“Lisa Aschan’s “She Monkeys” (Apflickorna) won the best narrative feature prize, while Alma Har’el took best documentary for “Bombay Beach” at the Tribeca Film Festival tonight in New York. The world competition winners for narrative and documentary films were chosen from 12 narrative and 12 documentary features from 21 countries. Aschan took to the stage, capping the efficiently dispersed awards with utter surprise.”
UPDATE – 10/24/11: I’m pleased to report that THE HAMMER (a.k.a. HAMILL) has acquired distribution and will be playing in select theaters starting October 27, 2011. For tickets and theater information, visit THIS SITE.
———
Overcoming the necessary obstacles in order to get your story out to the masses is a daunting aspect of independent filmmaking. With the current state of distribution, the obstacles are bigger than ever. If you’re unwilling to compromise your vision, the battle becomes even tougher, especially when your project portrays a unique world that general audiences are unfamiliar with. That being said, with big risks come big rewards and telling a powerful, unconventional story is the first step to making an impact on a large scale.
Filmmakers EBEN KOSTBAR and JOSEPH MCKELHEER understand this, and they are currently entrenched in this kind of battle with their latest film HAMILL, the true story of deaf UFC fighter, MATT HAMILL. Directed by OREN KAPLAN, it’s the inspiring journey of a man who, for most of his life, has found himself awkwardly caught between the worlds of the hearing and the non-hearing. It’s very much a classic underdog sports story that would touch and inspire the hearts and minds of most moviegoers should it garner a wide theatrical release (trailer below).
In order to remain true to Matt Hamill’s story and portray the Deaf and Hard of Hearing communities accurately, Eben and Joseph (co-writers and co-producers) chose to take some risks that they knew could impact their chances with distributors. They decided to cast smaller, unknown actors, such as deaf actor RUSSELL HARVARD (There Will Be Blood) in the title role. They also utilized open captioning and specific sound design to bring us into Hamill’s world, sometimes deliberately depriving our senses on screen.
Having only screened at five film festivals thus far, they’ve already collected a handful of awards (they’re five for five at the fests they’ve played at including the AFI Fest’s prestigious Audience Award). They also have approval from the largest Deaf organizations in the country, not to mention the vocal support they’ve received from the other core audiences portrayed in the film (the Deaf, mixed martial arts, and wrestling communities). Needless to say, Eben and Joseph are very optimistic about Hamill’s chances at a wide release.
In late February I sat down with the duo to discuss the obstacles they’ve had to overcome in order to bring Matt Hamill’s life to the screen, as well as their strategy for building a dedicated fan base that will help prove to distributors that this film belongs in theaters.
HAMILL screens at the 2011 NEWPORT BEACH FILM FESTIVAL in Newport Beach, California on Saturday, April 30th and Thursday, May 5th. Buy tickets HERE.
WILL PRESCOTT: This film has potential to make a huge impact on the Deaf community—either positively or negatively. How did this affect the choices you made during production?
EBEN KOSTBAR: Well, five years ago, when we were developing this, the big challenge was, are we going to go with deaf actors or not? I’m an actor, Joe’s an actor, we developed this with me acting and Joe directing. We quickly realized that this is the wrong way to go because you learn about Deaf culture and you realize deaf actors should be playing these roles. They obviously bring a lot more authenticity to the parts. Unfortunately, there’s no deaf male lead that’s a name actor. And that’s important when you’re putting a project together and asking investors for money, because that’s ultimately going to determine to distributors that you can get that chunk of money back.
JOSEPH MCKELHEER: At the beginning we weren’t thinking about hearing actors versus deaf actors. We didn’t really see anything wrong with it at the beginning. We were like, “What do you mean? This person is an actor. An actor can play deaf.” We learned quickly that’s not going to fly and we learned why. We came to understand the Deaf community’s point of view.
WP: So, despite the potential distribution problems, you went with unknown, deaf actors anyway?
EK: Yeah. We said you know what, with this type of project, if we’re really going to shake things up and make an impact, let’s hire all deaf actors for the roles. Let’s bring in some deaf crew people or deaf producers so they can teach us about their culture and really create this subplot to the story. Yeah, it’s your classic sports underdog story about a guy overcoming all obstacles, but we’ve see that a million times. And what’s interesting is that there’s a group of people out there who haven’t been portrayed like this on the screen yet. Or at least portrayed properly.
WP: But it was still difficult to get made.
EK: A lot of the reason why this film took five plus years was because the early creative decisions were met with challenges. But all of the great things about this film are the challenges we’re facing now. The deaf actors not being name actors was a good thing because we wanted to open up opportunities for them, because it gives more authenticity to the film. We implemented open captioning throughout the film because we wanted it accessible. The big picture plan is that we want deaf people to go to the theater because right now they can only go to selected times or to theaters with special equipment where they can read the subtitles.
JM: Or wait for the film to come out on DVD with closed captioning.
EK: Right. This is our vision. We want deaf and hard of hearing people to be able to go to the theater together and experience it with other hearing people. It creates two things: One, it gives them an opportunity to go to a theater just like any hearing person. And two, it creates this cool dynamic of deaf and hearing people being in an audience at the same time. They laugh together and cry together.
JM: That’s what it’s all about. The film is really about emerging the two cultures together and allowing each culture to have an awareness of the other.
WP: And Matt Hamill’s life is a great vehicle to do this since he’s very much a part of both cultures. How did you even come up with the idea to tell his story in the first place?
EK: I saw Matt on this reality TV show and told Joe we should go see him at this Deaf school where he was speaking at a wrestling tournament. It’s a K-12 school called California School for the Deaf and it’s in Fremont. They have deaf faculty, deaf principles, etc. They call it Deaf Town. That’s their slang term. They tell you to turn off your voice because they want you to get thrown into their world, their language, American Sign Language. So we spent a weekend with Matt, at this school, and we were just blown away by this culture. How cool would it be if we could portray this on the screen and let other people into this world a little bit?
WP: When was this?
JM: This has been a five-year process. Eben first saw him and called me and said check this guy out. I was like, “Cage fighting?” I wasn’t really into it at first. But we went and met him and were like, “He has a really inspiring story. We have to make it.” It took us a couple of years to write the script.
WP: And he was involved along the way? The whole time?
JM: Yeah. Matt was such a good guy. And we really wanted to do two things. We wanted to handle his life appropriately and handle the Deaf community appropriately. So we had a handshake deal with him that he’d have approval on the script.
EK: And we really did have a handshake deal (laughs). We didn’t even have a contract for the first year. How scary is that? We’ll never do that again.
WP: How difficult was it working with him since this is his story?
JM: It presented some challenges because, imagine if someone was going to make your life story and wanted to change it because it didn’t fit into a movie format or a three-act structure. You’d say, “That’s not the way it went!” So it created some challenges, but at the end of the day there’s not a whole lot of movie magic and it’s really accurate. It’s something that Matt’s happy with.
WP: As storytellers who can hear, did Matt or anyone else have issues with you being able to relate to their struggles?
JM: If you’re deaf and approached by people wanting to make this film, your first response is going to be, “Why are two hearing guys making this film?” We stumbled upon this many times.
EK: But we had open arms. We said, “Tell us who to work with. We want to work with deaf crew and deaf actors. We want to create opportunities for them.” Hopefully Hamill gets out there and people learn more about the community, for example, a lot of people call them “hearing impaired,” but that’s not the proper term. They’re deaf and they don’t see it as a bad thing. Deaf represents their culture. Like American Sign Language is their language, not English. English is their second language. And as cheesy as this might sound to some people, it’s these educational sub tones that are in the film.
