On the Red Carpet: "Fortune Hunters" at the Seattle International Film Festival

I kid. There was a carpet, all over the floor of the theater, but it wasn't red. I didn't really borrow Reese Witherspoon's Oscar dress, either. (She offered but I said, "Reese, honey, pft. This is Seattle. Maybe for Cannes. And here, eat something for heaven's sake. You're starting to look like a Barbie doll").

Last night we attended a program called "Northwest Ties", a part of SIFF that showcases regional independent film-makers. Upon entering, everyone received a ballot. The audience rates the films on a 1-5 scale and the winner receives the...wait for it...Golden Space Needle Award. This is no small prize, especially if you are hoping to create some buzz and find financing for, oh, let's say, turning your short into a feature length film.

I should probably make a little statement here about my general views on movies, what with me presuming to review films from time to time and all that. I'm not an avid film-goer. (You know that if you've noticed that I generally review films that I've rented on Netflix). My tastes are pretty simple. I like a good story. I say I don't like violent films but that's not strictly true; for example, "The Usual Suspects" is one of my favorite movies. I don't mind a "message" film, as long as it's not preachy. I don't mind high concept films, as long as they aren't pretentious or boring and tell a story. For the record and apropos of nothing, I hate the first 3 (newer) Star Wars movies (except for Ewan McGregor) and love the older 3. I don't always go ga-ga for the movies everyone raves about ("Brokeback Mountain" springs to mind) and rather enjoyed "Ishtar". So take my opinions with a big grain of fleur de sel.

Thom Harp & Mike Standish, the film-makers

Right then. I went into the evening with an admitted bias for "Fortune Hunters". The Spouse had so much fun working on the picture. The cast and crew I've met are all delightful people. Of course it was going to be the best movie. But I was determined to be open-minded and objective. Much as I love it, I wasn't going to allow sentiment to make me give it a 5 if there was another film that was better.

There wasn't.

What a relief.

"Fortune Hunters" played first. I didn't like that. Granted, as The Spouse pointed out, it was better than running toward the end of the program when everyone had to pee really bad but still, you run a risk of being forgotten by the time you've seen 6 other movies. As it was, "Fortune Hunters" set the standard by which all the other films would be judged (and no, Thom, I'm not just saying that because I know you're going to Google "fortune hunters" this morning).

Now admittedly, I've seen the film about half a dozen times. Hello? We own the DVD. But it's a charming story that it has yet to grow old. Plus, seeing it on a big screen was exciting. The best part was being in a largish theater with a full house, at least half of whom had nothing to do with the production, and hear their response. Which was superfantastic. People laughed at all the right parts. And they laughed loudly. They burst into generous applause at the end, quieted for the little bits of business in the credits and then applauded enthusiastically again. There was also whooping. And a holler or two. ('k, that was me).

There were other films. One was a documentary. Which, btw, had no business in that program, imho. A documentary is not a short film. It is a documentary. You necessarily judge that form differently. Plus, the doc was about a local woman who takes photographs of children who are terminally ill. Hello? Is it really fair to place a romantic comedy in competition with such a work? I think not.

There were 2 other movies which I frankly hated. One was an arty little thing that is an example of form over substance. Another was an over-wrought thing with no dialogue that was just silly and not in a good way.

As far as I was concerned there were only two films that were remotely to be considered competition for "Fortune Hunters". One suffered from some serious miscasting (which was ironic because the director raved about the gift of her fabulous cast). The other had some good lines and the lead was quite good but it came out of a theater piece and consequently had a stilted, talky quality. Not everyone, it should be noted, is David Mamut. It had a nice, hopeful little ending, though.

I know what you're thinking: my bias is showing. "Come on," says you. "Is "Fortune Hunters" really all that great?"

Yeah. It is. It's funny. It's truly, objectively funny. Because I'm so familiar with the story, I wondered how the audience would react to the major plot point. Would they see it coming? But they didn't. There was an audible little buzz of "Uh oh" when it happened. And you could tell they wanted to see how it would all play out. In short, the script had the crowd from the start and never lost it's grip.

It's a cute story with great writing but it is the two leads, Jessica Skerrit (Megan) and Kelvin Yu* (Arthur) who make this film work. (Do yourself a favor and keep your eye on these kids). They are refreshing actors, both possessed of terrific comedic timing. They are entirely believable and bring a natural ease to their roles. I especially appreciated this after seeing the other shorts; too many of the performances reminded me of Jon Lovitz and his "Acting!!!" thespian.

Another strength of the film is the possibilities hinted at in the short. There are characters to be more fully fleshed out, relationships to be explored. And Arthur should have to work harder to get Megan back. Which is why it's so exciting that Mike and Thom have nearly finished the screenplay for the feature length version. Judging by the response to the film (which I thought really was most generous for "Fortune Hunters" than any of the other offerings), I'm not the only one who will want to see it.

After the screening there was the obligatory Q&A with the directors (and one self-important actress who made me grind my teeth). I find those things largely insufferable, with "ego" being the operative word. Thom and the guy who made the documentary were the only ones who didn't make me want to find a cattle prod. But maybe that was just because I hadn't eaten anything since lunch and was getting cranky.

Mercifully, the Q&A wrapped up and a bunch of us went up to Braca, a Capitol Hill bar where part of the movie was shot. The Spouse and I had a little nosh, a little wine and some nice chats. Of course, he's the social butterfly in these situations, popping off to talk to this person or that, leaving me to fend for myself because he assumes I'm a big girl. which I am. A big shy girl. So not one for the idle chit-chat. But I talked for a while with a nice young man name Court who did production design on the film. And I spoke with Jessica (you'll remember she graciously gave me her autograph at the last screening). She's a charming young woman and I hope she'll be very successful because she is a) talented and 2) really sweet and, when I look at the current crop of young actresses in the business, I think that is a pretty important commodity.

(Oh, and btw, she might be reading this so I'll just take a moment to say: Hi, Jessica. I mean every word. You're great in the film, you're a darling girl and I hope you have a brilliant career. Or at least see the vast majority of your dreams come true. Whichever. You go, sweet cheeks. Make Seattle proud).

Court, Thom, Jessica and Moi

Here's looking forward to the day when I can announce, "'Fortune Hunters', coming soon to a theatre near you".

---

JP: Please note, Kelvin was on "Gilmore girls".