ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

#Metoo

Nina Wu – The Dark Side of Success

by Leave a Comment

“I really can’t take it anymore. You’re not only destroying my body, but my soul.”

An actress gets the roll of a lifetime in the Taiwanese film Nana Wu, directed by Midi Z. But while it may be a dream come true, it creates nightmares that she must try to figure out. What she discovers will put her career into a completely different light.

The title character (played by Wu Ke-Xi, who co-wrote the script) has spent eight years eking out a career doing bit roles. She is offered a leading role, but is a bit unsure because it involves nudity and a sex scene. Her agent tells her that she’s free to turn it down. But he also notes that this is an excellent role—the kind that can make a career.

We watch as the film is made, seeing occasional abusive behavior by the director. When the film is finished everyone thinks a new star has been found. Meanwhile Nina returns to her small hometown where she is reunited with her former lover who is still acting in a production of The Little Prince done for school children. When she returns for pre-opening publicity, she is pressed about the sex scenes of the film. She responds by stating she is a professional actress.

While on the trip, she begins to have nightmares—usually featuring the color red and frequently involving hallways (which also play a role in the film she was starring in). As we watch these nightmares (and some daytime events that may or may not be real) we sense that there is something from her past that is trying to find its way into Nina’s consciousness. Little by little, Nina begins to piece together the memories that reveal the true nature of her experience.

It is of interest that the quote I open the review with is a line from the film within a film. We hear Nina practicing the line before auditions. We also see her deliver the line in what is obviously a key scene of the film she is making. That line serves to help us understand not just the character Nina is portraying, but the feeling that is within her that is struggling to make its way to the surface.

In press notes, Wu Ke-Xi references stories involving the Asian film industry and the abuse of actresses. These stories were coming to light around the same time that the #MeToo movement began to raise similar issues in Hollywood. These stories highlight emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. This film is a reminder of the scars that such abuse can leave.

Nina Wu is opened in limited virtual cinema locations, expanding to more and to VOD on April 2.

Photos courtesy of Film Movement.

In Her Own Voice: 1on1 with Miranda Bailey (CherryPicks)

by Leave a Comment

Breaking into the ‘boys club’ is never easy.

Even as things begin to improve due to recent movements surrounding women in the Hollywood, the power still remains predominantly in the hands of the men in the industry. Interestingly, while many of these conversations have surrounded gender equity in filmmaking and production, what about the world of film criticism? 

Enter The Cherry Picks.

Developed by Miranda Bailey, TheCherryPicks.com seeks to create space for female-identifying and non-binary critics to find their voice. By highlighting reviews and creating original stories, Cherry Picks has started to bring a little more balance into the primarily male-dominated world of film criticism. Asked how the idea came about, Bailey recalls that the development of the site stemmed from the realization that, even though it seemed obvious, no one else was providing a platform for alternative critical expressions.

“The question is ‘why didn’t anybody else think of this?’,” she laughs. “It came about because I was looking for something like this. I had produced a movie [called] I Do Until I Don’t, which was Lake Bell’s second feature film. It was about women and geared towards women. It was friendly towards love. It didn’t make any grandiose political statements or anything like that and a lot of the male reviewers when they were reviewing it were saying things about how disappointed they were with Lake. It was like she was their daughter or something and it was just like really weird. Some of the female reviewers talked about it, and they didn’t necessarily score it any better, but they talked about it differently. They actually talked about the film part. And a lot of my friends who aren’t in the industry who are women really liked it… So, I was like, ‘Oh, well let me find out what all women think and what’s the women’s score of that for critics’.”

“And then I couldn’t find it. I found some organizations that had female critics that belong to it, but you’d have to like go and read each one. But those weren’t necessarily Rotten Tomatoes certified critics and you couldn’t figure out a score… When I was looking a little deeper, I realized that, at that time which was about three years ago, like 78% of the critics were men. I think they’ve gotten it to like 60 something now… How are we ever going to do what we say we want to do in Hollywood, which is have more women behind the camera and have more female stories, if consumers are hearing what is worth their money from mostly men? So [Cherry Picks] was kind of a way to start something that would help female critics get more noticed, get more jobs, get more hired. But it was also a way for me to affect the consumer market to prove that there actually is an audience for film by and about women. We collect the scores of all of the critics that on every movie, [including those that are] non-binary or identify as female. We do Ford v Ferrari, also. We collate from that as well. So, it’s not only about women movies, but it’s just about what women think these movies that are out there. So, you know, it’s a ‘for everyone, by women’ kind of thing.”