WP: Let’s talk about some of those deaf actors. Russell Harvard did excellent as Hamill but, Eben, you were originally supposed to play the lead role, right?
EK: [laughs] A long time ago. And Joe was gonna direct it! We’re actors. We come from acting backgrounds. Joe did a film called GODSPEED, which was the first film under Film Harvest. Everything came from let’s create opportunities for ourselves and also we wanted to make film. So, when I saw Hamill, I was like I wrestled, I can learn sign language, I sort of resemble him. Not really, but kinda.
JM: Hamill is six-three.
EK: I know! [laughs] But yeah, I put so much into it. I got hearing aids. I went and took classes. Like, I know Sign Language now, which eventually helped because it got thrown into the story.
JM: Eventually there was so much controversy over Eben playing the role that it made us second guess ourselves. And now, you know, we’d never go back. Anybody making a film about a deaf person you got to cast a deaf actor. It just has to be that way.
WP: So you fired Eben and hired Russell?
JM: Yeah. And one of the examples we gave to investors for why we were going go with a deaf actor was THERE WILL BE BLOOD. Paul Thomas Anderson recast the role of the older version of Daniel Day-Lewis’ son (played by Russell Harvard) with a deaf actor. Initially, and I’m not sure if I’m totally correct on this, they hired a hearing actor to play that role and during shooting there was some controversy and they recast. They were shooting in Texas and Russell is based in Austin, and they cast him.
WP: Was Russell a wrestler?
EK: No! Talk about a casting challenge. The actor who plays Matt has to be deaf, not hard of hearing, there’s a difference. He has to know sign language, which a lot of deaf people don’t know.
JM: He has to be oral.
EK: Has to be oral, which a lot of deaf people aren’t oral. Matt is very oral and can speak very well. He also has to look like Matt to a certain degree; he has to be in the same age group. Has to play from high school to age 32. You know, he has to be old enough where he can play older, but not too old that he can’t play younger.
WP: Wow.
EK: And if he doesn’t wrestle, he has to still be athletic enough to pull some moves off. I mean, that’s like a casting nightmare.
WP: That’s tough.
JM: There was one guy. Literally only one guy that we found and I think we did a pretty extensive search.
EK: And actually, we took a leap of faith with Russell. Deaf actors, a lot of times, just haven’t gotten the acting experience yet, you know, just like any young actors. But they (deaf and hard of hearing actors) don’t have the opportunities, unfortunately, and even less experience. So when we were looking for Matt, besides all the casting challenges, just in terms of acting, a lot of people we saw just weren’t ready yet. And the fact that Russell played opposite Daniel Day-Lewis, I mean, come on. You have to be pretty good.
JM: He was the bastard in the basket.
EK: Love that scene.
WP: So how did you get at him? How did you get him the script?
JM: We were writing the script when There Will Be Blood came out. So his name came up right away, but we were originally going to cast him as the best friend role (played by Michael Anthony Spady). We never really considered Russell and always thought we’d find someone a little bit younger. But he was right there the whole time.
EK: It’s so weird with the casting and things in general with this project, how they fell into place. The best friend role, Jay, is a great example. Michael Spady stole the show. I bartended on the side for years where I met Michael and just like his character, he had this eccentric personality. He was deaf, but it never really clicked that he’d play Jay because we kept thinking he had to be white because the original best friend is white. But after we couldn’t find Jay, casting-wise, we were like, “What about this guy?”
JM: And he won the job.
EK: And it’s cool. Having a black actor play a white role. I mean, who cares? We asked the real Jay and he was like, “Yeah. Sure. I don’t care.”
WP: So what about Oren Kaplan (the director)? When did he come onboard?
JM: I worked with Oren on a movie called THE HAMILTONS. He was the Second AC (Assistant Camera) and the Executive Producer. Odd combination.
WP: That is odd.
JM: He started doing a lot of web stuff for Disney, tons of content that wasn’t feature length. We had stayed in contact and were looking for a director who was talented and just starting out like us. We had put a lot of work into this project and didn’t want someone to come on the project and just direct it and walk away. We wanted to make sure there was that commitment long term. He’s been on this project for two years now and he’s got another two to go at least. It’s a big commitment for a director, or any indie filmmaker for that matter.
EK: From working for Disney, Oren had the eye and still does, to create a more commercial looking film that, I don’t know how to say this the right way, doesn’t look so…
JM: Indie.
EK: Yeah. Indie. For lack of a better word. It’s a classic sports underdog story and deserved to have kinda like, you know—
JM: More mainstream appeal.
EK: Yeah. More mainstream appeal. So, the fact Oren worked at Disney and had done work like this, we trusted his vision, and I think he hit a home run, especially with the resources he had.
WP: You guys certainly did some great things with the sound design.
EK: Geoff Green (sound designer), who we’ve worked with before, did amazing work. We still think that one of the coolest things about this film is the sound design. You really step into Matt Hamill’s shoes and see what it’s like to be deaf for two hours. Geoff really came up with some cool, interesting things.
JM: It was an interesting process because it was all in the script, but it maybe wasn’t as effective in the script as it was in the final product you saw. Geoff really took what we created in the script and thought it through from a practical position. He was on the phone with an audiologist and really did the research in terms of what, for example, sounds would sound like with hearing aids.
EK: And not only hearing aids but what it would sound like with only one hearing aid because Matt only wears one in one ear. You know, the differences. The frequencies. The little things you probably don’t pick up when you initially watch it, but then when they all come together when you experience it. It was a challenge, especially in the developmental stages, because they were saying you’ve got to be careful because of all those silent moments. You already have a pretty silent film and then big gaps of silence. The majority of your audience will be a hearing audience and they’re going to get bored reading subtitles. So, it’s making it cool but still having it flow consistently throughout the film. It was a challenge to find a happy medium.
WP: One of the coolest things I found about Matt’s character is that you have this guy, and I want to know how realistic it is, but you have this guy who doesn’t fit in either world—he’s raised one way and then he goes to the Deaf school that he doesn’t fit into as well. Is this straight out of his life?
JM: Yeah.
EK: Yeah. From the very, very first meeting we had with him at the school we met him at, he told us how he felt like he’s not in both. He feels like he can fit into both, but he doesn’t associate with “I’m just deaf,” or “I’m just hard of hearing.”
JM: That’s how he felt growing up. That’s how he was raised and wants to maintain to this day. He always said he was grateful he went to RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) and that opened up his world to the Deaf community because he hadn’t had that experience before. But, you know, he doesn’t necessarily want to be represented as someone from the Deaf community. He wants to be in the middle. And he wants to live his life in the middle of those two cultures. There is a distinction between the two and he doesn’t necessarily want to be grouped into either.
EK: He’s definitely proud to be Deaf. He doesn’t deny it or anything like that. He’s not an extremist one way or the other. Shoshannah Stern’s character in the film, Kristi, would be an example of what they call “Deaf” with a capital “D”. Meaning true Deaf culture, American Sign Language, they don’t believe in speaking because that’s not them. They believe you must learn their language, American Sign Language, I’ll learn English, but I’m deaf and this is what I believe in. And so, when constructing the project we were like, “Let’s just tell Matt’s story.” He grew up in a hearing world and would eventually embrace the fact that he is deaf and learn about his culture and who he is. That’s his journey. It’s not every deaf person’s journey. Through telling his story you learn so many different layers about the Deaf and hard of hearing cultures.
WP: Absolutely. It’s really educational in that sense. With Matt being caught between these two worlds, it really helps you as an audience member to empathize with him, while learning so much about the culture through his journey.
