MIDNITES FOR MANIACS—Diablo Cody On Jennifer's Body (2009)

As part of his "Sheroes" triple bill on Friday, June 11, 2010, Midnites for Maniacs host Jesse Hawthorne Ficks welcomed Oscar®-winning screenwriter Diablo Cody to the Castro Theatre stage to talk about her script for Jennifer's Body (2009). Before inviting Cody on stage, Ficks reminded his rowdy audience that Midnites for Maniacs "is a film series about underrated and overlooked films and watching them in a neo-sincere way." Ficks defined neo-sincerity as "post-ironic" where "you know you can make fun of something if you want to; but, you don't really need to" and you can—in this hate-free zone—admit geeky love for a film like Jennifer's Body. Sure, Ficks admitted, some people weren't there to see Jennifer's Body because they think they don't like Megan Fox and, yes, it's true, Megan Fox polarizes people; but, usually only those who don't want to admit that they want to have sex with her or become her. Or, as I shouted out, both. At Midnites for Maniacs, Jennifer's Body becomes a film to be celebrated, and what better way to celebrate than with the story's creator? Shockingly, Ficks announced that Jennifer's Body would be shown in HD cinema because—though no less than a year or so after its release—no 35mm prints of the film currently exist, having all been destroyed by the studio. What the....?

On Cody's Expectations of Jennifer's Body

I feel like I need to be honest in this case. I actually had dinner with Karyn Kusama last night, the director of this movie. Neither of us expected the film to be a blockbuster. We were surprised by the studio's expectations. They thought this was going to be this great big Megan Fox movie and we were like, "Have you seen it? It's weird. It's a weird movie and there are a lot of people who are not necessarily going to be loving it." We kind of loved that it was polarizing because we're freaks. I was maybe disappointed [in the box office] but certainly not shocked.

On Whether Jennifer's Body

Is A Feminist Horror Film

We were proud of what we were doing because there aren't a lot of situations where you have a female screenwriter and a female director making a mainstream horror movie that's going to be at the mall. A "feminist horror movie"? Yeah, that was our point, for sure. We were trying to turn the genre on its ear.

One thing I'm obsessed with is that I don't think women are allowed to be anti-heroes. They're not allowed to be flawed. The same week, for instance, that Megan got lambasted for talking about Michael Bay, Shia LeBouf—who I also like as an actor—came out and started sassing about another director and he's [seen] as refreshing and honest while Megan is seen as this horrible bimbo who should never work again. That's the way those two stories were interpreted and it had never been more obvious to me how aggravating it is that women are not allowed to be as complicated as men. We get shoved into these little boxes. It's weird. I've experienced it myself.

On Whether We are In

A "Post-Gender" Environment

No way. I think we're less post-gender than we were 10 years ago. It's getting worse. It's such a big global thing to discuss that I wouldn't even know how to express it. I work in Hollywood. The Kathryn Bigelow thing was awesome—that was a great thing to happen—but, it's difficult to be a female filmmaker and, believe me, nobody wants you to impress your feminist agenda on their nice clean celluloid. It doesn't sell.

On Whether Jennifer's Body

Isn't Funny Enough or Scary Enough

Probably true on both counts. I do think it's not scary enough; but, you have to understand, ordinarily when you make a movie you have these test screenings, which are horrible. You go to some large shopping mall cinema in Huntington Beach, California, they bring in a bunch of kids, put them in the front—you have to sit in the back so they can't turn back and see you—and at the end of the movie they fill out these little sheets. Most of the time you do that once because it's expensive; but, we had to do it about four or five times because the scores were so horrendous. I kept a lot of the score sheets because they had these incredibly articulate criticisms going on, like one said, "Need more bewbs." They misspelled boobs! The studio's looking at these going, "We need more boobs, lady." What you ultimately see in the movie—and I think it's cool—is a neutered version of what we had originally planned. It's not scary enough but I do think it's pretty funny, though.

Originally, I wanted it to be intense, poignant and dramatic. Then, as I wrote it, I found humor creeping in and it started to become campy. I decided to go with that; but, that was not something that I originally had in mind.

On Whether Her Script Was Questioned

Constantly. Here's the thing: would this movie have been made in this incarnation in this script at an earlier time in my career? Absolutely not. I had just won the award for Juno—and let's not talk about it—but, it was really a strange time. Honestly, for six weeks of my life I had carte blanche. I would say, "This is another script I wrote" and they'd say, "Okay!" I couldn't get away with that now and I couldn't have gotten away with it five years ago. They would have turned it into something a lot more high concept and digestible; but, I was able to do that at that time. It's kind of a miracle that Jennifer's Body exists.

On Whether She Had Actors

In Mind Writing the Script

I did not have any cast in mind. I have the superstition—actually, it's realism—that when I write something I never try to imagine anybody wanting to do this. You'll definitely be let down. So I write with this sort of pre-existing belief that my script will never see the light of day and my career is over. That way I'm pleasantly surprised.

On Whether the Cast

Was Behind the Finished Film

The actors were actually really supportive. Adam Brody loves this movie. I remember the first time he saw it, he came out saying, "This is the most awesome thing I've ever done" and I was like "Bless you." Megan was into it. Megan's mysterious, you can't always tell what she's into, but she'll tell you if she hates something. She didn't hate it, for sure, or I would have heard of it bigtime. I think Megan liked it and Amanda is just an unbelievably sweet person. The actors honestly seemed to be behind the movie, which is nice because that's not always the case.