Even though she believes that its essential for stronger diversity in the circles of film criticism, Bailey also explains that the ‘female voice’ is never the same across the board. With the development of Cherry Picks, Bailey’s vision is simply to provide an alternative opinion in a male-dominated industry.

“I think everyone’s an individual,” she explains, “so I don’t think [that] all men think one way. All women, all Republicans, all Democrats, all blacks or whites or whatever. I don’t think that way, but think about it like magazines, right? Like I don’t really read GQ magazine. I’m not the demo for that. I know most guys don’t read Marie Claire, right? So, it’s really just about interests and whatnot. I could read a GQ magazine, if I wanted to. A guy could read Marie Claire, if they wanted to do. I just wanted to present something that you could read, if you wanted to.”

From Instagram Live interviews to written reviews, Bailey is clearly excited about the variety of ways that Cherry Picks is bringing their voice to the public. Viewing themselves as a ‘film-friendly’ site, Bailey recognizes that even bad movies deserve a place in our hearts.

“Cherry Picks has a newsletter that comes out every Friday that kind of tells you what to watch right now,” she beams. “Obviously, we’re focused on movies that are playing at your home, but they’re new movies and it’s great. You can go to the movie pages, [and] see the scores [from] female critics, and how they’ve been curated. We have a ‘bowl of cherries’, which is like ‘run, don’t walk’. Two cherries, [means] that it’s worth the ticket. One cherry [means] catch it from your couch, but maybe not worth going to see. (Fortunately, all of us are on our couches now.) And then there’s the ‘pits’, which is pretty self-explanatory. For myself, as a filmmaker or a woman, I don’t know which one is talking here. Maybe it’s the combo, but I love ‘pitty’ movies. That’s kind of our motto. Everyone loves a ‘pitty’ movie now and then. So, it’s a very film-friendly site as opposed to something that [says] ‘Don’t see this. It’s garbage.’ I love some garbage. I mean, The Hot Chick is one of my favorite movies of all time… Our Instagram is doing Instagram Lives with a lot of actresses right now, and female filmmakers every day, every Tuesday and Thursday at one o’clock. Instagram Live. It’s really fun and it’s fun to make that new content, I have to say.”

A veteran of the industry herself, Bailey continues to strive for gender equality in the workplace. While people continue to debate whether or not things have improved for women behind the scenes, she insists that there is still much work to be done.

“I’ve been hearing [stories about progress being made] for my entire 20-year career,” Bailey points out. “[I’ve heard] ‘There’s no audience for it’ and then there’s, ‘We need more of it’. [From] not necessarily any movement to Times Up and MeToo. I had started working on Cherry Picks before that had happened. So, it was just really coincidentally good timing that we were able to get this site up and launched and writing right at the time when people were talking about [the fact that] women should be listened to. So, I got very lucky with that. Movements [like] Time’s Up, MeToo, or other movements like Black Lives Matter are really important movements that make people pay attention to [those issues]. We can’t just say that we want equality. We have to go out of our way to make equality happen. I think that, since those movements have started and they really gained a lot of traction, that things have been changing for the better for women for sure. I think there’s obviously still problems, but you know, I do definitely notice a change in the work place…” 

With this in mind, Bailey feels that one manner in which the industry could demonstrate gender equity would be for the Oscars to separate the Best Director award into male and female categories, similar to what they do with the acting nods.

