Laurence Anyways

You can say I am a Xavier Dolan fan as have highly enjoyed his two previous films with interesting explorations on human relationships, great visuals, outstanding use of color, extraordinary compositions, fantastic attention to details, great set design, and yes, fabulous music scores. This film has all the elements I like but there has to be some problem with editing as find film uneven. Perhaps too much.

At the beginning was not easy for me to engage as the way Dolan introduces us to his characters is not much interesting and due to marketing/news knew what story was about; then story captured me only to loose me after a while and it happened several times: capture-release me again and again. In the end I was confused with all the capture-release and after clearing my mind I think that there are two movies in here, one very "superficial" with absolutely fantastic images and another that tells the story of a very unconventional love. My problem is that Dolan and the editor are not able to join them together often as there are moments were both are together but more moments where they are independent. Then there is the issue of the length.

I have seen many three hours films and have NO problem watching them. Here and due to the inconsistencies there were moments where got tired (got out of the story) and moments when I wanted more (was inside the story); but one thing is fact, I noticed the length which I never do in, for example, movies from India. Perhaps that's the major consequence of the capture-release thing as breaking the flow -especially when you're engaged- is not pleasant as breaks all the emotional building that you were starting to feel. Ah! the emotional component.

Dolan's storytelling style of choice for this movie is different than the one he used in his two previous movies (J'ai tué ma mère and Les amours imaginaires) where I was able to feel for his characters, to have my emotions positively disturbed by what I was watching. Here was not easy to feel emotional connections with the characters and/or the intense love story. I know that story is NOT about a man's transformation into a woman, is about love, very intense love, that cannot be lived freely because the inability of a woman to accept the changes in the man she intensely loved. She couldn't love a woman and after leaving his transformation experience, she couldn't love a man. She was really unable to love a person and most of all, was unable to realize that she loved Laurence because the person, not the gender. Thus, story is about true acceptance of others. In paper story is very interesting, seems engaging, emotional and intense; in the screen this story is diluted with all the "big bangs" that showcase visually outstanding images and music.

Do not get me wrong, I highly enjoyed the visuals but regret that some of them disconnected me from the story as in my opinion some "big bang" visuals did not contributed to the narrative. As an example of the exceptions, the pouring water scene (photo) was one that visually blew my mind and made me feel in that moment, intense emotions for the character. Conversely, the ball scene blew my mind for the visuals, the costumes, the glitter, the sumptuosity, the music, the surrealism, so much blew me that was unable to feel for the character during that key moment. Ah! the movie surrealism.

When reading reviews most critics and viewers mention that they didn't liked some scenes, especially the ones with the Rose group. Then many compare/relate Dolan to other directors and I'm not an exception. There are many surreal scenes in movie and most made me think about Fellini, which was highly unexpected for a Dolan film. But find that most of these scenes while being gorgeous highly distracted me from story and yes, if Dolan wishes to continue to be surreal, needs to improve his skills; but I am not closed to visualize that for his learning process he gives us a film that ONLY uses surrealism. That will be just fantastic -based on what I saw here.

The use of color. Mainly viewers comment about the great use of color in this movie which I tend to agree but mostly disagree. The thing is that I have a reference, a Dolan's reference. If you wish to see how extraordinary Dolan can be with the use of color then you have to see Les amours imaginaires. Here he uses mainly red to tint, darkish colors to dramatize, and most of all, a lavish palette that really contributes to move the narrative as yes, I believe that if something did not distracted me was his use of color. But in my opinion, his use of color here is a notch down to what he did in Les amours imaginaires were color was not used to move narrative but was an essential part of the narrative.

Performances were above the norm but the one I really enjoy for the brutally honest character she plays so well is Nathalie Baye. Most of the one-liners that got stuck in my head came from her mouth; her character is so well-written that I imagine was easy for her to deliver a fantastic performance. I simply love Louis Garrel performances but do not regret that he dropped out of this movie, as is not easy for me to imagine a better Laurence than the one Melvil Poupaud gave us. Suzanne Clément performance allowed me to pay her character more attention than to Popaud's character but perhaps her moments in the screen are the ones more broken for me.