JM: That was our original idea. Here’s a deaf kid growing up in a hearing world and he’s a total fish out of water. And then, when he finally gets to the world you think he should be in, he’s a fish out of water still. We didn’t want to be too preachy about the Deaf community either. and we didn’t want to treat being deaf as too negative or anything. It was a fine line we had to walk.
EK: A lot of people will say, and even Matt, that they see being deaf as a gift. Where initially, when he was brought up, he was fighting against it. But now he says that it’s a gift and he wouldn’t be the person he is without the fact that he’s deaf.
JM: If you ask most deaf people if they had the ability to hear would they take it? Most will say no. And that was the moment in time when the light bulb went on for us. Oh, okay, I get it. I totally get it now.
EK: Our vision on the writing side was to do a 180-degree swap for the audience members. As a deaf audience member you’re thrust into a hearing world, like they normally are for about 90 percent of the day. So, in the beginning of the film, they’re forced to do what they always do by reading the subtitles or reading lips. But then all the sudden it’s flipped when Matt goes to RIT and they have sign language and they’re in their own world and the hearing audience is forced to read the subtitles. Hopefully, as a hearing audience member, when that happens and the sound cuts out, a light will go on and they’ll say, “Wow this is cool. It’s like this visual language, and there’s no sound, and they’re talking and there’s so much going on.”
WP: Yeah. I definitely felt that while watching. Hopefully it carries over to a much wider audience.
JM: That’s the goal.
WP: So, what are the future planes for the film?
JM: Well, right now we are really pushing for a theatrical release. We want to start with a small theatrical release and grow from there.
WP: Do you have a distribution deal?
JM: Right now no one is saying let’s take it wide release. So we have to do it ourselves and hold off on distribution deals that don’t include a theatrical release.
EK: There are a few companies out there who like it and specialize in strong niche-type films, but most of them are based on us bringing in the P&A money (Prints and Advertising), the marketing money, because they don’t want to risk as much.
JM: From the perspective of the distributors, the film has no business being in a wide release. What we’re trying to do is prove that there is an audience for it and the only way we can do it is by doing it ourselves and starting small. We’ll use a specific strategy catered to our core markets and use a guerilla marketing campaign, a viral campaign, that supports this and helps our growth until we get into a stage where we can show people that there is an audience for this film.
EK: And for our type of budget, our indie budget, we’ve made some huge alliances. We have every top Deaf organization, the president of the largest Deaf university, Gallaudet, is sponsoring the film. The president of RIT. UFC and Tapout are sponsoring the film. Most independent films don’t have these alliances. We have the infrastructure; we just need to get that relationship going with a distributor that’s willing to put their neck on the line so we can show them the true potential of this film.
WP: Well, I’m sure it won’t take long. It’s a great film on many different levels. Do you have anything else to add before we wrap up?
EK: Well, Joe’s having a baby this week.
WP: A baby? Really? You know the sex?
JM: It’s a boy.
WP:You got a name?
EK: He can’t say. His wife told me the name, and I spilled it, and she didn’t want anyone to know. So she’s mad at me and now he can’t tell anyone.
JM: But we do have a name, yes.
WP: Is it Hamill?
EK: [laughs] Yes!
JM: [laughs] Yeah, Matt Hamill.
Eben and Joseph are currently in post-production on their third feature, FREE SAMPLES, produced by their production company FILM HARVEST and starring Jess Wexler and Jesse Eisenberg. For more information on HAMILL, check out the official website as well as the Facebook and Twitter pages.
If you’re an independent filmmaker or know of an independent filmmaker we should interview, email blogadmin@sagindie.org for consideration.
For a writer the genesis of a story can come from a number of different places, inspirations or experiences—some real, some manufactured, but most, a hybrid of both.
For writer/director/producer, K. LORREL MANNING, the inspiration for his first feature initially came to him in the form of a book he discovered in 2004. Nina Berman’s PURPLE HEARTS BACK FROM IRAQ— a remarkable compilation of photographs and essays about servicemen and women wounded in the Iraq war—captivated him with what soldiers were experiencing once they returned from combat. Fueled by a desire to understand the world of PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), Manning began researching and interviewing veterans with the hope that his next “project” would emerge.
It didn’t take long before he met an Iraq vet-turned-police officer, who would serve as the catalyst for a short, eleven-page play about two war-torn veterans reuniting in a hospital called HAPPY NEW YEAR. For one of the lead roles, Manning called upon a friend he had freelanced with at a law firm in New York, MICHAEL CUOMO, who was also an actor working hard to cut his teeth in theater. Cuomo would prove to be more than just an actor in the stage production: he worked closely with Manning on the development, adaptation, producing and lead performance on both the short and feature films.
The feature version of HAPPY NEW YEAR follows the story of Sgt. Cole Lewis (Cuomo), a war-torn marine who returns home from combat to find humanity, compassion and friendship in a group of similarly injured veterans in the psychiatric ward at a Veterans Hospital (watch the trailer below).
What began for Manning and Cuomo (or “The Guys” as they refer to themselves) as an exploration into the minds of wounded veterans, would eventually become a four-year quest to present an issue that much too often goes unnoticed by society. With support from numerous veterans groups and big-name critics like, ELVIS MITCHELL, their goal is to have the film in theaters by November 11, 2011—Veteran’s Day.
It was in Austin, Texas at the 2011 SOUTH BY SOUTHWEST FILM FESTIVAL, only days after their world premiere in the Narrative Competition Category, where I caught up with the Guys. In a small room at the downtown Hilton that served as both their sleeping quarters and festival war-room, we had our first of what will be three conversations chronicling their journey along the festival circuit.
HAPPY NEW YEAR opens the 2011 AMC THEATRES KANSAS CITY FILMFEST (sponsored by AMC Theaters) tonight at 7:15PM in Missouri.
WILL PRESCOTT:So, Michael, what did you think initially when you first read Lorrel’s short play?
MICHAEL CUOMO: I’ve told Lorrel this story a million times. My printer was broken so I was reading it off my laptop. I got through it and I went back to look at something, and my computer was all fuzzy and screwed up. I couldn’t figure it out, and I stepped away, went to the bathroom and realized my face was flushed with tears. But I wasn’t sobbing, it was almost more like an unconscious reaction to something. And that’s when I called him and was like, “We’ve got to do this play.” Because if I’m reacting this way, imagine how other people are going to react.
WP: How did it finally get on stage?
LORREL MANNING: I, Michael and another actor by the name of William Oliver Watkins were getting together to explore these characters and I was filming it and everything. And around this time, I was talking to Lee Brock (co-artistic director of the Barrow Group theatre company) about the play and she said, “We could put this in the big theater. Make it a two night thing.” And I said, “Sure.” But then she called me back later and said that they had the one-act play festival coming up and that she was not very happy with the plays that were coming in. She said, “Why don’t you take it over and make this the one-act play festival? I was like, “Lee, I only have two-months to put that together and she says, “You can do it.” (laughs)
WP: That’s where it premiered?
LM: Yeah. I hired some directors and put out this big call across the country for war-themed plays. We went through this whole process of vetting these plays trying to find which ones were best. And then I took Happy New Year and another play I had written and submitted it to the group and took my name off of it and that play (Happy New Year) got through. And they were like, who wrote this? And I said I did. (laughs) And they didn’t know that. But it got such high marks so it was able to play at the festival. The festival ran for six weeks in NY and was very successful, sold out almost every night. It was a way for us to make people aware of the issues. Each of the plays dealt with the war, not overseas but at home.