“Do we still have the problem that not a single female director was nominated for an Oscar this year when we had the best year ever of movies by women? Absolutely,” she continues. ”It was a problem. That has to do with money. Unless there’s a category specifically for women in the Oscars or Golden Globes for directing and there’s a reason why a distributor will put money behind a campaign specifically for a woman who is not an actress… It’s only going to happen if they can make money off of the ‘Oscar winner’. Right now, they don’t go out of their way to select movies that are directed by women. They go out of their way to select the movies that they think have a chance. Also, people vote for their friends. This is in SAG Awards, PGA and whatever. It’s always the idea [there’s] a ‘boys club’ and it’s true. But more and more women are breaking into that boy’s club. The more we get into the boy’s club, the more it will [improve]. Awards campaigns are very expensive and the only reason that you do it is to make more money. So, until there’s a financial interest for distributors to literally invest in a campaign for female directors, I don’t see it taking great strides.” 

Although she recognizes that dividing the Best Director category has its complexities, she also believes that doing so would create more opportunities for notoriety and financial gain for everyone involved.

“Do I want to be called a female producer or a female director? No, I want to be thought of as a director and a producer,” Bailey contends. “It doesn’t matter what my sex is. However, the only way I can see us really jumping in and getting money behind us for being a director is if there’s a category for it, personally. Now, I know that a lot of people that disagree with that because they don’t want to be singled out, you know? There’re also sexual identity stuff and nonbinary people, people who don’t identify as either sex so, I do understand the complexities. It’s certainly not something I’m going to campaign for. It’s too controversial but I have a distribution business myself. I’m a partner at the Film Arcade so I know how it works. I have a production company and so I know how it works. And, at the end of the day, whether it’s doing a small campaign for a Spirit Award or doing a big campaign for the Oscars, it’s all about money and what you can put on your website or your video case, your film poster, which is ‘Winner Of…’. Not until this year did I come to the thought [that] there should be a female director category because Mary Heller, Lulu Wang… and all these other movies that were smaller movies that were brilliant should have been nominated for directing and they were not. But yet they would have been if we had a female director category. So, that’s where it gets a little tricky. I don’t think it will happen, but that’s just what I think.”
“The only reason that women and men [acting categories] are [separated is] because, back when they started it, getting Marilyn Monroe and getting these fancy, beautiful, iconic actresses that were movie stars to show up was how they got people to watch the show. No one [cared] about the costume designers or whatever before. But now, it’s become an art form that’s much more about filmmaking than movie stars.” 
However, what’s far more important than awards campaigns is the issue of equal pay within the industry. Even though she sees that progress has been made as a result of recent social movements, Bailey also recognizes that there continues to be tremendous imbalance behind the scenes.

“People are talking about it but, to be honest, the deal I was just making with two other men, I, once again, was asked to not take a fee,” she remembers. “So, it’s not changing for me as a producer. I did have to demand that I get paid what everyone gets paid. My friend also is a producer on a big movie right now that got shut down. She also had an issue where they were paying her $25,000 less than the two men who are doing less work. I mean, it is a big problem still and it is still happening. It is really annoying and upsetting when you go through it. And I’m done. My whole life has taken less than men on every single movie I’ve ever made or been asked to and I’ve done it. Me and my colleague Amanda have to split a fee, one fee for the two of us, where the other guys will get their own. It’s just shocking and I’ve had to fight just for that. So, now I have a resume that’s big enough that I have enough confidence in myself to be able to say that I’m not going to do this movie or this TV show, you know? I just had to take a hard line. I started the hard line about four years ago with Swiss Army Man. I did get paid less on that movie than the other producer… And my office did all the work. Amanda got paid less as well. I had to fight for us to get paid at all on that. That was obviously before MeToo or Time’s Up. But now, I’m not accepting anything less than equal. If I’m doing the equal work, I’m just not. If I’m not doing equal work, I get it. I don’t want to pay a man the same as me if I’m doing more work. That’s pretty much always happening. I love men… There are men [that] I admire. Several men have mentored me more than women have in this business. My agents and managers, they were the first to believe in me and I really appreciate them.”

Looking forward, while she may not have any specific path in mind, Bailey very much hopes to see awareness of the issues of disparity continue to build so that more people can receive opportunities to succeed.