No doubt that the newest of cinema "Enfant Terrible" or as some critics call him, ambitious Boy Wonder, is exploring new -to him- territories with this film that he calls his "most accessible" and maybe it is, but my true feeling after watching is that I wanted scissors to cut and glue to rearrange this movie, not because the length (the 10 years story could be so good that four hours or more are all right) but to make it more emotional, more engaging, not broken, not uneven. All the elements are here but some needed to be polished to make it an almost perfect cinema experience.

As we know film premiered in the Un Certain Regard section at 2012 Cannes and news told us about Dolan's "surprise" to not being in the main competition; I really understand why film was not chosen to be there and now more than ever understand Dolan not going to accept in person the Queer Palm as believe that this is NOT a gay-interest or transgender-interest genre movie, this is a mainstream movie, so much mainstream as love (or tolerance) can be.

Nevertheless, film has collected many honors while travelling the fest circuit, starting with Suzanne Clément winning (tie) the Un Certain Regard Award for Best Actress to continue with winning the Best Canadian Feature Film at 2012 Toronto fest and more accolades; then won't surprise me if film collects more recognition in the next Canadian award season.

Do I recommend movie? Yes, of course. But suggest to be prepared for an uneven ride and if you're not patient with "long movies" then be glad that movie is now available to view it at home, so you can select the right viewing-rhythm for you. For those readers that enjoy the LGTB-interest genre share that my impression is that due to how story is tell, looks and feels more like a cross-dressing film than a male to female transformation story (especially when consider that Laurence is straight, not gay -by-the-way, I'm not giving film the label-), there are no real gay-interest scenes and the brief lesbian-interest with transgender tones scene is thankfully brief as generates a non-positive impression.

Still, I am Xavier Dolan fan and after watching this film still are, as for me is exciting that he is moving forward and exploring new-to-him territories; now I just can't wait to see his next one, Tom à la ferme especially because he is also acting and not doing only a brief cameo as he did here (his cameo was fantastic!). To tease you readers, check the following clearly gay-interest synopsis: "The story of Tom, who is in the grip of grief and depression following the death of his lover. When he meets the family of the deceased, it is revealed the mother was not aware of her son's sexual orientation, or his relationship with Tom either, for that matter."

Enjoy!!! (if movie was not uneven, this could have been Big Enjoy!!!)

Watch trailer @MOC

6th Annual Asia Pacific Screen Awards Winners

Was able to watch the ending of the awards ceremony and enjoy live the amazing concerts especially the one with Ryuichi Sakamoto performing a composition from Bernardo Bertolucci's The Last Emperor. Awards ceremonies like this one are centered in culture and is not an easy task as the Asian Pacific Screen Academy groups 70 countries/territories with very different cultures.

At the Queensland Performing Arts Centre in Brisbane, Australia , the ceremony gave Awards and High Commendations to films from ten countries and areas of Asia Pacific including Turkey, India, Indonesia, Iraqi-Kurdistan, Israel, Japan, People’s Republic of China, Philippines, Republic of Korea and Taiwan, and Iraq.

These are the 2012 winners.

Best Feature Film: Tepenin Ardi (Beyond the Hill), Emin Alper, Turkey and Greece

Jury President statement: Beyond the Hill took us on a journey to hidden secrets within a family. It was a microcosm of what can happen in a more universal situation. The characters were truthful and complex, it told the story in an original and different way. Beyond the Hill dealt with our tendency to look on the outside for a solution when the real problems lie within.

High Commendation: Bumchoiwaui Junjaeng (Nameless Gangster: Rules of the Time), Jong-bin Yun, Korea

UNESCO Award: Seediq Bale (Warriors of the Rainbow: Seediq Bale), Wei Te-sheng, Taiwan

Screen International Jury Grand Prizes
Director Anurag Kashyap for Gangs of Wasseypur, India
Actress Cho Min-soo in Pieta, Kim Ki-duk, Korea
High Commendation: Writer Joseph Cedar for Hearat Shulayim (Footnote), Joseph Cedar, Israel

Achievement in Directing: Brillante Mendoza for Sinapupunan (Thy Womb), Philippines
High Commendation: Cheng Er for Bian jing feng yun (Lethal Hostage), China

Best Performance by an Actress: Nora Aunor in Sinapupunan (Thy Womb), Brillante Mendoza, Philippines
High Commendation: Darya Ekamasova in Жила-была одна баба Zila bila odna baba (Once Upon a Time There Lived a Simple Woman), Andrey Smirnov, Russia