All these plays had a different take on the effect of war on the American psyche. They were all great plays but Happy New Year was the central piece because it was very hard hitting and closed out the night. One night a group of military mothers wanted to come and I was quite nervous because this was the first real test of anyone connected to the military would see the piece. I was unclear as to whether or not they’d respond to what we were doing. A few of the mothers stayed after to talk to us and they said, “You have to do something with this. It can’t just stay here in NYC. People have to know about these issues and what’s going on.”
WP: And thus the short film was born.
LM: We got together in Michael’s apartment on the 4th of July in ’07 and wondered how we were going to raise the $20K that we needed to make the film. We put together a letter writing campaign. Had a benefit show. Reached out to family friends. All kinds of stuff. So over the summer we raised the money and six weeks after the show closed we were shooting the short film adaptation.
WP: So, what were some of the things you did specifically, in terms of development, to transform the story from stage to screen? How were they different? What were some of the lessons you learned to improve the filmed version?
MC: Well, the stage version is essentially two guys in a hospital room, right? It’s dialogue driven. It’s their story and the story of their relationship. It looks at New Year’s Eve as an interesting metaphor for looking at our lives and asking, “What’s next?” What do we want to do different in the New Year? Two guys who were greatly affected by their experiences overseas who are now reuniting.
WP: Right.
MC: And the main thing for us is that we wanted to get it to festivals. We were looking at Sundance, and Cannes and all of the biggies. And Cannes helped determine what a short film should be because they wouldn’t accept anything over fifteen minutes.
WP: How long was it?
MC: The play was about twenty-five minutes. So we immediately said, “Oh shit,” if we want to have a shot at something like Cannes, the film will need to be shorter. And Lorrel already had ideas on how to adapt it and jokes we could take out of the script that won’t take away from the relationship. It’s just that less is more. So much more can be seen because of the intimacy of film as opposed to theater. So, from an acting perspective, it was the first time in my life I had something—you know, with most films you come on with little rehearsal—but this was incredible because both myself, and William Watkins, who were in the original play, were going to do the short film with the original writer/director. So, for us, one of the things that was so cool, was that the characters were already so in us. We knew these guys. We knew our lines. If anything, we had to relearn beat changes and things like that because it was now going to be condensed and you were going to have to get to certain places quicker, emotionally.
WP: Where did the short premiere?
LM: The Cleveland Film Festival.
WP: And what were some of the other highlights of the short’s festival run?
LM: Two of my favorites were the Rhode Island and Maryland Film Festivals. Two of my favorites by far.
WP: How did (Executive Producer) Iain Smith get involved?
LM: We were looking for a good makeup artist for the film. In the play Michael looked very sickly, but I wanted him to appear more deteriorated in the film version.
MC: We put an ad out for a makeup artist. The first person to respond was this woman, Ailie Smith, who said she was located in London but worked on Harry Potter and Cold Mountain. Said she was planning a trip to New York and if we were willing to help her find housing, per diem for food, and money for supplies, she’d be willing to fly over for the project. She sent us a sample and Lorrel looked at her resume and was like, “let’s hire her.” So we did. But then a week later, she wrote back and said she’s really sorry, but she can’t afford the expense right now. And we were only two weeks out from shooting. So, our producer, Karl Jacob, said he was going to search for someone else. I emailed her a plea, asking if there was anyway she could reconsider, writing something like ‘we want you on this movie and we think it’d be better with you involved.’ And it worked.
LM: And she came in. The day of shooting. She’s doing a makeup test on Michael and casually tells us that she’d shown her father the script and that he really liked it. I asked if he was in the film business, and she said that he was a producer. And I asked what he’d done. And she said, oh, you know, ‘Children of Men, Cold Mountain, He’s worked with Brad Pitt a lot.’ And Michael and I are like, “What?” Quick, IMDB him!” (laughs)
WP: So her dad is Iain Smith?
LM: Yeah. And maybe two months later we were close to our fine cut of the film and she checked in and said, “You know, my dad’s in New York this weekend. Would you want to show him the film?” And we were like, “sure.” So, he watched the film, and we met him the next day for a lunch that ended up being over three hours long. He was so blown away by the short film. We talked about spirituality, and art, and the business. He gave us so much advice and said we really should expand the short into a feature film. I was like, “You know, we thought about doing something like that, but not exactly this story.” He was like, “No. No you need to expand this film.” I was very intrigued by the idea.
WP: So you started writing.
LM: I started working on the treatment and adding more characters. A lot of multi-ethnic characters. Things I’d been wanting to tackle. So I’d do a treatment and send it to Michael for feedback. And then do another one. I eventually said we should share story credit because he was adding some really good ideas.
WP: Well, at this point you guys had already become a strong partnership.
LM: Yes. Our friendship had grown immensely. We started to think alike. We challenged each other creatively. So, as we were finishing the short film, I was finishing the feature treatment and then a draft of the script that we got to Sundance.
MC: We submitted it to the Sundance Writer’s Lab. It made it to the final round, but was ultimately not accepted that year for 2008. But Michelle Satter sent us a really nice letter saying of the thousands of scripts we made it to the final round and encouraged us to make the film.
LM: One of Iain’s big points was that if we wanted to make the film that we wanted to make, it was important to keep the budget low. ‘Then you’ll be able to showcase yourselves and also be in control of how you present this issue that you feel so passionately about. This is a challenging issue. These films haven’t done well. But if you feel passionately about it make sure you are in control of it.” So that’s why we kept the budget low and remained true to each other. So, Michael and I made made a pact with each other that said, “I’m not gonna dump you, and you’re not gonna suggest I leave the project so someone bigger can come in.” We made that commitment to each other and knew it would be an extremely hard road to travel, because the first thing that happened once we started going out there we were bombarded with questions – “You’re an unknown writer/director, and you cast an unknown actor in the lead, plus it’s about Iraq? Come on? Why doesn’t Michael take a supporting role. Or why don’t you sell the script to someone else? Or, if you’re gonna do it together, why not take on a different subject matter?”
WP: Who were some of these people saying this?
LM: A lot of them were producers.
MC: Agents.
LM: And we both said, “No.” And they said, “Obviously this film isn’t getting made.“ So, it was a very long road. While the short was on the festival circuit, we were trying to figure out ways to get the feature made. I was turning out drafts, we were interviewing veterans and military personnel. At the same time holding down full time jobs.
WP: Were you guys still working at the law firm?
LM: Yes.
MC: Yeah. At night. 7PM to 2AM.
WP: Wow.
LM: So during the day, we’d get to our film office at 10am and work on the film all day, and go to work at night.
WP: And so you found it helpful to have the short out there. You’d go to the festivals with a backpack of scripts or whatever and be like, hey, here’s a feature version of it?
LM: Yeah. A lot of people suggested that we don’t make a short and go right for the feature.
MC: That’s the thing. People said, why use $15-20K on a short when you can make a low budget feature for $50K? Luckily, we didn’t do that. We stuck to our guns and made the short. It was a very wise choice. Because as a young director and young actor, in terms of a career, it was good to have that short as a calling card, to show people a small portion of what to expect. Of course, if you do that, you better make sure the short is a microcosm of what the film will be. In that, it kind of needs to be the quality, and ideally if that actor, who is unknown, is gonna be in the feature, he or she should be in the short. So anyone who questioned my ability, or Lorrel’s ability, could look at the short, from an investment perspective. Instead of sending them a 120 page script, or even a 20 page investment document, we could bring a group of people in a room like this, play them the short and discuss the investment structure. That process, of course, took a lot longer than it should because every film about the Iraq war was getting killed at the box office.
WP: Right, but what was your goal with this film? Was it to get it into theaters and get a huge box office or get this story out there? What’s great about you guys, and this whole story is the drive that you had to get this issue out there in the face of all this box office talk.
