conversaton as that film became the traditional period prestige drama of the competition lineup that everyone wanted to talk about. Beyond Aïnouz’ relationship with the festival, I’m not really sure why they didn’t just wait for Toronto.
Thanks!
After I wrote this, I tried my luck at Googling (I do not always have the greatest success Googling about Cannes), and I saw the same. It sounds like Vikander, in particular, really missed the mark, so I’ll cross her out for awards season.
I enjoyed it a lot. Great performances from Jude Law and Alicia Vikander. Very Game-Of-Thronesy in it’s political battles and fight for the throne, as well as its mad king.