(Please read full post before getting angry)
This Film is Crap-TACULAR!
The internet is a difficult place to convey tone, so please understand, this is said with incredible glee.
I don’t know, maybe it’s that I’m too cynical. But “My Winnipeg” is a film so bad, so appallingly over-long for it’s content, so mind-bendingly stupid while pretending or possibly aiming and failing to find depth within the stupidity, that I couldn’t tell if Maddin’s a pretentious incompetent or a satirical genius.
All I knew was that the rest of the audience appeared to be struggling to find the deeper meaning present within the film, while I was laughing my ass off at its sheer awfulness. For future reference, the scene where a Girl’s possessed by the spirit of the Cefe Goddess of Winter Magic or some such was the first moment where I began to chuckle, and I broke into hysterics at what I’m going to call the “Nazi Point”.
The best part was surely the audience around me. Some were seemingly deep in thought, while occasionally laughing at the least funny bits, where Maddin had included a fake “joke” like horses being frozen. Others were clearly thinking that their partner making them sit through this was the breaking point of their relationship. One or two fell asleep.
I want to believe that Maddin has found one of those ideal careers, where you can make fun of the achingly pretentious, while at the same time extracting respectable amounts of money from them. Am I wrong? Is he in fact actually pretentious, and I’m the only one who believes that the real joke is much deeper than the crude tools such as the random lady who refuses to leave? The fact that he won the Best Canadian Feature Film at the 2007 Toronto International Film Festival suggests I may be wrong; as does this comment I found elsewhere:
“It's a fantasy documentary that doesn't put undue emphasis on that crazy notion of "objective truth," but instead creates a magical version of the past that is closer to the subjective ways we all probably feel about our "cubes of home." It's not fake enough to be a fake documentary, not real enough to be a real documentary, but it blends the two to become a subjective documentary.” - the_crystal-image “Re: What is this exactly?”(Sun Jul 20 2008 09:09:58)
I’ll be honest, this feels like exactly the comment I’d make while trying not to break out in laughter, but as I said, the Internet is a hard place to convey tone, and I can’t shake the nagging horror that he’s *actually serious*. I just can’t tell!
I would firmly recommend this film to both friends and enemies.
In fact, I would rave about this, invite them over to watch it and suggest it’s best watched stone-cold sober “so you can really understand it”, while secretly taking shots of Scotch at every opportunity. Any attempt to leave (and there would be many) would be met with “No! Don’t go now! This is the really good bit coming up.”
With my pretentious adversaries, the joy would be in watching them try and discuss the “deeper themes of bitterness and apathy”. Firstly, these aren’t deeper themes, they’re really obvious before the third shot of a fat woman’s naked “lap”. The deeper theme, if one exists, is “That’s right, you paid money to see this, you pretentious fool. NOW SUFFER FOR IT.”
With my down-to-earth enemies, the joy would be in the moment where they look at me in disgust and proceed to insult the movie and anyone involved in it, from the writer to the viewers. (See Missy H’s comment below for an expurgated example)
With my most deadly enemies (aka my best friends), the joy would be in watching them slowly realise what I’ve suckered them into. Yes they might punch me in the face for my audacity, but the amount of Scotch I’d downed would probably mean I never felt the blow. After that, I would let them share the Scotch.
To Conclude, here are a few of the reviews I read, while seeking enlightenment.
“You may find yourself clutching your ticket stub in a pathetic attempt to hold on to reality.” Well, Peter Scarlet of www.tribecafilmfestival.org, I’d have preferred Scotch to be honest. The ticket merely reminds me that I’m paying to sit through this, something that becomes more unbelievable with each passing second.
“He rewrites history; when that fails, he creates it.” – Again, I can’t be sure if Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times is kidding or not, although that final paragraph appears to be hinting that he is.
“I felt as if I too were sleepwalking, a theme in this over long film. A 20 minute documentary on the very interesting though questionable subject would have been enough. A feature...not!” – Thank you Missy H. of Metacritic, I feel this will have been a common feeling among the girlfriends of film students throughout Canada.
“Though it may feel undernourished to the faithful, "Winnipeg" is an easily digestible meal, for the uninitiated and fans alike, featuring Maddin's utterly individual worldview, suggesting receipts and ancillary on par with his recent work, if not modestly better.” - Someday, Eddie Cockrell of Variety will surely find himself in a compromising position with a donkey, under the belief he’s involved in a controversial art piece.
Who knows, maybe he will be. After watching this film, I can’t tell anymore.