Best Performance by an Actor: Choi Min-sik in Bumchoiwaui Junjaeng (Nameless Gangster: Rules of the Time), Jong-bin Yun, Korea
High Commendation: Lior Ashkenazi in Hearat shulayim (Footnote), Joseph Cedar, Israel

Achievement in Cinematography: Touraj Aslani for Fasle Kargadan (Rhino Season), Bahman Ghobadi, Iraqi-Kurdistan and Turkey

Best Screenplay: Reis Çelik for Lal gece (Night of Silence), Reis Çelik, Turkey

Best Documentary Feature Film: In My Mother's Arms, Atea Al Daradji and Mohamed Al Daradji, Iraq, UK and Netherlands
High Commendation: Planet of Snail, Yi Seung-jun, Korea, Japan and Finland

Best Animation Feature Film: Momo e no tegami (A Letter to Momo), Hiroyuki Okiura, Japan
Best Children's Feature Film: Launt Bercemin (The Mirror Never Lies), Kamila Andini, Indonesia

The Best Film award went to Emin Alper's debut film that was premiered at the Forum section of the 2012 Berlinale where won a Special Mention in the Best First Feature category and has been collecting more honors while travelling the fest circuit. But the best news for me is Rhino Season winning a cinematography award as somehow confirms that film has to have great visual images.

Beasts of the Southern Wild

I can appreciate this movie as has many great visuals, great hand held camera shots, not with a slowish pace, some tension building elements, good editing, good raw/realistic non-actor's performances and more great tech specs for a low-budget production; but graphically tells a story that for me is very hard to watch as no matter all the magical elements present or the "happy and uplifting" message, story is so unsettling that even made feel sick while/after watching and the feeling stayed with me for a too long time.

This movie has been called by many as an American Magic Realism representative as according to them shows reality and fantasy blended in a magical way. But let me share with you a brief description of Magic Realism.

In literature the term magic realism describes contemporary fiction, often from Latin America or the third world, whose narrative blends magical or fantastical elements with reality. Was coined early last century in Europe but got wider use later in an effort to differentiate the work of Latin American writers from the European Surrealist movement. Eventually the term was transferred from literature to other arts, including films. The key element is that the magic and the reality blend so flawlessly that readers cannot differentiate them or if they do, it does not matter to them.

I'm quite familiar with many of the very different Latin American cultures and as you can tell if you are a blog regular reader, I highly enjoy Latin American movies. In my experience I have seen beautiful magical realism in the movies of directors like Carlos Reygadas, Claudia Llosa, Alfonso Arau, Lisandro Alonso, and many others. Movies that exquisitely blend magic and reality to make watching a very enjoyable ride no matter what the story is all about and most stories are about very disturbing issues like discrimination, poverty, oppression, repression, abuse of power, bleak future, sexual taboos, etc.

In my opinion this movie does not blend magic and reality. What it does is to show us some magical moments and many raw reality moments, perhaps too many. My problem starts the moment I realize that to see many of the "real" things shown I just have to walk, drive for a while and I'll be able to see them for real. But it doesn't stay there. The "real" things are shown so barbarically raw in the name of creative license, of art, that become intolerable to watch; and say this considering the many films I have seen that show us very raw realism with NO magic at all.

But also believe that viewers from the so-called "first world" does not have the sensibility that viewers for the "other worlds" have regarding the issues shown and understand why they like the story as for them has a positive message of pride, choice, belonging, prevailing, overcoming, individualism, freedom, surviving, etc. When you read American critics and viewers reviews you notice that many talk about the "politics" in the story; some go as far as to give interpretations of what story is about when seen from the left and the right of the political scale. Others say that they are sure that many only got the evident message and the real message was lost in the "beauty" of film. But all end up praising the film and some foreseeing the possible awards that will collect in the American award season.

Yes, film as a film can be good, so good that captures you attention and holds it in a very hypnotic, mesmerizing way. That's why I was able to watch the entire film that otherwise would have stopped watching as soon as I started to feel sick. My honest feeling is that I wish I stopped watching, as I have no need or desire to see what is shown in film. It is undeniable that the story, the narrative is essential in filmmaking and many times a great story makes a great movie, conversely a terrible story makes a terrible movie no matter if everything else is good. So, is this movie good, no matter the story it tells? The answer is up to you. My answer is: no, as the whole gave me a not positive cinema experience.

