Non-Legends of the Fall (Patreon)

Will Glover asks (via a comment): 

hey Mike, sorry for the unrelated question, but I was wondering if you would be 'attending' TIFF this year given that it's gone virtual?

Now that I've seen the lineup: No. TIFF always costs me money, because I haven't covered it professionally since 2009 (apart from a brief stint for The Dissolve) and no longer have a press badge. It's always been worth the cost to me in the past, as my "shortlist" of must-sees and wanna-sees reliably runs to 40+ films; most years I can't fit several of them into my schedule, though that's partly just due to the fest's feast-or-famine approach to its own scheduling. This year would be way less expensive—not only will I not be shelling out for hotel and airfare, but the virtual industry badge is like $US260 (vs. more like $600-$700 usually, depending upon the exchange rate and whether I'm in a financial position to take advantage of the early-bird discount that year). With only 50 films total in the lineup, I knew there wouldn't be 40-50 "oh boy!"s, but I was hoping for maybe 8-10.

Seeing the Venice Competition lineup yesterday pretty much killed that hope. Apart from Kiyoshi Kurosawa, there's nothing that really elevates my, well, pulse. And that film isn't even in the TIFF lineup. Mildly interested in the Vinterberg, the Wiseman, the Spike Lee, the Herzog, the Ozon, and...that's it. Key word in all of those few cases is "mildly." Lee's film is another of his theatrical adaptations, and it's been a good while since I've been really enthused about a film by any of those other directors—most recent 70+ rating is Grizzly Man, 15 years ago now. So I'd kinda be spending $50 per film to stream stuff—and the big screen is a significant part of any festival's draw for me—that I'm perfectly happy to wait and stream probably 3-6 months from now. Obviously there might be some sleepers among the other titles, but given that I have to rely entirely upon y'all for my income until January (when I can resume writing regularly for the A.V. Club—maybe a bit sooner if an amendment to AB5 passes in November), it just seems like an unnecessary expense. Sorry to disappoint, but it'd probably be a lot of W/Os anyway.

"What does this portend for the Skandies?" some of you may be wondering. I see no need to make a final decision until the end of the year, but after seeing these fall fest lineups, I'm leaning pretty heavily toward not conducting the survey this year. It's very clear now that almost every major film once intended for 2020 is being held until (hopefully!) 2021. Yes, some very good pictures have been released, especially if I open up eligibility to streaming-only (which I would certainly do); I'd be giving points to First Cow; A White, White Day; and probably The Nest (assuming it comes out as planned) and Fourteen in any year. But without all of the usual fall stuff, the field almost certainly won't be deep enough to be what I would consider remotely competitive with a "normal" year. I'd rather combine 2020 and (hopefully!) 2021 into one abnormally strong Skandies than hold an abnormally weak Skandies. But we'll see what happens over the next five months. Quite honestly, it'll likely depend upon whether I personally wind up with ten films that I wouldn't feel kinda embarrassed to include on my Best Picture ballot. Which doesn't look likely to me at the moment. I enjoyed The Burnt Orange Heresy, but come on.