On Megan Fox

People really hate Megan, right? I think that's interesting. She's a really nice girl. She really is. She's just outspoken. We all know that will get your ass in hot water real fast. You'd think everyone would be on her side for criticizing Michael Bay, right? I don't understand the whole thing. I felt it was really extreme.

Jennifer's Body got made because Megan Fox agreed to do it. There was this moment after Transformers came out where it was like, "Who is this girl?" She was a white hot energy. She read the script and agreed to play Jennifer and it was like—boom!—Fox will make this movie. It wasn't even a situation like she auditioned, she was just cast as Jennifer, which happens occasionally when you get somebody who's so sought after. Honestly, at the time, it was kind of a shock and overwhelming and exciting. I couldn't believe that I was going to get to make my movie. I just thought, "I hope this works out." Then when I saw her acting with Amanda, I was immediately not worried. Maybe I should have been? Because all I had to go by were these scenes of her fixing a car in Transformers, looking hot. But I had this blind faith that she'd be a good lead, and she was.

On the Failure to Market Amanda Seyfried

Amanda, the star of the movie, is not on the poster. I know that the belief was that she was not going to bring anybody in and now she's made three hit movies since then, which is kind of like, "Hmmmmm. Interesting."

On Making A Horror Film

I would like to do this again if I'm ever given the opportunity, which I'm not so sure I will; but, I would like to. I'm not one of these people into totally excessive gore or anything but the original script for this movie had a lot of jump scares. Somebody got eviscerated and it wasn't shown in shadow puppetry. A lot of the scenes in the movie that the female members [in the Huntington Beach preview screening] responded to wound up cut because—for some reason—the focus was on getting 14 to 18-year-old guys to like this movie. I mean, I like 14 to 18-year-old guys, some of you are brilliant, I know this, but you weren't in Huntington Beach.

One tactical error we made that actually turned out to be kind of cool is that nobody who worked on the film had ever done anything pertaining to horror, ever. Karyn had never made a horror movie, I had never written one, and our producers had never been involved. I love Jason Reitman but you don't want to sit with the guy and talk about what's scary. We didn't have anyone on the set who had any input on how to make a horror film. I think that's why the movie is so awesomely weird. We couldn't have adhered to the genre conventions if we tried. We just didn't know enough.

Horror movies have rules, that's what people would say to me. If you've seen Scream, they even parody that. This happens because of this. This movie does not have rules, it doesn't have logic, and so you have to decide why Jennifer is eating boys. So I said, "Okay, I'll think of something a little bit Scooby-doo." That's when I made up that whole concept of, "Oh, she's not actually a virgin so they fucked up the whole ritual." There's something specific about the horror genre where people demand logic. Sometimes I wish I could be European so I could be like, "That's the way it is." In America everyone wants to know why shit happens all the time.

On What Movies Inspired

And/Or Influenced Jennifer's Body

Visually, we looked at a lot of the Italian horror movies, the giallo. I love Dario Argento. Oh my God! I got to talk to him about Jennifer's Body a few months ago and that was an intense experience for me. [Using an Italian accent] He said he liked it! I was in Italy at a film festival and I ran into him in the lobby. It was a thrill. You want to run into Dario Argento in the lobby.

In terms of content, obviously Karyn and I both love Carrie. But in a lot of ways, rather than being an homage, Jennifer's Body is more reactionary. We saw something we didn't like and said, "Let's not do that."

I love The Evil Dead. We have the poster up as a shout-out and then Needy's line when she says, "Is that my Evil Dead t-shirt?", a lot of people interpret that as a wink to The Evil Dead; but, actually, "my" is the operative word in that sentence. It's like, "Oh, she wears her clothes too? What a bitch."

On Whether Buffy, The Vampire Slayer Influenced

The Relationship Between Jennifer and Needy

I've never seen Buffy, though I know I need to. I'm a huge fan of Firefly. I think Josh Whedon is amazing. By the way, what an awesome idea to take the Buffy, the Vampire Slayer movie—which didn't do so hot—and turn it into a totally successful TV show. I wish that could happen to me, if there are any network executives here.

On Whether There Was A Lesbian Relationship

Between Jennifer and Needy

There was. Honestly, I think that the people in power were not interested in the richness of relationships, sexual or otherwise. I don't think that was a priority. In addition to that, there's a lot of connective tissue that's missing from the movie. There's a reason why Jennifer was fucking a police officer. Because of that, she had protection throughout this entire story; but, that was cut out. It's gone. Chris Pratt was so funny as the cop and now that's not in the film anymore; it's frustrating.

I had always believed that Needy loved Jennifer, moreso than Chip (Johnny Simmons). I wanted their relationship to be read as romantic. I hope it comes off that way. That's why it's strange for me when people say, "Oh, there's this random kiss" because there isn't anything random about it. I think if the characters were a boy and a girl, no one would think there was anything random about it. These two people had chemistry leading up to that. I'd always written in that they had this girly kind of Sixth Sense connection, which was another argument I made: why can't they just be connected in that way?

On Courtney Love's Theme Song

I don't know what happened but Courtney didn't write the song I thought she would. I can't remember what the complication was. Courtney is a friend of mine and her opinion about the movie has vacillated a bit. She's into it now. Check back next week. It's a creepy song. It's sort of like a horror movie.

On Narrative Similarities

to The United States of Tara

Actually, I feel like many of the things that I've done in my vast decade-long career have dealt with—not just similar things—but, the exact same thing of being female and not being able to decide what kind of female you want to be. In Tara, it's very literal. In Jennifer, it's creepier. Juno was kind of the same thing, but opposite sides of the same coin.