Do I recommend the movie? No, I don't; especially for those viewers that are not from the "developed countries" as probably your sensibilities will be touched in a very negative way. Will this movie continue to collect honors in the American awards season? Probably, especially the young non-actor that is the lead character.

Sigh.

Watch trailer @MOC (but be aware that trailer has very beautiful images and do not tell much about story)

The Twilight Saga - The Conclusion

Finally saw all the five movies and wish to not see anything more related to Stephenie Meyer Twilight books, unless she decides to write a new book about the amazing world she created. Of course will read the book before watching anything, as with the huge success she got with her four books, writing a fifth should not be an easy task as now readers expectations have to be very high. Well, at least mine are.

As some of you know, especially if you read the first movie review, I liked the first and the last book, the ones in-between were less interesting for me. Luckily was able to read all four books before watching the first movie as Meyer's world was first created in my imagination and when watching films my imaginary world became the benchmark to see what they did in the movies.

Still believe that the first installment, Twilight, is the best movie when considering everything involved in making a movie as director Catherine Hardwicke created in the screen a world very similar to what I imagined when reading the first book. But from the acting point of view, the second movie New Moon by Chris Weitz has the best Kristen Stewart performance. So, from the cinematic point of view -not related to the story- the less interesting film for me was Eclipse by David Slade, so much that I didn't even bothered with a review.

The same happened with Breaking Dawn - Part 1, besides the story there was nothing interesting to see in it. But mentioned that the fourth book is one I liked and from it what blew my mind was the fantastic use of words that Meyer created to describe the confrontation with the Volturi. So the movie second installment was really what I was interested in watching as was very curious to see how that magnificent description could be translated to the screen. Honestly I tried to imagine it and in my very creative mind was almost impossible to figure it out how to do it.

Breaking Dawn - Part 2 by Bill Condon was a great surprise as even if it wasn't thanks to the director but to the joint collaboration between Stephenie Meyer and scriptwriter Melissa Rosenberg, what blew my mind in the book ALSO blew my mind in the screen. Well, more than my mind, blew my emotions. The so-called "twist" in the last installment really is not something new to the book, it is in the book but in the movie is told so unexpectedly that audiences react loudly when key elements happen. Well, not only the audience that surrounded me, I also reacted! (lol). Which is fantastic as not often a movie makes me "react" in a public place!

Won't spoil the movie for you, as know that most blog readers are not teenagers and probably have not seen the movie, but if you read the book and were moved by the confrontation then be prepared for a great surprising interpretation in the screen. Before the confrontation I only got impatient, very impatient while all the previous events happened as I just wanted to see that part. LOL. Yes, movie is all right, nothing special, similar to Part 1 as after all was filmed together -two years ago- by the same director.

The five films were a nice entertainment moment that allowed me to escape reality and live for a while in the fantastic world Meyer created but more relevant, in the imaginary world I created while reading her books. I believe that imagination is something that adults tend to use less and less as they grow up, which only makes me to pay more attention to it and to use imagination very often. But what you create in your mind thanks to what you read is very personal. That is why I believe that all five films are for adult audiences a very personal trip into the world they were able to imagine. For those that do not used their "imagination muscle" while reading the books as well as for those that haven't read the books, the trip becomes not pleasant from almost every point of view that involves filmmaking, as honestly, movies are nothing special in the world of films.

Truth is that this saga did something interesting in the American filmmaking industry, it allowed them to "discover" that female-centered stories have HUGE audiences beyond young female teenagers as the five films in the "domestic" market made more than a billion of dollars and the number doubles when you add the international market. Figures tend to be different according to the source you consult, but all place the up-to-date figure close to three billion for the worldwide box office. The immediate benefit is that other female-centered stories are being currently told with also great box office results, among them the best example is The Hunger Games first installment that has collected only in theaters almost seven hundred million worldwide.

As often happens in the American industry trends appear to only eventually disappear but hope that "smart" industry executives realize that stories well-told make more money than lousy stories told with huge amounts of special effects. Stephenie Meyer Twilight stories are good, were able to involve teenagers with the romance between the lead characters and adults with the imaginary world. Just imagine IF all five films were done with the same standards that the first one had -which included more creative freedom to the director and "a lot less hands in the pot"- surely the box office figures could have been a bit higher.