LM: Talk about sticking to your guns, we both did. I got approached for other plays and feature films to direct. Had to step away from that. Michael stepped away from a management contract. They wanted to take him on the road and get him out there doing regional theatre and tv pilots.
MC: It was hard because I was unrepresented at the time. I’m still unrepresented for legit film/tv. But it was hard, because you always want the ear of these people, and they have a plan for you. But that wasn’t my plan. And now I have something that I’m truly proud of. It’s one thing to be an actor sitting at Starbucks waiting for your agent to call to tell you if you got that job. It’s another thing to take the power back in a way and produce your own vehicle. It’s great to have an agent, but so many friends of mine were in this spin cycle of “What do I have to do to become that star name that the casting director is seeking and not get boxed out.”
LM: We both said we’re not gonna wait for anybody to give us anything anymore. We’re gonna do what we want to do and just go for it. That lunch with Iain is what really did it. “You gotta take it, boys.” (laughs)
WP: Totally. You look back at the people we all admire that we grew up watching—they all started out like that. They all went out and just did it.
LM: Don’t get me wrong. It’s not like everyday was great. There was a lot of second guessing. Should I take this job? Should I take that job? But we were good at talking it out. Supporting each other.
WP: That’s interesting. I’ve heard people advise against turning a short into a feature because you have a lot of projects in you. You do the short and that’s gone. Now do the next thing. Was it frustrating pushing that stone up the mountain, and not getting sick of working on the same thing over and over again?
LM: What really kept us going were the interviews we were having with the veterans and their families. They were just so moving and we cared so much about the issues that the film presents. Sometime you go so far down a path and you can’t turn back. We were so into it – physically, spiritually, mentally. We thought, “Yeah, these (Iraq) films aren’t doing well, but maybe this will be the one that does.” The response we got from veterans who saw that short was enough to keep us going. Even after the interviews they’d say, “No matter what happens, please keep going. Make the feature film.”
MC: My frustration with the project came from the fact that I wasn’t doing a lot of acting. We weren’t really workshopping the script because we were promoting the short, working on the script, trying to raise money. Trying to understand what it meant. I always joke and say I felt like the cat in the hat. Where you’re juggling a bowling pin, and a fish bowl, an encyclopedia, a baby, a dog, a cat, and a bed and you’ve never done it before. How will we get this thing made? But we were both in this spin cycle of “If we took on another project, what would happen to this one?”
WP: With all the energy you were putting in, did you ever think it wasn’t going to happen?
MC: It was a real risk if it didn’t happen. My friends were saying if this doesn’t work, do you feel like you’ve wasted two years of your career? My response was “It’s going to work out.” Because, to be honest with you, I couldn’t let those thoughts into my mind because if I did, I would’ve stopped working. If there’s any advice I can give, it’s that no one is going to believe in your career—whether you’re a writer, director or an actor—more than you. Ever. I don’t care what agency you’re with. Who you’re dating. There’s this great line in The Departed when Jack Nicholson says, “When you want something in life you can’t ask for it — you just have to take it.” In the case of The Departed, there’s a criminal element to it—
WP: Really? There is? (laughs)
MC: (laughs) There is a criminal element to it, but I think it does apply to this conversation of, when you want something in life you can’t necessarily rely on a studio, or an agent or a casting director, to really validate you. At a certain point, you have to validate yourself. I can say as an actor there’s nothing more rewarding then knowing the script you’re attached to is not only gonna get shot but also get completed and you have a big hand in that. As a lead producer on this movie, I was invited in the editing room. Not everyday. But I got to look at the first cuts. And that’s an incredibly complicated relationship.
WP: And now here you are. At SXSW. You premiered on Saturday. March 12. How did that feel? After all these years? After all these things you’ve given up and sacrificed. How did it finally feel to just play it?
LM: I felt two things. Immense joy. And immense sadness. I felt immense joy in the fact that it was a reward for everything we had done, a gift for all the people who stuck by us and who really came through for us. The actors could see their amazing work, as well as the editor, the cinematographer. Everyone could celebrate. We stood here in our hotel room right before we walked over to the theater and gave each other a huge bear hug and said “This is fucking amazing, man.” We’ve been working so hard that we have a difficult time stepping back and seeing the accomplishments that we’ve made. Family and friends, flew in from NY and all over to support us. However, I felt sadness in the fact that I quickly realized how enriching and challenging the journey has been and that I’ll probably never have this experience again. I’ll never look at this process with virgin eyes asking, “How do you do this? How do you do that?” There will be more discoveries, and challenges, but I will no longer be this uneducated kid trying to figure out how to make things work. There is great beauty in learning. It was back-breaking work, but there was a beauty in it. Kind of like learning to ride a bike for the first time. Or getting your license. I’ll never have that experience again. So there’s some sadness with that. But would I go through it again? Hell, no! (laughs)
WP: How about you, Michael? How did you feel?
MC: I felt great. It was incredible when we got the call from Janet Pierson and she was so moved and wanted us in the festival, eventually, a competition selection.. Especially with all the doubts we’ve talked about and the voices of dissent people had shared with us over the years saying, “You making the right decision?” There was a degree to which I trusted in my heart and telling the story no matter what and I wasn’t wrong. If that makes sense. I haven’t been working in a vacuum for the last three years on something that no one’s ever gonna see. As an artist that’s all you have. Your work that you’re gonna leave behind. I went through a serious personal relationship during this time that didn’t work out. At one point my mother said to me, “It’s okay. You’ll find someone else.” I said, “Maybe I will and maybe I won’t.” And she said, “Surely you want to have kid and a family.” And I said, “Is it alright if I don’t? I mean maybe I will. But maybe these films are the things I leave behind instead of a child. Maybe that’s my contribution to society.” Maybe it’s not. I don’t know. But if that is true, if you are making sacrifices for certain things, you at least want to see them born in a way. Happy New Year was “born” at SXSW.
WP: Absolutely.
MC: You want to birth these things into the world and share them with people and if they are meant to shake things up and affect change, you know socio-politically, you need a place like SXSW to launch you. Or Sundance or Tribeca or Los Angeles, or whatever the usual suspects are, so you can then go take your film out into the world into theaters and reach more people. And then do it on another project.
WP: It’s about leaving a body of work.
MC: At the State Theater I remember looking up at the marquee and it said SXSW 2011 Happy New Year. My aunt and uncle were there. A lot of friends were there. And we’re on a fucking marquee. We made it. But look. There are new challenges. With sales and distribution. And those two guys who were in a 10 by 10 office for two years trying to make a film are now trying to sell a film. You better believe there’s more meetings and getting advice…lots of new challenges.
WP: So clearly you’re going to be with this project for a while. Do you have any plans to jump on something new? When do you ever leave this project?
MC: That’s a great question.
LM: Great question. We don’t know.
WP: I mean, is a mini-series for HBO next? (laughs)
LM: We do want to continue working together. But a lot is dictated by what happens with this. Michael will probably get offers to act in more films, and I will probably get more writing and directing opportunities. As far as working together again, the plan is to do another film called RED HOUSE, which I’m working on right now. If the script takes off and people want to fund it, we’ll shoot this summer. Or the Fall or whatever. But that’s all up to the gods I guess. Michael would be the lead and I’d be the writer/director. It’s a great working relationship right now. I see it as Scorsese/De Niro or Scorsese/Dicaprio now.
MC: Yeah. Eventually I’ll be aged out. (laughs.)