I like the second season of Tara a lot more than the first because before the first season I'd never done any television at all—I was learning and listening—and the second season I kind of turned into a bitch. I was more adamant about what I wanted, which was the kind of show I wanted to watch. We've grown into something that I can be proud of.

On the Naturalness of the Gay Character

in United States of Tara

I have to credit Showtime because at other networks that would not have been allowed. They would have had to turn it into the after school special.

On Whether Teenage Girls Are Really Clever

I hate that critique. Some people are just idiots. It's so condescending to say that. "Your characters should be less articulate to reflect our youth." What they are saying about teenagers is horrible and the people who are saying that are not spending time with teenagers.

On Her Sweet, Sensitive Male Characters

Honestly, I don't know how to write impressive men because my dad and my brother are both these two sensitive guys who get in fights and cry all the time. That's the model for me. That's all I know.

On Young Adult

[Scheduled for production in 2013 according to IMDb, Young Adult] is a weird script about a woman who has a mental break and decides she wants to return to the time in her life when she was happiest, so she ends up stalking her highschool sweetheart in earnest. It's deep. [Laughs.] I hope I can get it made; but, it's difficult because it is a small story. I'm hoping somebody will take a chance.

On Whether She Will Direct In the Future

The one sort of very strange thing about my career trajectory is, like, I don't direct. I really feel like I wanted Karyn to get her due as the director of this film and I'm sure she has a specific director's vision; but, I just write. I'm sure I have a final draft copy in the computer somewhere that reflects how I would want [a film] to come out; but, definitely not [from the perspective of a director].

I don't know when I'll direct. I'm so scared. It's a completely different skill set from what I do. I'm really solitary. Directing is like you're the coach, you're the captain of the team, and it really intimidates me. It's surprising to me how many writers freely make the jump into directors. In fact, most writers aspire to be directors. I would like to do it; but, I'm really dragging my feet.

Cross-published on Twitch.

SFIFF53: ROGER EBERT TRIBUTE

Roger Ebert was the distinguished recipient of the Mel Novikoff Award at this year's edition of the San Francisco International Film Festival (SFIFF53). The presiding theme that ran throughout the celebratory evening held at San Francisco's historic Castro Theatre was that—at a time when (as Jason Sanders states it in his tribute essay) "the future of film criticism remains a real question"—Ebert has proven by example that film criticism's role in championing the work of new filmmakers has kickstarted many a career and encouraged others to hone their craft. To prove that point, the San Francisco Film Society invited four guests whose directorial careers have been personally encouraged by Ebert to share their thoughts: Philip Kaufman (The Right Stuff, Henry & June), Errol Morris (The Fog of War, The Thin Blue Line), Jason Reitman (Up in the Air, Juno) and Terry Zwigoff (Ghost World, Crumb).

Letter From Tilda Swinton

One guest who had been invited but was unable to attend due to a conflict in her filming schedule was festival favorite Tilda Swinton, whose brave performance in Erick Zonca's Julia was singled out by Ebert for reconsideration. In lieu of attendance, Swinton forwarded a letter to Ebert, which Program Director Rachel Rosen read to the audience:

"Dear Roger: I cannot tell you how sad I am to miss out on our San Francisco moment. I am—as my daughter would describe her dog when it pines—'pretty low to the ground' about the whole thing. Were it not that I'm in Connecticut shooting what I sincerely hope is a great film with Lynne Ramsay, and were there flights that existed that could get me there and back between the end of a Friday night shoot and an early call on Monday without our company suffering one collective heart attack, you know I would be there.

"You do me and Julia such great honor. Such a beloved film for me and all those who made it. Your support has kept us warm over the past months. The witness you provide for this kind of work is incalculably valuable to all filmmakers working outside the frame of studio movie's muscle and your inexhaustible passion as a film fan means everything. Tilda."

Terry Zwigoff

Introducing Terry Zwigoff as a "director who makes a specialty of literate antisocial oddballs", Rachel Rosen qualified: "that he does it with comedy takes more guts than doing it in tragedy."

"I make films about 'antisocial oddballs'?" Zwigoff countered behind the podium. "I guess that's fair. You write about what you know. I'm actually so antisocial myself these days I find it very difficult to watch a film in a theater among other people. I'm not saying that to be self-serving; it's just the truth. I feel very uncomfortable and I prefer, these days, to watch films at home, especially comedies. I know Roger prefers that communal audience experience—he's a much more well-adjusted, sane person—but, I really can't stand it when I go to a film and the audience starts laughing at something I don't find funny and when they don't laugh at something I do find funny. It's a very alienating experience for me and I'm alienated enough, so.... But whenever I watch a film at home, I got into this habit of wanting to talk or think about it with somebody and, of course, the guy I always choose to think about is Mr. Ebert. I can go to the computer and hope that he has written a review of what I've just watched. Why do I do this? I'm not even sure to tell you the truth because I don't fully agree with him; but, why I do it is because he's a great writer.