So the Twilight chapter is closed, but I still have one more thing to do. Have to have the Box Set with the five films as definitively have to have them in my collection to be able to visit my own imaginary world as often as I wish. No date has been set yet for the release however know that the Box Set has to be available by next midyear; but the best is that already have someone committed to give it to me as a present, LOL!

Cheers!

2012 Lux Cinema Prize Winner

Today in Strasbourg, the European Parliament's President Martin Schulz awarded this year's LUX Cinema Prize to the film that better "help celebrate the universal reach of European values, illustrate the diversity of European traditions, shed light on the process of European integration and provide insights into the building of Europe".

This year and for the very first time since its inception in 2007, the European Parliament's LUX Prize launched the "LUX Film Days": the three finalist films were screened and subtitled in all the Member States, enabling thousands of citizens to see these beautiful European cinema features.

And the winner is:

Io Sono Li (Shun Li and the Poet), Andrea Segre, Italy and France

Synopsis: Shun Li works in a textile factory in the outskirts of Rome, in order to get her papers and enable her eight-year-old son to come to Italy. She is suddenly transferred to Chioggia, a small city-island in the Veneto lagoon, to work as a bartender in a pub. Bepi, a Slavic fisherman, nicknamed “the Poet” by his friends, has been a regular at that little pub for years. The friendship between Shun Li and Bepi upsets both the Chinese and local communities, who interfere with this new voyage, which they are perhaps simply too afraid of.

According to the press release, the film explores the question of immigration and, in this context, the conflict between shared traditions and individual aspirations. It tells an attractive story of friendship that breaks down stereotypes and prejudices against "foreigners".

This is one film that I'm really looking forward to see perhaps because different reasons than those that made it the winner today, as believe story has to be interesting plus from trailer and photos seems like has awesome visuals that border on visual poetry.

Check trailer @MOC.

Intouchables (The Intouchables)

My love for French cinema is not blind. I really dislike French comedies, French melodramas, French mainstream cinema and French bland dramas. I choose what I see. That is how I fell in deep love with French cinema, a love that started after I finished high school and had to face the "real" world. That is why, with a few exceptions, follow directors and not actors, follow great festivals to discover new films and new filmmakers. Have seen my share of bad French films but more than 90% of French films I decided to watch were fantastic cinema experiences.

A few months back I had the opportunity to watch this film and I said: No, merci. Then the French local committee selected this film to be the submission to 2013 Oscar. Got me upset, very upset. How could they chose this film above magnificent Jacques Audiard latest film? Or even, above crazy Holy Motors? Do the French want to show the world that they can also do mediocre films that make lots of money in France and beyond? Probably. Shame.

I saw the movie. Somehow I was hoping to be wrong, to like film, to enjoy the ride, to have an entertainment moment. But I did not. Yes, I did not like the film and most of all I did not like the story about pity and let me be clear, the word "pity" is one that doesn't exists in my vocabulary, there are many more words that can better explain caring for someone than this hideous word that plays with guilt. Then maybe that is why didn't like the story that made me feel awkward with all the clichés and stereotypes shown (including the brief lesbian interest moment), elements that are not often seen in good or bad French cinema.

I didn't like the performances. Have seen a few handicapped people stories and the two that came first to my mind have French pedigree: Jacques Audiard latest film and Julian Schnabel's Le Scaphandre et le papillon. In both films is key that characters are handicapped but more than showing the drawbacks they show their emotions, what they are feeling which allows actors to give us very layered performances. Marion Cotillard and Mathieu Amalric are simply fantastic in these two films. François Cluzet is a good actor, have seen good performances by him but this is not one of them as performance is simply "perfect" one dimensional, what you see is what you get, is spelled for you and you have nothing to do but just resign to watch what character does. But what really bothered me was Omar Sy that gave us an over-acted performance, so over-acted that many times made me close my eyes to not see him in the screen.

Not often I'm so graphic when telling you about what I dislike, but believe that this time I have to be clearer as after all this is a worldwide success movie if you consider the money that has made, the huge amount of people that have seen it and the "honors" that has collected. As many praise this film -so much that there will be a Hollywood remake- have to share that I am not alone in feeling the way I feel about this movie. There are critics and viewers that also did not enjoy much this film. Some examples that speak about what I also felt.

"What The Intouchables does cannot exactly be called grappling, and its genial parade of stereotypes may be more regressive than liberating. It is certainly possible to be offended by the broad, silly aspects of Mr. Sy’s performance."