“I’m not one for mandates, myself,” begins Bailey. “It’d be great to have more PSAs about it frankly and bring more awareness into it because I don’t think people understand. I know my son who’s 12 does not understand. He thinks that the ‘pink tax’ is a hoax. He thinks that there’s no such thing as ‘fair pay’ just because that’s not a real thing. It is! I didn’t experience this, but my mother did. Women weren’t allowed to get their own credit card or buy their own house without a man co-signing for them. Women weren’t allowed to get jobs. One of the things with Rotten Tomatoes that was probably why it was hard for them to have a more diverse selection of critics, [is] because their standards at the time… were things like you had to work at the New York Times for the last ten years. Those jobs 10 years ago were not given to women or people of color. So, when your restrictions are set with the resume you need to have, it’s a lot harder for women or people of color because we weren’t able to get those jobs. (I’m certainly not comparing what women have gone through with people of color. I think that people of color have had a much harder time than white women and women of color have had really hard times getting jobs as well.) I think we just have to be more open to taking people who aren’t as experienced, believing in people who need a chance, who haven’t had the ability to make twenty movies before now. Maybe they’ve done one. Maybe they’d done a short. I think that people with money, which isn’t necessarily me or indie films, but studios, television series and whatnot, need to be able to be willing to bring on female directors. “

When she considers which current female voices in the industry she’s most excited about, Bailey believes that there are several high-quality filmmakers that are worth keeping an eye on.

“I think Lulu Wang and Alma Har’el’s work are very exciting to me right now in terms of female directors and ones to watch,” she says enthusiastically. “Where will they be in five years? I hope that they’ll be huge, personally. You know how Wes Anderson has or the Coen Brothers or Baumbach have a [specific] look? I think there’s this girl named Suzi Yoonessi that’s [directed] a couple of films and she’s had very little money to work with… And I’m not saying not the greatest films in the world, but she definitely has a really interesting style, I think. I’m curious to see if that style gets embraced. It’s definitely kind of girly pop-y style, which I haven’t seen before. So, those are a couple of filmmakers that I think are really interesting right now”.

To visit Cherry Picks, click here.

For complete audio of our conversation with Miranda Bailey, click here.

6.18 Setting Off the BOMBSHELL of Truth

by 1 Comment

Back in 2016, after Megyn Kelly and Gretchen Carlson raised allegations about FOX Executive Roger Ailes, the fallout helped further survivors of sexual misconduct to speak out against their attackers sparking a movement that reverberated throughout the industry. Now, with his latest film, Bombshell, director Jay Roach attempts to give light on the truth of the story in the hopes of continuing the ongoing conversation surrounding sexual misconduct in our culture. In an honest and challenging conversation, we welcome back ScreenFish’r Julie Levac and TO Film Files’ Jolie Featherstone to discuss the relationship between power and voice.

You can also stream the episode above on podomatic, Alexa (via Stitcher), Spotify or Soundcloud! Or, you can download the ep on Apple Podcasts or Google Play!

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

6.18 BombshellDownload

Bombshell – Another #MeToo Moment

by Leave a Comment

Workplace sexual harassment and abuse doesn’t qualify as “man bites dog” news. But in recent years it has become news because of the rich and powerful people involved. #MeToo has become the catchall term for such abuse, especially in the entertainment industry. Bombshell is based on the 2016 scandal that led to the ouster of Roger Ailes, the CEO of Fox News. We may look at that story as a sign of success in the fight against sexual harassment, but we might also see within the story the failure of society to adequately address the underlying issues.

We first meet two of Fox’s key women on-air talent, Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron) and Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman). They want to be considered serious journalists, but face an uphill battle. For example, when taking part in an early GOP candidate debate, Kelly challenges Donald Trump (then a long-shot to get the nomination) about his record with women. She becomes the target of his abusive twitters. Carlson has been demoted to a less viewed time slot.

Photo Credit: Hilary Bronwyn Gayle SMPSP.

When Carlson goes to lawyers to file suit over a demotion, she says it is because she has thwarted Roger Ailes’s (John Lithgow) sexual advances. She assumes that if she files suit other Fox News women will come forwards.