"I brought something to read and I hope he doesn't mind but it's part of a review that he wrote for one of my favorite films, which is Army of Shadows: 'Jean-Pierre Melville's Army of Shadows is about members of the French Resistance who persist in the face of despair. Rarely has a film shown so truly that place in the heart where hope lives with fatalism. It is not a film about daring raids and exploding trains, but about cold, hungry, desperate men and women who move invisibly through the Nazi occupation of France. Their army is indeed made of shadows: They use false names, they have no addresses, they can be betrayed in an instant by a traitor or an accident. They know they will probably die. This is not a war film. It is about a state of mind. ...[A]bout the war within the minds of Resistance members, who must live with constant fear, persist in the face of futility, accept the deaths of their comrades and expect no reward, except the knowledge that they are doing the right thing. ...Their immediate commander is Philippe Gerbier, played by Lino Ventura with a hawk nose and physical bulk, introspection and implacable determination. To overact for Ventura would be an embarrassment.' That's like the greatest line I've ever heard: 'To overact for Ventura would be an embarrassment.' People forget that Roger is a very funny writer as well as a smart one. I know that's known without my reading that.

"I often times read things he's written and take on a new appreciation for something I've seen, and watch it again, and learn something. Anyway, I'm so socially retarded that I don't think I've ever become friends with Roger in the traditional sense. I don't know him very well personally so I don't have very many anecdotes to share. I had dinner with Roger and Chaz once, but Malkovich's whole crazy family was there.... He's interviewed me a couple of times. He's had me at Ebertfest. I don't know, part of it's—I guess—that you have to keep a little bit of a professional distance if a guy's reviewing your films as well.

"I first met him at the Telluride Film Festival in 1984 where I had my first film Louie Bluie and I had only been accepted in one other film festival before that; it was down at Filmex, which is now called the L.A. Film Festival. I think 12 people showed up to see the film down there. So I didn't expect much when I went to Telluride; but, one of the people in line to see the film was Roger Ebert, which was a big deal to me. I remember I was in the lobby selling LPs—that sort of dates the whole thing; but, at least they weren't 78s—and they were soundtracks to the film Louie Bluie. Roger wanted to buy a few. He came up and I said, 'Just take a few, man, take some.' He seemed rather put off and rather irritated by that because maybe he thought I was trying to bribe him or something.

"I guess the biggest criticism I have of Roger is that his reviews are often too easy on films, except for my films of course—he could never be too easy on them—but, the guy loves films so much that it's almost contagious. He's open, he's smart, he's thoughtful, he's always very clear, and he's got a really good heart and—like I said—he's really funny, which is hard to do as a writer. He manages to make you think critically without making it seem like homework. God knows the world needs more people thinking critically these days about a lot of things.

"Finally, I'm going to tell a short story for Roger's benefit that he's never heard and that probably most of you have never heard. I don't tell many people this; but, I get a kick out of it so what the hell? When I made my film Crumb years ago, my executive producer Lynn O'Donnell suggested that we have a few informal test screenings before we locked picture. She wanted some feedback from an audience and so she got about 200 people to come and she handed the audience survey cards. They would ask you things like: What do you like most about the film? Do you like this? Is it too long? Too short? That sort of thing. After the screening was over, I realized it hadn't gone very well and so I went up to Lynn and I said, 'You know what? Let me take those cards home with me and read them over tonight and I'll give them back to you tomorrow morning.' She said, 'Okay.' So I took them home.

"I was mortified reading the cards because they were unanimously down on the film. The consensus was that I should take Robert Crumb's brothers out of the film, which to me was the whole point of the film. But everyone wanted to go in a more cheery, upbeat direction, and spend most of the time on underground comic books or something, which I had no interest in. So I thought, 'Well, I better take a few of these cards and fill in my own comments to balance this out.' I knew I wasn't going to be able to find any blank cards so I took some Wite-Out and I whited out their comments, then I went down to Kinkos and I Xeroxed about a hundred of these things. I came home and got a bunch of different pens and tried to disguise my handwriting on these cards and wrote, 'Oh, the brothers were great! More of them!'

"Eventually, we had one more screening and I couldn't do that again and, luckily, at that test screening this guy Walter Murch came and everybody felt the same way except him; but, he had enough clout as an Oscar®-winning editor to just say, 'Y'know, the film is great. Just leave it alone.' He went on beyond that to do a free sound mix for me, because we had no money.

"So we locked picture and started submitting it to film festivals and everyone turned us down. Eventually, somehow, the New York Film Festival let us in and it did well there. Roger and his ol' pal Gene Siskel saw it and they started championing the film on their show. They got it on there three or four times. The first time they did an early review to encourage theaters to actually book the film. Then after that they did it again when it came out to review it. And after that to remind people to go see the film. Eventually, by then all the other critics had gone along and come out for it. Ultimately Roger argued for it at Oscar® time and eventually it made its way onto Roger's list of great films, which was probably a greater thrill for me than winning the Oscar® itself.

"A few years ago Roger did a commentary for the film. The truth of the matter is that Sony Pictures had done a poor transfer the first time they did it and I had been on their case to correct it. Ever since then they sort of made it clear that—if they were going to do that—they wanted me to do a commentary and that's how I could pay them back for all the expense. But I just wasn't comfortable doing a commentary for a film. I think it takes the mystery and the magic out of it and it diminishes the film sometimes if you're not careful. So I was a little reluctant to do it, but I said, 'Y'know, why can't Roger Ebert do it? He could talk about this film. He knows it pretty well.' They said, 'Okay. That's a great suggestion.' So they called Roger and Roger agreed to do it and I said, 'Great! I'm off the hook.' And they said, 'No. You have to do it as a conversation with Roger.' So Roger came and we did this commentary and I tried to sit there the whole time and not say anything. I let him talk. I later found out they had used a lot of his voice from that DVD commentary to help restore his computer voice, which was great.

"Anyway, it's been my greatest hope and fondest joy to talk about Mr. Ebert here. Again, I'm glad he's been given this award. He truly deserves it."