"The plot, as a result, becomes disastrously condescending: the black man, who’s crude, sexy, and a great dancer, liberates the frozen white man. The film is an embarrassment."

"Remarkably, late in the film Phillippe encourages Driss to seek work elsewhere so he can live closer to home; his forcing Driss back into the projects and into unemployment is framed as an act of friendship."

"À l’arrivée, le résultat est à peu près le même : même parlant et pensant, le corps handicapé reste un objet, un instrument, au même titre que la figure de bouffon qui l’accompagne, tous deux pantins au service d’un divertissement désincarné et d’autant moins sympathique qu’il prétend vendre de l’émotion certifiée authentique."

"A mediocre film for mediocre minds". "Hollywood film made in French".

"It's as slick as an oil spill, as sugary as an eclair, and many moviegoers will find it irresistible."

So post has become long but you get the idea, I didn't like film at all while MANY just love it, including those that selected film to be France's submission to Oscar. IF you like good cinema suggest to avoid this movie, especially if you already had the opportunity to watch and decided not to.

This award season GREAT surprise will come IF this film does not make it to the shortlist of nine in the foreign-language category. IF happens then admit that will have to consider that foreign-language committee Academy members deserve more respect than the one I have been giving to them lately. Unfortunately due to WHO is behind this film (the American distributor) is most likely to not happen. Then on the positive side, I will have to continue feeling very little respect for those Academy members. Sigh.

SIGH.

Watch trailer @MOC

23rd Stockholm International Film Festival Award Winners

While the previous post festival was having their award ceremony, the more (a lot more) interesting Swedish festival was also having their award ceremony that gave awards to much interesting films.

The fest big winner is Lore by Cate Shortland that not only got the top award but also three more awards. The following are all the award winners.



Bronze Horse for Best Film: Lore, Cate Shortland, Germany, Australia and UK
The motivation of the Jury: A coming of age story that is beautiful and brave and transfers it’s audience to a time and place that we have all known many times before. Only this time the perspective is different. A historical drama with timeless brilliance.

Best Directorial Debut: Benh Zeitlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild, USA
The motivation of the Jury: For achieving a sense of naturalism in a fantastic universe and grabbing a hold of his audience and never letting them go. For his belief in humanity in a cinematic landscape that so often cannot pull itself out of the mire of misanthropy. Like our hero Hushpuppy, Benh cannot help but hear and embrace the beating heart that keeps all of us going.

Special Mention for Directorial Debut: Karzan Kader for Bekas, Sweden, Finland and Iraq
The motivation of the Jury: For telling a beautiful tale of an unbreakable bond and endless hope in the face of adversity, capturing two amazing performances from his young leads, and making a film that moved this jury. We eagerly await this director's next film.

Best Actress: Saskia Rosendahl in Lore, Cate Shortland, Germany, Australia and UK
Special Mention for Acting: Eloise Laurence in Broken, Rufus Norris, UK
Best Actor: Tim Roth in Broken, Rufus Norris, UK
VIASAT Film Rising Star: Nermina Lukac in Äta sova dö (Eat Sleep Die), Gabriela Pichler, Sweden

Best Script: Andrew Dominik for Killing Them Softly, Andrew Dominik, USA
Best Cinematography: Adam Arkapaw for Lore, Cate Shortland, Germany, Australia and UK
Best Music Award: Max Richeter for Lore, Cate Shortland, Germany, Australia and UK

FIPRESCI Prize: Everyday, Michael Winterbottom, UK (film was shot over the course of five years, a few weeks at a time)
Telia Film Award: Una Noche, Lucy Mulloy, USA, UK and Cuba
Silver Audience Award: Call Girl, Mikael Marcimain, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Ireland

Stockholm Feature Film Award: director Amanda Adolfsson and producer Gila Bergqvist-Ulfung with the film project Unga Sophie Bell (Young Sophie Bell)
1Km Film Scholarship: Johanna Paulsdotter for Århundradets Brott (Damaged Ones), Sweden

Best Short Film: Curfew, Shawn Christesen, USA
iFestival Winner: Bejamin's Flowers, Malin Erixon, Sweden

Stockholm Achievement Award: Willem Dafoe
Stockholm Lifetime Achievement Award: Jan Troell
Stockholm Visionary Award: Jacques Audiard

There are several must be seen movies in this list, hope to be able to watch as soon as possible.