|
The following interview was recreated with permission from
IndieWIRE. The original
interview was authored by Jessica Hundley and published by indieWIRE
on 24/Oct/01.
|
|
Question 1: "Start by telling us a little about your
experience at USC. Do you feel like it was a good
decision or do you think that film school was a waste
of time and money?"
|
|
|
Film school for me was absolutely worth it.
I don't think it's necessary for everyone,
but for me, it was absolutely necessary. I
think it's what you make it and I made the most of it.
It can be a worthless experience, depending on
how you approach things and I really took advantage
of what was there for me. And I walked away feeling
like my parents got their money's worth
|
|
|
Question 2: "What, exactly, was there for you?
What was your most valid experience?"
|
|
|
I was always a movie geek growing up,
but it wasn't until film school that
I became aware of a lot of filmmakers
that have since influenced me, like Kubrick or
Truffaut, a lot the foreign filmmakers.
I grew up in Virginia, weaned on Zemekis
and Spielberg and Ridley Scott and that's
what got me started wanting to be a filmmaker.
Then USC provided a little bit broader
spectrum. It was the difference between being
a fan and being a student. It's always great to
be both, sometimes people forget to be a fan and
they just become so much the student that they
lose their love for the popcorn films, which I
certainly never would lose.
Going to USC was a good decision in that it
also got me to LA. It's difficult to
get started in this business outside of Los Angeles.
I came out for college and haven't left
since. I met my producer, Sean, in college;
he produced my grad film and then started
working for New Line. He was the only
person I really knew within the industry.
When I wrote "Darko," Sean was able to hook
me up to an agent.
|
|
|
Question 3: "Coming at the industry as not only
an outsider, but as an outsider with very little
experience, you obviously met a lot of resistance.
Do you feel like in the end you were able to make
your film because ultimately good ideas are
recognized in Hollywood, despite views to the contrary?"
|
|
|
Definitely. As long as you've got the talent,
that's what matters most. There's a lot to be
gained from knowing people. But I didn't know
anyone. My parents, my grandparents aren't in
this industry. I knew no one. It's all about the
material in the end and luckily there were a
lot of people that thought my material was good
and I was lead into the inner circle pretty quickly
and I'm really thankful for that. Really in the
end, all that matters is the material and not
letting it be corrupted and not giving it away.
At first, I would walk into a room with Sean and
they would just start laughing, 'Who are these
guys! Come back in five years when you actually
have some kind of experience!' It was pretty
ridiculous there for awhile, trying to get people
to let me make this movie. If I say, 'Yeah, I
directed a movie,' a lot of people still think I'm
some creep who is totally full of shit. It's absurd to
think that I've gotten to do this at this age, but I've
worked really hard for it and there's nothing else that
I think I can do. I have no other skills. If this
writer-director thing doesn't work out I'm pretty much screwed.
|
|
|
Question 4: "Tell us about getting involved with Flower Films."
|
|
|
Well, originally Jason Schwartzman was
involved in the project but he had
to eventually back out because of
another film. But his agent sent it to
Flower and Nancy and Drew read it and
immediately loved it. I got a meeting with
them and I asked Drew if she would play the
teacher and she asked if they could be
involved in making this film and that was
it. Once we had Flower on board we pretty
much secured the financing. And everything
in my life changed after that meeting.
|
|
|
Question 5: "Do you feel like Hollywood is
reaching another cycle of change, that the
"old guard" is being replaced in some ways?"
|
|
|
There are a lot of really exciting
independent filmmakers who are starting
to take the studio system by storm and I
think that that's great. You're starting
to see a new crop of auteurs emerging. I
think it's all about holding on to your
sensibility and to your ideals and developing
your material and protecting it. It's
really that simple. You have to work as
hard as you can to keep the system from
corrupting you. It's really tough in the
beginning and it's kind of a miracle that
I've been able to pull this movie off.
Because it's not an easy movie to sell on
the page and it was not an easy movie to
sell to a distributor. There was about four
months there when I really had no idea what
was going to happen to my movie. You work so
hard on something for two years of your
life and to not know what's going to
happen to it is a little frightening.
But in the end I couldn't be happier with
Newmarket and the way that they've handled
it so far. I hope it finds an audience.
|
|
|
Question 6: "Were you under any pressure to change the
film, given the content, in reaction to the terrorist events?"
|
|
|
No. We did pull a couple of shots out of
the trailer, shots involving a jet engine
were pulled. In terms of the context of
the film itself, it's a period piece.
It's a dark movie that asks a lot of questions.
But once the dust settled a bit and we were able
to kind of regroup and think about how the movie
would be affected by the events, we all felt that
the movie stands on it's own. Every movie is going
to be looked at differently from now on, based on
what's happened and I think we just need to be able
to continue to tell the same kind of stories
we've always wanted to tell and not let our
perceptions be damaged and not shy away
from provocative ideas. Because now I
think we can look at art in a way that we
haven't looked at it before. The lens has
changed slightly and I just hope that
we continue to not shy away from provocative
subject matter, because I think that's
important subject matter.
|
|
|
Question 7: "You did re-edit the film from
its Sundance incarnation, is that right?"
|
|
|
Yeah, we had barely finished in time
for Sundance. We had never showed it
to an audience before, so after those
screenings I went back and tightened
it up a bit. We pulled a couple things
out. We added a couple new things. And I'm
happy with what became the end result.
There are always some painful things to
pull out that thankfully you'll be
able to put it back with the DVD. I'm
really grateful to have had the time to
really finish the film and Newmarket was
really supportive. They understood the
film and they believed in it. It's great
to have that relationship with your
distributor, because things can get
really ugly when they don't. That's
when you want to pull your hair out and
leave town. I think that Newmarket had an
amazing experience with "Memento." No
one wanted that film, but they recognized
that they had an amazing film and they
didn't underestimate the audience's
ability to comprehend provocative and
complex stories and they reaped the
reward for taking that chance. I always
applaud the little guy who sticks his neck
out when no one else is willing to. I think
we definitely ended up at the right place.
|
|
|
Question 8: " It's interesting because it seems
in the film industry the "little guy" does reap
the rewards and then he becomes the "big guy"
and stops taking chances. Then the whole cycle
starts again."
|
|
|
It's true. No matter how successful or
unsuccessful I am in my career
I think I'll always have that underdog mentality
, because ultimately I think every film I
make will have that feel. If this one does
well in any way or performs moderately, I
would hope that it would allow me to make more
of these kinds of movies. Even with big studios.
I would love to be able to alternate between
making big studio films and independent
releases. The term independent has become murkier
than ever anyway. Ultimately I would hope that
all my films would continue to be independent in
spirit, regardless of who's financing.
|
|