Errol Morris

"It's an honor for me to be here tonight. Roger Ebert has given out so many awards to so many filmmakers, it's nice to be part of giving him an award this time around. Anybody who's done this long enough knows that there are two, three, four people who have made an extraordinary difference in their careers for many many many reasons. For me, Roger is most certainly one of those people. He champions unlikely films. His own film festival is the perfect example of this. It's my perfect trophy, by the way, the thumbs up. ...It's something I'm very very proud of, although I was disappointed to find out it was not Roger's thumb.

"I had made my first film Gates of Heaven. I think this is true many many films later, you don't really know if they're good or bad. You really depend on someone to tell you that they're not as bad as you might think and, in fact, they might be good! For me, very early in my career Roger Ebert—because my film went to the New York Film Festival; I was really lucky to be accepted—but, there was a newspaper strike that year in New York so no one read about the film. And then out of seemingly nowhere these reviews appeared on television and in the newspaper from Roger and Gene Siskel, almost as if he would not give up. In fact, he hasn't given up—I think it's now something like 30 years—his obsession with this film and other films I've made. I owe him an enormous debt of gratitude.

"What do you hope for when you make a film? That someone out there will appreciate it, perhaps see it in a kindly light, or maybe see things in it that you saw in it, or maybe even see things in it that you never even noticed. It's truly a blessing and Roger has certainly played that role in my life over the years. For that alone—aside from all the great writing and the great criticism—I am grateful.

"It also occurred to me—I will be brief—that there's something very odd about this man. He's not really just a film critic. He's also an icon, quite clearly. I remember when I first met him—I believe I first met him at the Cannes Film Festival years and years ago—I was told, 'Y'know, Roger always writes about his experiences at Cannes' and I read the one from that year. I remember saying to my wife at the time, 'This guy writes really really well.' And it's absolutely true. He's an extraordinary writer. If I call him 'kind', it seems like it's the wrong way to put it; but, he's an enthusiast and a person who is very much a person of conviction....

"So it's an enormous privilege for me to be here. He means—and continues to be—a lot to me. He's mastered every form of this sort of thing: as a writer, as a newspaper man, as a television personality, now as a blogger, and I'm sure that—if in the future there is a new kind of media that is developed—he will master that as well."

Jason Reitman

"Terry, I have one word of advice for when you're in a movie theater and they are laughing at the thing that's not funny. It's something I do when my wife drags me to a horrible romantic comedy. You just have to laugh three times as loud and talk about what's happening on the screen: 'Oh my God! She doesn't know that he's already in the bathroom!' And just get bigger and bigger and bigger. You can own that film.

"It's hard to give context for the life of Roger Ebert when it is he who has given us all context. He is America's critic. He's one of the few people who comprises our cinematic voice of record. He is ... 'The Thumb.' It's almost hard to come up with what we're supposed to say. Roger's name alone stands for his great writing, his criticism, all his contributions that have lived so far beyond them. One would think one could say, 'Now the Mel Novikoff Award goes to Roger Ebert' and that would be it.

"A few times a year Roger will choose a film, sometimes a studio release, but more often a film on the fringe, something small that was made for all the right reasons; something that moves him, and he will blow wind into the tiny sails of this film and give it a life that otherwise would be unimaginable. I'm not the first person to talk about this. I realize everybody's actually talking about this. I have personally experienced it. I remember arriving at the Toronto Film Festival with this tiny movie about teenage pregnancy starring an unknown Canadian actress named Ellen Page that I really thought, 'This will be a festival movie and it will not be seen otherwise.' I remember when the movie ended and people began to clap, I saw Roger—he was actually seated a few seats away from me—and he nodded to me. It was an extraordinary thing! The next morning he had already started talking about the film. He shone a spotlight on it. He gave people a reason to pay attention to it and by the end of the week I got a call saying that Roger would actually like to sit down and talk to me about the film. I was terrified but knew it was going to be a thing I was going to cherish for the rest of my life, and it was. I have no doubt that Roger is one of the very few reasons why people know the name Juno.

"There is a joy for Roger even when he doesn't like a film. I'm sorry in advance for this but here is a quote from [a review of] a movie that will go nameless: 'I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it.'—Errol, you're right, he's a great writer!—'Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it.' Here's the thing: even in this review, I know how much Roger loves movies. I know how much he thinks of them, how much he wants from them, what he expects from them, because these are the same things that I look to movies for. I can't quite put a finger on it but there's something about many film critics and the way they write that makes me think they actually hate movies.

"There's an enthusiasm in Roger's writing that can't be mistaken for anything else but joy. He's passionate and cannot be silenced. He's America's best friend who won't stop nagging you until you've seen this new film. Nowhere is this more evident than on Twitter. I know teenage girls that tweet less than Roger Ebert. You could put Ashton Kutcher, Britney Spears, and the entire staff of Ain't It Cool News and /Film together and not tweet as much as Roger Ebert. He tweets about movies. He tweets about politics. He tweets jokes. Yesterday he retweeted the following Twitter user named Superstanos who wrote: 'I just spent 20 minutes writing WU TANG into a lab table. This is why I go to school y'all.' The Roger Ebert Twitter feed is one of the best publications we have running. I don't mean this sarcastically. It's awesome. It's political. It's daring. It's funny. It's self-effacing. It's everything that I love about his writing. It rails against Sarah Palin. It's even about the artfulness of video games.