MC: Right now it’s hard to dictate what’s next. People are like, “You’re done.” Not yet. We’re not done. We want to see this in theaters in nine months. And there’s gonna be a lot that goes into that. I think we do, for lots of reasons, need to work on other things. But how that happens is a little unclear right now. And that’s alright because, as Lorrel says, “It’s gonna be linked to the response to HNY,” which has already been really positive and is growing. And we’re talking with agents and managers on both coasts, so we’ll see how it all comes together.
WP: Great, guys. I think we can end on that.
MC: It’s taken a lot to get to this point. It’s been a lot of work, but it’s been a great time.
For more information on Happy New Year, check out the official website as well as the Facebook Page. If you’re an independent filmmaker or know of an independent filmmaker we should interview, email blogadmin@sagindie.org for consideration.
We admit we’re a week or so behind in getting our Sundance recap out, but better late than never, right? Right, guys?
Overall, Sundance 2011 was a blast. The films were great, the parties were fun, and the weather was amazing. We couldn’t have asked for a better experience to kick off this year’s festival run. Below, a few of us have listed the films we saw and included special commentary on some of the ones that really stuck out for us. We highly recommend checking out all of these if and when they come to a theater near you. Enjoy!
Ed Helms, John C. Reilly, and Clay Davis? Sheeeeeeeeeet. CEDAR RAPIDS directed by Miguel Arteta is definitely one of my most anticipated films at Sundance this year.
A new year has begun and, with it, a new year of film festivals. It all kicks off with SUNDANCE in January. Obviously it’s a great festival for numerous reasons, but for us it’s the fact that the whole SAGIndie team attends together.
Sure, we’ll be there for work– hosting and attending events while spreading the word of SAG’s Low Budget contracts– but we’ll also be spending many hours watching films. Some are pretty small and truly independent while others, of course, are a bit larger in scale.
As a team we like to divide and conquer so we can view as much as possible and get a good feel for what the year will bring. On the rare occasion, we’ll attend a film together. For instance, this year we’re all super stoked to see the premiere of Kevin Smith’s new film, RED STATE. Say what you want to about his more recent work, but after a long career in the industry that began with the game-changing film, CLERKS, Smith seems to have found his way back to the independent arena with his first horror film.
Check out the creepily intriguing teaser trailer if you haven’t yet…
We at SAGIndie have the luxury of seeing numerous indie films due to the fact that we travel (almost non-stop) to festivals all over the place. This year we decided to compile our favorites from the last twelve months and the festivals at which we saw them.
Some of these you’ve heard of and will have the opportunity to see in cinemas around the globe. Others might not even come close to getting a distribution deal. Either way, they’re all great stories told in true, risk-taking style. We strongly encourage you to seek some of these out and continue to support independent film in 2011.
TOP 5 Favorite Films picked collectively by the SAGIndie Staff (in no particular order):
Filmmakers who have done consistently well in this business will tell you that if you want your project to succeed, you must be its biggest supporter, its biggest champion and its biggest fan from start to finish. There’s no point in dealing with the highs and lows of independent filmmaking if you don’t believe in your work wholeheartedly.
This seems to be the living mantra for Chris Brown and Jill Pixley who together have attended 14 of the 18 festivals that their film, Fanny, Annie & Danny,has been accepted to over the last several months. This may sound extreme, but having been married for ten years, Chris (a writer/director) and Jill (an actor), are certainly no strangers to traveling together, or tag-teaming heated debates about their work at screenings (more on that later).
Fanny, Annie & Danny is a darkly comedic story about three adult siblings who are forced by their mother to reunite for a holiday dinner (check out the trailer below). The film has played everywhere from Daytona Beach to Anchorage, garnering phenomenal reviews and awards in the process (for instance, Chris was awarded the 2010 Emerging Filmmaker Award at the Starz Denver Film Festival and Jill won Best Performance at the San Antonio Film Fest as “Fanny”).
Although the accolades are wonderful (and much deserved), Chris and Jill will be the first to agree that attending these festivals in the flesh is just as beneficial as receiving an award or title. At the end of the day, these festivals are about seeing people experience your work, as well as making lasting personal and professional connections that you wouldn’t otherwise be afforded.
It was at their third fest, the Waterfront Film Festival in Saugatuck, Michigan, where I first connected with this refreshingly down-to-earth power couple. Over the few days that followed, I was fortunate enough to see their fantastic film and get an idea about what it means to fully support your own work.
WILL PRESCOTT: Tell me a little bit about your backgrounds. How did you get started in filmmaking (Chris) and acting (Jill)?
CHRIS BROWN: There’s this ridiculous photo of me taken when I was a little kid. I’m maybe two years old, tops. I can barely walk, and yet I’m carrying this big goofy camera around my neck and straining to look at my shoes through the viewfinder. That pretty much sums it up. I was one of those annoying kids with a camera. When I was 10, I finally commandeered my family’s old Super 8 camera so that I could make my first movie (The Werewolf – thankfully unavailable in any form). After that I more or less never stopped making movies. All through junior high, high school, I just kept making these little films. It’s the only thing I’ve ever I wanted to do. After that, I went to film school and here I am today still making my little films. And the funny thing is, that feeling of magic, that thrill, has never dissipated. Being on the set, working with actors, watching dailies, making a cut, constructing a scene, it’s all still totally thrilling to me. This is probably a sad commentary on my basic lack of development!
JILL PIXLEY: I played a froggie in my 2nd grade play and after that, I was pretty much hooked. I graduated to being the bookworm in 4th grade, did musicals in high school, majored in drama at Stanford, then went off to the Neighborhood Playhouse in NYC to study acting. I got headshots taken, continued studying, pounded the pavement, waited lots of tables and did lots of theatre, industrials, and indie films.
WP: How did you two first meet? What’s your current work/life relationship like?
CB: Jill and I met when she auditioned for my first feature (Daughters) a little over 10 years ago.
JP: Such a cliché, huh?
CB: I’d seen countless actors for this part, and a few of them were really good, talented, intelligent, everything. But when Jill came in, she just blew everyone out of the water. I still have my audition notes. In the “comments” section I wrote, “I love her!! She’s in!” During the shoot, I developed a terrible crush on her, and after the shoot we started dating. We got married a few years later. It makes sense that I would marry an actor since I love actors so much. I mean, as a tribe, I just totally love them, revere them.
Anyway, ever since Daughters, I’ve been dying to work with Jill again. In the intervening years, I directed a second feature (Scared New World) and a bunch of shorts, but the right project just never presented itself.
JP: I produced a short film of Chris’ a few years ago (Battleship Contempkin), but Fanny, Annie & Danny is the first feature we’ve worked on as husband & wife, which was tricky, trickier than I thought it would be.
CB: I wrote Fanny, Annie & Danny for Jill. I wrote it for Jill, Colette (Keen who plays Edie) and George (Killingsworth, who plays Ronnie). These three people are some of my favorite actors and I wanted an excuse to work with them again. I wanted to give them some fun parts to play – I wanted to get the band back together! The funny thing is, when I gave Jill the script, she didn’t want to do it!
WP: Seriously?
JP: I read it and [gulps] was terrified. I didn’t think I could pull it off, even tried to convince Chris to look elsewhere for somebody who could do it better.
CB: Yeah, that’s totally true. I was kind of shocked. All this I can see clearly now in hindsight. This isn’t an easy role, not easy at all. There are so many potential pitfalls when playing a character like Fanny [the character is a developmentally disabled 39-year-old]. Make the wrong few choices and you look like an idiot – and then you take the whole film down with you. Meanwhile, there’s the whole issue of working with your spouse.
JP: It’s one thing to take direction from your ‘director-boss.’ But it’s another thing to take direction from your ‘director-boss-husband.’ The intense nature of the script combined with the husband/wife dynamic presented a few challenges we hadn’t really anticipated.