We also meet Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie), a composite character of several women at Fox News who spoke with filmmakers anonymously. Pospisil is a Barbie-figured young woman who dreams of being an on-air personality. She is ambitious and pushes her claim that as a Christian Millennial, she represents a key demographic. She creates an opportunity to get a meeting with Ailes to make her case. Even this first meeting is a bit on the creepy side.

Photo Credit: Hilary Bronwyn Gayle SMPSP.

The story develops as we watch these three women each trying to negotiate their way in a toxic and misogynistic environment. Anyone who raised these issues would be accused of the dreadful sin of “feminism”—not even women at Fox News wanted to be saddled with that word. All three women face sexist behavior from colleagues without much support from other women. Even after Carlson’s lawsuit is filed, few women come to her support—in large part because they need their jobs. Meanwhile the institution gears up with demands of loyalty to the company and expressly for Ailes.

Photo Credit: Hilary Bronwyn Gayle SMPSP.

This is not about an isolated bad situation. It reflects a reality that many women (as well as other minorities) can face in the workplace. In this case we see an especially heinous example, but even when it is not as blatant as we see here, such situations can be damaging. One of the contributing factors at Fox News, as it’s portrayed in Bombshell, is that it is built on an amoral pragmatism. A co-worker describes a Fox News story to Kayla in an early scene as what will get the most watchers. Ailes’s key phrase as he asks to see women’s legs is “It’s a visual medium.” The goal of Fox News here is not even ideology; it is whatever sells.

That amoral pragmatism was not limited to the abusers. It was suggested as the way to get what you want. The end justified the means. Good viewership justified sensational reporting. Keeping one’s job justified silence. Does a chance at a fame and fortune justify allowing oneself to be used?

Photo Credit: Hilary Bronwyn Gayle SMPSP.

Part of the problem that the women at Fox News faced was the silence of other workers. Should people warn new women about what happened in Ailes’s office? (It seemed to be an open secret.) Should they speak up when they know something bad is happening to their coworkers? In the film, much of the debate of this takes place in sotto voce debates within Megyn Kelly’s work team. These discussions serve as the voices that might well play within us and our coworkers in such a situation. We have conflicting feelings and fears, just as this small group brings to the film.

Photo Credit: Hilary Bronwyn Gayle SMPSP.

What I see as a small downside of Bombshell is that it feels a little bit voyeuristic. We stand outside looking in. (That may be in part because I’m a man who hasn’t had to live out this story in the workplace.) It may seem like an aberration that took place in a company of questionable integrity to start with. But we need to remember that in many ways both big and small, women continue to have to deal with such abusive situations.

The Art of Self-Defense: Genuine Power in Toxic Times

by Leave a Comment

The Art of Self-Defensetells the story of timid bookkeeper Casey (Jesse Eisenberg), a timid bookkeeper who joins a local karate studio to learn how to protect himselfafter he’s beaten mercilessly one night by a roving motorcycle gang. Under the watchful eye of a charismatic instructor, Sensei (Alessandro Nivola), and hardcore brown belt Anna (Imogen Poots), Casey begins to experience inner strength for the first time in his life. However, as Sensei’s increasingly bizarre (and violent) lessons continue to develop, he soon discovers what it means to be trapped in a world of hyper-masculinity and violence. As a result, Casey’s growing concerns begin to place him increasingly at odds with his new mentor and he must decide for himself where the boundaries of true strength lie.

Written and directed by Riley Stearns, The Art of Self-Defense is an excellent example of modern satire for the #MeToo era. Awkwardly hilarious and terrifying at the same time, Stearns journey into the soul of toxic masculinity showcases the complex challenges of modern gender identity issues. Tightly written and executed, Stearns’ film is unflinching in its desire to draw you into this world without becoming comfortable. Something is off… and the audience is well aware of it. Star Eisenberg shines as the socially-stunted Casey, portraying him with an innocence held in constant conflict with his inner rage. Adding to the tension is Nivola’s maniacal Sensei, who provides the necessary level of angst against Casey’s harmless heart. On several occasions, it almost appears as though Sensei is casting a spell on the hapless Casey, a testament to the chemistry between the two actors.