"He has somehow found yet another medium and a way to share what he thinks is special. This is the passion I associate with this great man who I was introduced to watching At the Movies and who I was fortunate enough to meet when I was a 20-year-old short film maker at the Toronto Festival. I introduced myself. I had no idea that as a writer he would change my life. His instinct to write and share is one thing, but then he wants you to experience what he has experienced, to feel what he has felt. It's an instinct to give and he gives so much. And so there's really only one thing left to say: thank you. Roger, thank you for everything you have done for my career. And thank you for everything you have done for cinema. I cannot imagine a more deserved honor."

Philip Kaufman

"Rose and I left Chicago during the great blizzard of '66 with our little son Peter. We'd done a couple of low budget independent films in Chicago but the films gave no return to the investors, money dried up, and Rose said it was time to head back to San Francisco: always our city of succor. We'd become best friends with Nelson Algren and he came to the airport to see us off. He started to tell us it would be lonely in Chicago without us. Nelson, as you know, wrote The Man With the Golden Arm. At that very time, maybe at that same moment that we were hugging Algren on our way out of Chicago, a bright, tough young kid was just making his way into Chicago. I like to think he took our place. He became a friend of Algren's. And Studs Terkel. And the great Mike Royko. In time he would come to be known as the Kid With the Golden Thumb. Everything you've read by this kid Ebert over all these years should be taken in the context of his being in the tradition of these Chicago guys: tough, give 'em hell, not compromising, no bullshit, tell it like it is, compassionate writers. Like them, Ebert spoke from his heart, spoke against the big boys, championed the little man against small-minded bullies. He told us the truth according to Ebert and—like Mike Royko—he could say with all humility: 'I may be wrong ... but I doubt it.'

"Once, Roger called and woke me up at about six in the morning. Rose and I had made Henry & June and by now Peter was our producer. The Ratings Board had dropped the dreaded 'X' on the film, which meant essentially that it couldn't be distributed. They demanded that I make some cuts. 'Why should I?' I said, 'You guys don't give an "X" rating when a breast is mutilated or blown away; you only give one when a naked breast is caressed. Besides, I applied the same standards I did in The Unbearable Lightness of Being and you gave that an "R" rating.' They said, 'We should have given that film an "X" too.' At which point I might have used the word fuck. They told me I could not use 'the F word' with them and that cemented the 'X' rating.

"I was going to fly to Washington that very day with a big-time lawyer to take on the system and that's the morning Roger called me and woke me up. Roger had been fighting the same fight with the rating system for years and he called us to tell us that the Ratings Board had backed down and that—because we had challenged them and Roger had led the forces of change—they were finally coming up with a new rating: NC17. This was the first I had heard of it. Roger had the news before anyone else. Good news. We felt great at the time. We thought everything had changed. Now, in America we could see films that were—as Rose used to say—'not for children of all ages.' But pretty quickly the powers-that-be found a way to make the NC-17 become the new 'X' and today studios will no longer make or distribute a NC-17 film; but, that's another story. The point of this story is that no one has fought harder or longer or with more enthusiasm than Roger Ebert for justice and fairness and good movies. He's fought for intelligence in movies and, at the same time, he's fought for fun, for sex, beauty, humanity and did I mention sex? In San Francisco, Roger Ebert's our kind of guy.

"Roger and I have both been lucky to find great loves in our lives who stood by us through thick and thin, who had our backs, at the same time led us, who were our partners. I wouldn't be here today if not for Rose and Roger wouldn't be here if not for Chaz. Chaz and Roger, I wanted to tell you a little story about Rose. I was in graduate school at the University of Chicago. Rose and I went to see a film at the Hyde Park Theatre. One of us liked the film and the other one didn't. I've forgotten who felt what. I've even forgotten the name of the film. But I do remember that—in the heat of our passionate disagreement—Rose hauled off and punched me in the face. ...A couple of hours later after thinking things over in some of the local bars, I decided, 'Who needs this shit?' I staggered back to our one and a half room basement apartment on Blackstone ready to end our relationship. Rose had bolted the damn door. I was locked out on a cold, windy Chicago night. I walked around to the alley and found a window that was slightly open. This was the window to the tiny bedroom. As I crawled through the window onto the bed, Rose grabbed me and wrapped herself around me. Tears were all over her face. She whispered, 'Enough of this crap. Let's make our own films. Let's make our own films.'

"We stayed in that bed for days and talked through those days and every night that followed about everything; a lot about films. Our conversation went on for the next 50 years. We never stopped talking. [At this moment grief overwhelmed Kaufman and he found it difficult to speak. Ebert reached out his hand to him.] It's tough being here because Rose and I saw hundreds of movies in this theater. We saw many with Mel. We loved this theater. I thought I could get through this more easily; but, anyway, Rose—as anyone who knew her can attest—never stopped telling me or anyone exactly what she thought. She was fearless and brave as hell, like Roger. As I said, I wouldn't have the honor of being up here on stage with Roger and Chaz if not for Rose.

"I just wanted to say, Roger: thanks for always keeping the bedroom window slightly open. Thanks for encouraging me and these wonderful directors up here and thousands of aspiring filmmakers all over the world to make our own films. Now, as one Chicagoan who has found his home here in San Francisco to another Chicagoan who will always have a second home here, I'd like to present you with a couple of things."

At this juncture Kaufman read aloud Mayor Gavin Newsom's proclamation of May 1, 2010 as Roger Ebert Day in San Francisco and handed Ebert the Mel Novikoff Award.

Cross-published on Twitch. Introductory photograph of Ebert and friends in front of the Castro Theatre marquee courtesy of Pamela Gentile and the San Francisco Film Society.