WP: I bet.
CB: It’s hard to leave your husband/wife hat at the door. We had to figure that out along the way, but thank God Jill agreed to be in the movie, and of course she’s just insanely brilliant in the part, just miraculous. I had so little to do with it, really.
JP: Nice props there, but the truth is Chris had an enormous amount to do with it. This is his film, through and through. His baby. We joke that he’s the mom and I’m the dad. He’s nurtured it through its inception, writing, casting, production, editing, and now during the festival/promotion circuit. He’s indefatigable when it comes to film, and this is such a critical trait in a director on set. As an actor, I want someone on the outside keeping an eye on my performance, somebody I trust so that when I go overboard and get something wrong, he’ll be honest and tell me. That happened during the shoot. There were misfires, acting choices I made that, simply put, were horrible. But I knew I could go there, make those strong choices, because Chris had my back. He lets actors play, make discoveries, make mistakes, try again.
WP: Where did the idea for Fanny, Annie & Danny come from?
CB: That’s always such a good question and so hard to answer. There are certainly some very minor personal bits in Fanny, Annie & Danny, a few overheard lines from friends and family, some borrowed character traits, etc. But the world of this film is a totally invented one.
Every film idea begins with the question, “what’s it like?” What’s it like to be this person? I make the film in order to find out.
The characters in Fanny, Annie & Danny just started nagging at me, tormenting me, making me curious, making me laugh. The funny thing is that at first I didn’t realize that these characters were related to each other. When I discovered that, everything instantly fell into place. I was actually preparing a completely different film from another script I’d written when Fanny and the others sort of grabbed me by the throat and demanded I make their movie. So I obeyed.
WP: How long did it take to finish the script?
CB: It took about 6 months to write the script. For me this is terribly fast. I’m usually much slower. This thing kind of flew out of the laptop. The final shooting script was 118 pages long, which really scared me at first. I thought that was way too long. The finished film is only 82 minutes, and almost nothing was cut.
WP: Besides Jill, what was the rest of the casting process like?
CB: I really love the casting process and take my sweet time when I cast a film. For some reason I can’t fathom, filmmakers too often skimp on this crucial stage of production and put themselves in a corner where they are forced, because of the time constraint, to compromise on the quality (and suitability) of the performers. “Oh god, we only have two weeks before we shoot. Let’s just hire X, even though X is completely inappropriate/weak/whatever.” It’s total insanity.
I must quickly mention that Fanny, Annie & Danny wouldn’t be half the film it is without the contribution of my friend, Jessica Heidt, who introduced me to so many amazing Bay Area actors. An excellent director herself, Jessica is the artistic director at the Climate Theater here in San Francisco. Before that, she was the artistic director at the Magic Theater, so she knows the cream of West Coast acting talent.
WP: Were your actors SAG, or–?
CB: Half and half.
WP: So did you work under a SAG low budget contract?
CB: Yep, the Ultra Low Budget contract. And I have to say, it was so much easier than it used to be a few years ago. The new agreement is so simple. Fatna Sallak-Williams, our local SAG rep, couldn’t have been nicer or more helpful. Everyone was paid the same rate, cast and crew, whether they were SAG or not. There were no tiers.
WP: We love to hear that. But didn’t that affect your budget?
CB: Yeah, it affected it pretty severely, but it’s the only fair way to handle it. You can’t have a dual class system on a set. My time isn’t worth any more than your time. Look, no one got rich working for me. Not by a long shot! People worked on Fanny, Annie & Danny because they loved the project and I was very thankful for their participation.
WP:Did you cast any one actor and then build the rest of the cast based on that? Or was it more, “whoever we can get” kind of thing?
CB: I wrote the film for three of the main actors; I auditioned almost everyone else. And I didn’t stop auditioning until I found the perfect actor for every role. In one case, I rewrote the part to better suit an actor. The role of Mrs. Keller was originally written for a much older woman, but when Jessica introduced me to Anne Darragh, I instantly re-wrote the part for her. And the brilliant Nancy Carlin (who plays the band mom in the film) is also a good friend; I’ve wanted to work with Nancy for years.
WP: Any rehearsal? If so, how much and how long before shooting?
CB: I’m embarrassed to say that there was almost no rehearsal. I don’t recommend this method of working to everyone, but personally I enjoy it. I do, however, shoot lots and lots of takes, which really amounts to an on-camera rehearsal period. This is of course one of the advantages to shooting digitally. If you’ve designed your schedule properly, you can shoot every scene until it’s great, until the magic starts to happen. Back in the days of expensive film, we often had to settle for “good” and move on.
JP: Lots and lots and lots of takes. Some actors love this, some find it challenging. For me, it was both. I always appreciate the opportunity to give it another try and make it ‘better.’ But sometimes, all those takes simply wear you down. And I think that was Chris’ idea. He wanted us to break away from any pre-conceived notions we had of a scene, break away from the way we’d heard ourselves say it over and over. Basically, get out of our own way, quit trying to make it ‘better’ and just deal truthfully with the moment of the scene. Chris also had a very specific shooting aesthetic. He shot many of the scenes as whole units, without any cutaways.
WP: Why is that?
CB: Well, for me, a cut breaks the tension. And I didn’t want that tension to break even for a moment. I didn’t want to give the audience that release.
JP: Kinda scary for the actors, since we had to get through these beefy scenes, beginning to end, without any goofs. And for Chris, because he had to make sure he got it before we moved on, since he’d have absolutely nothing to cut to in post. He was seeing the movie evolve in front of him, right there on the set, instead of covering it from every angle and hoping to make sense of it in post.
WP: Was there any improv on set or did everyone stick to the dialogue?
CB: Amazingly there was very little improv, except for one or two scenes. I’m not a big stickler for script accuracy, though. If an actor comes up with a better way of saying something, I’ll go with it.
WP: Talk a little bit about Colette Keen. Where did you find her and how did she inform the role of Edie?
CB: Colette was in my first feature (Daughters), so we’ve been good friends for a long time now. It’s so funny, audiences are just terrified of Edie. And of course Colette is one of the sweetest people on earth, nothing at all like her. The woman has amazing courage. She committed FULLY to the role, without winks or special pleading. Edie is a force of nature. You either love her or hate her. We’ve had some pretty interesting debates after screenings about this!
WP: After Fanny, in what order were the next siblings (Annie and Danny) cast? Can you talk a little bit about working with Carlye and Jonathan?
CB: I could talk about Carlye and Jonathan for days, because I’m just crazy about both of them. I cast Carlye and Jonathan at about the same time, coincidentally, so both of them were new to my filmmaking family. I have Jessica again to thank for introducing me to Jonathan. Carlye, on the other hand, responded to a call I posted on the good ole interwebs, thank God. As did Nick Frangione (Todd), who’s so damn good it’s scary. Yeah, these three actors are so deeply committed to their work, so talented and so much fun on the set. I can’t wait to work with them again.
WP: Jill- what preparation did you do for the roll of Fanny? Any research? Studying? Does she come from anyone in real life?
JP: Fanny evolved as a curious amalgam of people I studied, people I know, and some stuff I just made up. Since she’s developmentally disabled, I did lots of research on various types of disabilities. But I didn’t want it to be only about her disability. I didn’t want to trivialize or simplify or make her one-dimensional. I never wanted her to fit neatly into a box with a pretty label that people could attach and then simply explain her away. People aren’t that neat. They’re messy and complicated and I’ve never known one who fits neatly into a box. Fanny is no exception.
WP: You can definitely feel the history while watching these characters. Was there anything in particular you all did in prep to create that family dynamic on set?
