Directed by Min Kyu-dong, Antique (Sayangkoldong yangkwajajeom aentikeu) was a brave choice by the Melbourne Queer Film Festival programming team, which usually shows relatively safe crowd-pleasers on opening night to assist in fostering an appropriate vibe at the party following the screening. Unlike the usual bland fodder sometimes screened at opening nights (such as the dreadful Canadian feature Breakfast with Scot, shown two years ago; ironically, the year prior was one of the best opening night's ever, the excellent Truman Capote biopic, Infamous) Festival Director Lisa Daniel and her team went with this high quality but more challenging film from Korea.Consequently, numbers were definitely down at the Astor on Wednesday night (some 200 less tickets were sold than in previous years), a situation which reinforced my view that - generally speaking - the gay community is inherently conservative (a view that's further bolstered by the domination of drag and house music in gay clubs: tangible signs of a culture that is stuck in the 1980's). Subtitled films, it seems, are too challenging for many of Melbourne's gay cinema-goers.
Their loss. It meant that there was more food and more booze for the rest of us at the opening night party.
But what of the film itself? Antique was a curious blend of genres - comedy, drama, thriller, musical - that unfolded at a pace so rapid it was sometimes bewildering; featuring luscious cinematography and production design, and a stunningly handsome cast.
The plot revolves around a young man from a rich family, Kim Jin-hyeok (Joo Ji-hoon) who is searching for a girlfriend, and decides to attract one by opening a bakery specialising in rich pastries and fine cakes - an odd choice, given that such sweet treats make him physically ill.
The pastry chef he hires is Min Seon-Woo (Kim Jae-wook), a French-trained master of his craft who has nonetheless been sacked from every previous work place within 12 months, because he is 'a Gay of Demonic Charm' - irresistible to any man, gay or straight. Chaos follows in his wake. Only Kim Jin-hyeok, it seems, is immune to his charms.
Joining the team at the patisserie, 'Antique', where fine food is served on equally fine old china, are the eager young boxer turned apprentice pastry chef Yang Ki-beom (Yu Ah-in) and Kim Jin-hyeok's loyal bodyguard, the cool-seeming but clumsy Nam Su-yeong (Chin Ji-ho).
All four main characters, we soon learn, have secrets, but it is Kim Jin-hyeok's past which is the most complex: kidnapped as a child, he cannot remember any details about his kidnapper, only terrifying flashes that haunt his dreams, in which he runs through the streets covered in blood.
But soon Kim Jin-hyeok's past returns to haunt the present: more children are being kidnapped, and their bodies are turning up dead, stuffed full of cakes from a certain bakery. Further complicating matters is the unexpected arrival of Min Seon-Woo's French boyfriend and former teacher, the short-tempered Jean-Baptiste (Andy Gillet), who is desperate for his ex-lover to return home to Paris.
Unhindered by Western traditions of genre, Antique follows a convoluted and unpredictable narrative path which was at times confusing, but never less than entertaining, although its rapid pace meant that some story elements felt a trifle rushed. Even more puzzling was the resolution of its plot, which seemed somewhat contradictory - possibly due to a subtitling error at a key point in proceedings.
Such criticisms aside, this was a sweet yet surprisingly complex film, and a very enjoyable one. The chemistry between its odd couple leads - Joo Ji-hoon as the rich but unhappy Kim Jin-hyeok, and the gorgeous Kim Jae-wook as the 'Gay of Demonic Charm' - was fantastic, resulting in a rapport which resulted in solidly comedic moments; and the lingering shots of cakes and pastries had me salivating in my seat.
A highly enjoyable though occasionally confusing start to the 20th Melbourne Queer Film Festival.
Rating: Three and a half stars
2 comments:
Richard, you've put your finger on it again. The "dreadful" opening night feature of yesteryear (and not only yesteryear) is just a part of the MQFF story.
The often rubbish features, the long history of charging the same price to see a 35mm print, or a digital screening,(and one year, God help us, a videocassette!)and worst of all the utterly opaque and uninformative festival guide which manages to make every film sound identical, from professional feature to indy cartoon.
Reviews such as yours, or even links to them, seem like too much hard work for the organisers. And there's the omnipresent feeling that availability rather than quality is the main criterion for inclusion. (It would also help if we knew which films were not going to have a local release in cinemas, on air or DVD, so we could spend up on the quality rarities.)
I personally lost interest the year the committee in a frenzy of moralism rejected the film of Dennis Cooper's sadomasochistic drama Frisk for its political incorrectness. Though the subject didn't appeal to me, the film created a stir at overseas festivals, and it seemed obvious to program it here. The committee lacked even the conviction of its own timidity when it caved in and screened it the following year when it seemed sort of irrelevant.
But really, I just want to trust the program and be able to bypass the prevailing whitebread Californian swill (of any nation)when I stump up my increasingly hard-earned cash!
Toni, I welcome your comment but I'll actually stand up to defend the festival here.
In terms of the 'utterly opaque and uninformative festival guide', the same could surely be said of any film festival, whether it's the MQFF or MIFF - everything is written up in glowing terms.
That's why I think festival-goers are beholden to do at least a modicum of research, reading reviews at the iMDB etc. Having trailers for the films on the MQFF website is a definite bonus here too - it gives you at least a sense of what the film is about. It's certainly the best way to avoid the 'whitebread Californian swill', as you call it.
I also want to avoid such films - and if you've been going to the MQFF for the last 12 or more years, surely you've learned to read between the lines by now?
As for the 35mm vs digital print issue - sometimes prints simply don't arrive, which isn't the festival's fault, but the shipping company's. And with so many films shot these days on digital video, it's only natural that so many films should be screened digitally too.
As to Frisk, ironically it was the then Festival Director's (deplorable, to me) decision not to program the film that lead to me joining the innaugural programming committee the very next year and successfully argue for the film to be screened.
It wasn't that the programming committee lacked the courage of their convictions; as I recall it was Tamara Jungwirth as Festival Director who banned the film the previous year - at that stage there was no programming committee.
The whole reason I got involved with the MQFF in the first place was to push for more diverse programming. I'm no longer actively involved other than as a media commentator. life member and avid attendee, but I hope you'd agree that these days, the festival program is certainly much richer and more diverse than it used to be?
Post a Comment