UP IN THE AIR—Peter Galvin's Review

Ryan Bingham is not a man you want to meet. Not because he is unlikable, which he sometimes tries to be, but because Ryan fires people for a living. He flies from city to city, firing employees for companies too afraid to do it themselves. After so many years in the air, his sole personal ambition is to reach a million frequent flier miles, a feat only seven people have accomplished. Ryan lives a solitary life and wouldn't have it any other way.

But Ryan's life is turned upside-down with the arrival of Natalie, a young upstart at his company who pulls him off the road and threatens to outsource his job to a new video-chat system. His last chance to save his jet-setting lifestyle—and his miles—is to take Natalie on the road with him and show her that firing people needs to be done face-to-face. It's a breezy set-up, ripe for one of those industry manufactured summer rom-coms, but Up in the Air surprises by presenting a film that is thoroughly human-feeling.

Here, we have a movie that takes the time to create rich, multidimensional characters. These are people who make us laugh because they are funny, not players who appear always to be reaching for the next punch line. The character George Clooney has developed in Ryan Bingham is not an instantly agreeable one but he is believable. He's that guy you can laugh with even while you mostly feel sorry for him. Anna Kendrick, who the internet tells me is in the Twilight film series but I remember being effortlessly winsome in the little indie gem Rocket Science, takes the role of Natalie, which probably looked pretty one-dimensional on paper, and makes it feel 10-dimensional.

Without punch line comedy, the actors in Up in The Air rely on smart writing, and this is an intelligent, well-written script. There's a bit of the uncomfortable humor that has spread since the success of The Office, but much of the humor is more subtle, allowing the irony of Ryan's situation to play out to a logical—if somewhat unconvincing—conclusion. It's a shame that after developing such interesting, human characters and avoiding being cloying and sentimental, Up in the Air gently veers towards a predictable finale.

Even with a slight, third-act betrayal, the film showcases a great talent in Jason Reitman, who is a strikingly skilled writer/director when his talents are not overshadowed by the aura of Diablo Cody. With Thank You For Smoking, Juno and now Up in The Air, it is apparent that Reitman has a knack for reflecting our contemporary culture in a way that many mainstream films fail to understand. It's not how many pop-culture references you can throw in, it's whether or not we believe in the people saying them.

Cross-published on Ornery-Cosby and Twitch.

MVFF32—Michael Hawley Previews the Line-Up

The Mill Valley Film Festival (MVFF) announced its 2009 line-up last week, adhering to what has become a proven formula for the 32-year-old festival: Start with a dozen or so indie-ish, autumn-release prestige pics, often with stars and directors in tow. Next, throw in a couple big name tributes and high profile selections from the year's fest circuit. Then round things out with a big helping of docs, shorts, live music events and largely unheralded narrative features from around the globe. There are close to 100 programs from 34 countries this year, and what follows is a picky, subjective look at a portion of what's in store from October 8 to 18.

First off, MVFF has become the Bay Area festival for movie-stargazing. This year offers the opportunity to ogle Uma Thurman (appearing at a tribute with her new film Motherhood), Clive Owen (star of the co-Opening Night film The Boys Are Back, followed the next night with a tribute and screening of 1998's Croupier) and Woody Harrelson (also getting the tribu-treatment alongside a look at his acclaimed new film The Messenger). For those who like their stars a bit more edgy and obscure, MVFF presents veteran character actor Seymour Cassel—best known for his collaborations with John Cassavetes—in conversation with iconoclastic Bay Area filmmaker Rob Nilsson. Cassel's latest film, the LeVar Burton-directed Reach For Me, screens the following night. And while we're at it, Nilsson's got a new film in the festival, too (Imbued).

The tribute which really had Bay Area cinephiles oohing and aahing, however, is sadly not to be. Iconic French new wave actress, singer and director Anna Karina recently had an accident which prevents her from attending the festival. Happily, she has issued a rain check and promises to come here next spring. Meanwhile, MVFF will still be screening Karina's first directorial effort in 30 years, Victoria (described as Some Like it Hot meets Breathless), as well as a revival of 1965's Pierrot le fou, one of seven features she made with then-husband Jean-Luc Godard.

Of all the "stars" attending MVFF32, perhaps none will be on the lips of movie-goers in the next few months more than Gabourey Sidibe, the star of co-Opening Night film Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire. The film, which won Sundance's Jury Prize and Audience Award back in January, just got a huge push at Toronto (where it snagged another audience prize) with newly onboard executive producers Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey beating the drum. Precious is the inspirational story of a derided, African-American teen who's pregnant for a second time with her father's baby. TV actress/comedienne Mo'Nique has won accolades for her portrayal of the mother-from-hell, and even Mariah Carey has been singled out for her small role as a social worker. MVFF Director of Programming Zoe Elton is predicting that Precious will go on to become this year's Slumdog Millionaire, i.e., the little film that could. Director Lee Daniels is also expected to attend the screening. (Precious opens in limited release on November 6.)

There were two British films in competition at Cannes this year (well, three if you count Jane Campion's Bright Star), and MVFF has got them both. Ken Loach's Looking For Eric is one of two Closing Night films (along with Jean-Marc Vallée's The Young Victoria), and stars ex-Manchester United soccer champ Eric Cantona as an apparitional life coach to a put-upon postman. The other is Andrea Arnold's Fish Tank, in which a council flats teen (a much lauded performance from newcomer Katie Jarvis) experiences sexual tension with her mother's new boyfriend (Hunger's Michael Fassbender). Fish Tank is Arnold's second feature, and just like its predecessor, 2006's Red Road, was the winner of Cannes' Prix du Jury. It's my second most anticipated film in the festival.