JP: That’s so good to hear because that clash of family is really at the root of the film. Most of the actors didn’t know each other beforehand (only Colette and I had worked together). Some of us paired off before shooting, went out for coffee, hung out, ran lines, that kind of thing. But I tell you, that family dynamic came together on the set.
WP: I understand you’re also a gifted singer and songwriter. Did you also contribute music to the film?
CB: Yeah, I’m a singer-songwriter by night. I released my first CD a few years ago (Now That You’re Fed). Music and film just go naturally together, the two art forms are such close cousins, really.
Regarding the music in the film, Jill wrote the Fanny song, and I wrote the Christmas songs. It was a defensive act, really; I just didn’t want to have to pay for music/recording rights! So rather than using standard Christmas songs, I just wrote my own. Most of the cast and crew thought that these were traditional Christmas songs.
WP: Can you talk a little bit about Morgan Schmidt-Feng? How did he become attached? What was the working relationship like?
CB: Morgan and I have been friends for years. Rick’s book Feature Filmmaking at Used Car Prices was my bible as a student. Morgan has produced many of my films and our working relationship is great. We’re friends and business partners, in that order. Morgan has a very deep understanding of film and he’s one of the very few people I trust to read a script or view a cut. His notes are always extremely helpful. On the production level, it’s Morgan who puts the package together, who assembles much of the crew, who helps make it all happen. I couldn’t do it without him.
WP: Can you speak on the budget and funding process?
CB: It’s so nice of you to refer to it as a “budget.” By any standard, our budget was very modest. One of the age-old rules of Hollywood filmmaking is that you should never, ever put your own money into a project. Of course I put all of my money into all of my projects. My feeling is that if you’re not willing to risk your own neck, how can you ask other people to risk theirs? We had a group of investors that pitched in sizeable amounts of money and/or in-kind contributions, but most of the money investedwas my own. Happily free from children and mortgage, I am able (and apparently willing) to sink every dime I make into my work. This isn’t always an ideal funding model, but if I’m frugal and persistent, it means that I get to make my movie.
If you’re not careful, you can sort of lose yourself in the fund-raising process. I’ve seen so many people raise money for years, make a trailer, shoot for a few days to get some sample scenes on film, do another round of fundraising, rewrite the script for the 100th time, and on and on. Meanwhile they lose all interest in the actual film, they forget what made them excited about the project; all that initial passion and urgency just drains away. At some point, you just have to go make the damn movie!
WP: What was the shooting format?
CB: We shot in DVCPRO HD, a great, robust HD format that, unlike many other flavors of HD, stands up nicely to all sorts of intricate post work.
WP: And where was it shot primarily?
CB: We shot the entire film in and around the San Francisco Bay Area – San Francisco, Berkeley, Hayward, Tracy, San Rafael, Oakland.
WP: Was the post process long? Any pick-ups or re-shoots?
CB: It took me almost a year to edit the film, partly because I’m fussy, and partly because my day job eats up a lot of time.
Regarding pick-ups, I have to confess, there was one scene that I had to shoot three times. I won’t identify it, because I don’t want to bias the jury.
WP: How about the rest of the crew? Any MVPs or standouts worth noting?
CB: We had many standouts, many MVPs. Dan Diaz and his lovely wife Marcy came through like heroes in many ways. Dan and his company Atlas Production Services, provided much of our lighting and grip equipment. Dan did much of our sound recording, and helped out in a number of crucial ways.
Russell Ramos, our location manager, was totally invaluable and lots of fun to work with. I must also acknowledge our gaffer, David Feiten. David is an extremely gifted writer and animator (he’s worked for Disney, among others) who kindly volunteered to be our gaffer.
One of the major MVPs in the whole production was my good friend and film school buddy, André Fenley, who was our sound editor. André has worked at Skywalker Sound since the 1990s and he knows so much about sound. He’s taught me a lot. I mean, the guy has worked on the soundtracks to some of the most sonically brilliant films of the past 15 years — Iron Man, Minority Report, Munich, AI, Fight Club. A lot of viewers have commented on the film’s sound design. All credit goes to André.
WP: And Skywalker Sound did the mix?
CB: Yep.
WP: Wow. How’d you score that?
CB: Again, all credit goes to André. He showed the film to his colleagues at Skywalker and to my amazement everyone loved it and wanted to support it. Everyone there was just so nice, so generous. We even ran into George at lunch one day. That was a trip. I had to fight the urge to get him to autograph my C3PO action figure.
I’d been up to the ranch before, but I’d never had the pleasure of being there with my own project. It was a total, crazy thrill. We mixed in the Stanley Kubrick mixing room!
WP: You’ve played at a ton of festivals in a short amount of time. What’s been the audience’s response?
CB: Amazing, just amazing. And so personal. That’s the thing that’s surprised us the most. After every screening, people come up to talk to us about their own families, their own brother/sister/mother/father. And in so many cases, it’s obvious that these people don’t have anyone to talk to about this. For us, this is a real privilege. The film has opened the subject up, has given them an opportunity to tell their own stories. It seems to be touching this nerve everywhere we go.
WP: I understand that there have been some heated debates at screenings.
CB: Yeah, it’s gotten dicey at times. An argument broke out at a screening last month about whether the film was a comedy or tragedy. Neither side would budge. I thought it was going to turn bloody! There have been other controversies, but I don’t want to give anything away.
WP: What do you think the film is? Comedy or tragedy?
CB: I’ll never tell!
WP: Can we expect see it on DVD or On Demand anytime soon?
CB: It’s still sort of early in the game, but, yes, we’ll definitely have a DVD release in a few months. And I love the On Demand model too. We’ve been in discussion with a few producers’ reps, too.
WP: What’s your general attitude towards production?
CB: No matter what happens, KEEP SHOOTING! Something weird happens every day. The trick is to keep shooting. No matter what happens, keep shooting, get creative, turn that potential disaster into an opportunity. And whatever happens, you must NEVER cancel a shoot! Planning a single day of shooting is a lot like planning a wedding. There are hundreds of logistical puzzle pieces that need to be considered, weighed, arranged and composed weeks in advance and they all need to fit together in a very specific way. By extension, planning a 25 day shoot is like planning 25 weddings. If you cancel even one day, you can throw your entire shoot into chaos and put the film seriously at risk. I’m almost superstitious about this. I’ve never cancelled a shoot day ever. Fanny, Annie & Danny, was scheduled to be a (for me relatively luxurious) 25 day shoot. We finished it in 23 days.
WP: What’s up next for you two? Next film, next acting gig? You guys ready to retire or just getting started?
CB: Oh geez, we’re just getting started! You know, it’s funny, for as many films as I’ve made, it feels like my first time out every time. I have my next film ready to go, actually. It’s definitely another obsession, something completely different for me and hopefully for the audience. It’s kind of a risky subject. I can’t talk about it, unfortunately. But I’m totally excited about it. We already have one investor who’s come aboard based on Fanny, Annie & Danny, so that’s pretty cool, but we’ll need a few others. It’ll require a slightly larger budget, but I still want to keep the production lean and mean.
WP: Lastly, I noticed you were both wearing some AMAZING sunglasses. Seriously. Where the hell can I buy a pair?
JP:Allynscura.com. A husband-and-wife team who design and collect frames and have the coolest selection around. We’ve been fans for years!
WP: How about that. Another husband-and-wife team. Very fitting!
For more information on Fanny, Annie & Danny, check out the official website as well as the Facebook Page. If you’re an independent filmmaker or know of an independent filmmaker we should interview, email blogadmin@sagindie.org for consideration.