Whereas numerous films in recent years have explored the dynamics of sexual power through the eyes of a female, Self-Defense sets itself apart by examining the tensions of gender from a distinctly male perspective. A victim of bullying in every facet of his life, Casey appears completely unaware of what it means to ‘be a man’ in today’s culture. From photocopying pornography to purchasing a firearm, Casey is looking for something—anything—that might give him a deeper sense of strength in an uber-masculine environment. Herein lies the appeal of his relationship with Sensei. What begins as a simple class teaching how to protect himself becomes a mentorship on domineering masculinity. Suddenly, Casey begins to transform himself from ‘adult contemporary’ to ‘metal’, not only in his musical taste but also his approach to life and work. This is a ‘man’s world’ and only those who adhere to the ‘rules’ will survive. (This truth is reinforced by the muted power of Anna, a female student who Sensei believes will never achieve greatness simply because ‘she’s not a man’.)

In doing so, however, Self-Defense shines an intense spotlight on what happens when the needle is pushed too far in the other direction as well. Is masculinity based upon one’s ability to create chaos and violence? Or is there something intrinsic to courage and strength that leans away from a desire to do harm? These are the questions facing Casey as he attempts to navigate himself through a dangerous world. Similar to the questions facing women following #MeToo, Self-Defense invites men to ask what it truly means to identify as genuinely powerful in toxic times.

With a biting tongue and sharp wit, The Art of Self-Defense is a dark but fascinating satire for a culture that remains in search of what it means to express one’s gender. Writer/director Stearns attacks his film with a ferocity that both entertains and opens the door for genuine conversation surrounding the nature of toxic masculinity. Making good use of a talented cast, Self-Defense is definitely a class worth taking.

To hear audio of our interview with Jesse Eisenberg, click here.

The Art of Self-Defensebegins its classes in theatres on July 19th, 2019

Making the Modern Man: 1on1 with Jesse Eisenberg (THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE)

by Leave a Comment

The Art of Self-Defense tells the story of timid bookkeeper Casey (Jesse Eisenberg), a timid bookkeeper who joins a local karate studio to learn how to protect himself after he’s beaten mercilessly by a roving motorcycle gang. Under the watchful eye of a charismatic instructor, Sensei (Alessandro Nivola), and hardcore brown belt Anna (Imogen Poots), Casey begins to experience inner strength for the first time in his life. However, as Sensei’s increasingly bizarre (and violent) lessons continue to develop, he soon discovers what it means to be trapped in a world of hyper-masculinity and violence. As a result, Casey’s growing concerns begin to place him increasingly at odds with his new mentor and he must decide for himself where the boundaries of true strength lie. Given the importance of its exploration of toxic masculinity, star Jesse Eisenberg knew from the first moment that he read the script that the film would be something special and relevant.

“I thought this was a brilliantly funny, funny movie about a cult because that’s kind of what it seemed like to me at the time,” he recalls. “[After all,] the karate classes are like a cult [and] the sensei seems like a cult leader. My character seems like the perfect candidate for a cult. You know, somebody who’s desperate to be part of a group, who can’t make friends, or has trouble interacting with other people. So [I thought] the movie was a great commentary on cult behavior. But then, when we were doing the movie, I realized that it’s just a brilliant satire on masculinity, partly because while we were filming the movie, the MeToo movement began, and the Harvey Weinstein story was released. So, the movie took on this other very kind of relevant, topical feeling of being a clever commentary on what being a man means to society.”

Credit for this sharp satire lies in the hands of writer/director Riley Stearns, who steered the project from its inception. Working with Stearns for the first time on this project, Eisenberg was absolutely blown away but he writing prowess and attention to detail.