And what's first? That would be André Téchiné's The Girl on the Train, starring Émilie Dequenne (best known for her titular role in the Dardenne Brothers' Rosetta) as a young woman who falsely accuses some black and Arab youths of an anti-Semitic attack. Based on true events, the film co-stars my favorite Israeli actress Ronit Elkabetz (The Band's Visit, Late Marriage), vet actor Michel Blanc, and Catherine Deneuve, making her sixth appearance in a Téchiné film. The Girl on the Train premiered at this year's Berlin Film Festival along with another anticipated French film on the MVFF roster, François Ozon's flying baby movie, Ricky.

Unfortunately, Latin America is grossly underrepresented at Mill Valley this year, a lamentable programming decision given the fact we no longer have an exclusively Latin American film festival in the Bay Area. I've scoured the line-up and come up with only one narrative feature from the region—Sebastian Silva's The Maid. Happily, this social satire about a maid becoming unhinged after 23 years of service to the same upper class Chilean family is one I've been looking forward to ever since it won the Sundance Grand Jury Prize for World Cinema.

Asian film enthusiasts will be thrilled to learn that master Hong Kong director John Woo is expected to attend the MVFF screening of his new film, Red Cliff. This two-part historical epic represents Woo's return to Chinese language films after a 15-year stint in Hollywood. It's also purported to be the most expensive film ever made in Asia, with an all-star cast that includes Tony Leung Chiu Wai and Takeshi Kaneshiro. With the aim of celebrating the 100th anniversary of Hong Kong cinema, MVFF will also be screening Johnnie To's Sparrow, which had a theatrical run at San Francisco's 4 Star Theater earlier this year. A more impressive choice might have been Red Cliff II, which has been touring festivals since January. Or even To's more recent Vengeance, starring craggy French rock n' roller Johnny Hallyday.

A last-minute addition that you won't find in the printed program is the latest from Polish maestro Andrzej Wajda. Many incorrectly assumed that 2007's Katyn, which screened at MVFF last year and was nominated for a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar, would be the 83-year-old director's last. But he turned up in Berlin this year with Sweet Rush, an older woman/younger man film-within-a-film romance that surprisingly copped the festival's boundary-pushing Alfred Bauer Prize. Kudos to the programming staff for securing this one.

As for the rest of the World Cinema section, it's mostly filled with unknown entities (to me at least), making it difficult to know quite what to spotlight here. I'm a fan of Czech director Jan Hrebejk (Up and Down, Beauty in Trouble) and am pleased to see his latest, Shameless, in the line-up. I'm also intrigued by the made-for-$500 Romanian film about two teens trapped in an Elevator. Hipsters is a splashy Russian musical about rebellious Soviet youth in 1955 Moscow, while another period piece Hellsinki, concerns young Finnish criminals in the 1960s/1970s. The clip from Israel's Surrogate shown at the MVFF press conference made it look pretty darn sexy. Jermal is an Indonesian father/son drama set on a remote deep-sea fishing depot. A film about a narcissistic, egomaniacal movie star would seem to be an unlikely entry from Iran, but nonetheless we have Tahmineh Milani's Superstar. In addition there are a couple films each from India, South Africa, Australia, Denmark and Sweden that look promising. Finally, anyone planning to wait until the marvelous An Education opens in theaters on October 16 should know that director Lone Scherfig (Italian for Beginners, Wilbur Wants to Kill Himself) will be attending that film's MVFF screening.

I've touched on a handful of the fest's U.S. narrative features and here are a few more worth considering. First off, director Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking, Juno) will receive a tribute accompanied by his recent Telluride/Toronto triumph Up in the Air, starring George Clooney. Miguel Arteta (Chuck & Buck) directs his first feature in seven years, Youth in Revolt, with Michael Cera as a dull teen with a seriously rebellious alter ego. I'm not sure which of these two films has the more intriguing cast—Mitchell Lichtenstein's Happy Tears with Parker Posey, Demi Moore, Rip Torn and Ellen Barkin, or Rebecca Miller's The Private Lives of Pippa Lee with Keanu Reeves, Alan Arkin, Robin Wright Penn and Maria Bello. Admirers of Larry Blamire's affectionate 1950s sci-fi spoofs The Lost Skelton of Cadavra and its sequel The Lost Skelton Returns Again, surely won't want to miss his parody of 1930's "old dark house" movies, Dark and Stormy Night.

Amongst the two dozen non-fiction features in the festival's Valley of the Docs section, perhaps none will draw more attention than Rick Goldsmith and Judy Ehrlich's The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. Ellsberg himself is scheduled to attend both MVFF screenings. Traditionally the fest brings us several fascinating music documentaries and this year they've come up with Meredith Monk—Inner Voice and Soundtrack For a Revolution, which explores the music that accompanied the American Civil Rights Movement. The Blind Boys of Alabama are expected to perform live at the October 10 screening of the latter film. And finally, the Bay Area's own counter-cultural cheerleader and ice cream flavor gets the bio-doc treatment in Michelle Esrick's Saint Misbehavin': The Wavy Gravy Movie.

10/07/09 UPDATE: Of related interest, Dennis Harvey offers up his "Mill Valley Menu" for Variety. MVFF, he writes, is "starting to look like kudos season preview, Northern California edition."

Cross-published on film-415 and Twitch.