“It was the only movie I’ve ever done where we all knew exactly what shops needed to be done in each scene,” says Eisenberg. “We were so aware that the script was so perfectly written… that we knew every shot that needed to be done and then, he was able to execute it perfectly. I think Alessandro said, [that] ‘this is the closest experience he has had from script to screen he’s ever seen a movie.’ That’s how I felt too. It was unbelievably concise and efficient. He was able to just execute exactly what he wanted to so perfectly while, at the same time, making us all feel like we were bringing ourselves to it.”

Of course, the topic of toxic masculinity and its effect on our culture has been on the forefront of our culture in recent years, especially in the light of MeToo movement. Asked what he believes it means to be a man in light of these current conversations, Eisenberg suggests that much of our ideas about gender stem from the importance of empowering those without a voice.

“My wife was raised by a woman who ran one of the most important domestic violence shelters in America,” he explains. “From birth, [she] was raised to be an activist for women’s rights. So, since the moment I met her, my mind shifted about the responsibility of men in society and that it’s important to be an ally to those who don’t have as much power in society. So, I’ve always thought that’s the kind of like best way to be a man and the movie so brilliantly shows the other side of it, [by exploring] what men think they have to do in order to succeed in this society. [They think] they have to listen to the right music, drink the right coffee and have the right kind of tech. The movie shows that in a very blunt and funny way from the pressures that men feel because the movie is the satire. It lets the audience off the hook. It’s not preachy, didactic, or strict. The movie shows, through comedy, the dangers and the absurdities of masculinity in modern culture.”

When he was offered the part of Casey, Eisenberg found himself drawn to his character because he provided the opportunity to play someone who has a powerful emotional experience in the midst of outrageous circumstances.

“This is a comedy and, oftentimes in comedies, the characters are just placeholders for jokes. In this one, [though] the character seems like this real emotional person, even though the style was so heightened. I don’t think you or I know anybody that’s like Casey that speaks in that strange, childish way or that is so trusting and earnest. At the same time, the character has a real emotional experience. So, this movie and this character gave me the opportunity to do what kind of tone and style of performance that I’d never done before, but still within the context of a character that’s experiencing real emotions. It didn’t just seem like performance art, but that [Casey] seems like a character with a psychology, just one that doesn’t really exist in this world.”

As Casey, Eisenberg had the chance to explore the boundaries of power within the masculine psyche. Although the film eists in a world of heightened circumstances, he believes that Casey eventually learns how to find a balance between strength and weakness.

“My goal was to play the kind of six-year-old version of myself. When I was six, I was scared of everything but also very sweet and innocent. I thought of Casey like that. He’s just a child in a world where everybody else was an adult. At the beginning of the movie, everybody hates him and don’t pay attention to him. Halfway through the movie, everybody’s scared of him cause he’s an aggressive, you know, horrible man. Then, towards the end of the movie, he kind of finds his balance.”

“I think he’s so desperate to be part of any group at the beginning of the movie [and] the thing a lot of people like that find who are desperate for acceptance a lot of times is dangerous authority. [They’re the kind of people who] prey on people like Casey. I think what he learns over the course of the movie is that… his goodness can be masculine and strong. The movie is so twisted [though] that to put it in those terms, I think sells short some of the absurd lanes that the [story] actually goes.” 

While Eisenberg underwent some intense physical training, he credits the stunt team and other cast members for stepping up to the challenge of developing their martial arts skills. As a result, because his character is only starting out, Eisenberg ultimately felt that the pressure was off him, making the experience more enjoyable for him

“We had [about] three weeks of intense training with this woman, Mindy Kelly, who was like the stunt coordinator for the movie. She is also one of the best martial artists in the world and has been competing since she’s a kid. We had good training, but my character only has to be a yellow belt. So, as good as our training was, I still didn’t have to be as great as like Imogen [Poots] had to be or Alessandro’s character whose characters are black belts. So, I had really intense training with the knowledge that I didn’t have to be as good as some of the other characters. So, it was kind of a bit recreational for me. I had a stunt double this great guy, Ryan Moody, who has worked with me on Zombieland and some other movies. So, I also knew that he would be there for anything that I couldn’t do. Then, when we got to the set, I could do a lot of it cause my character is supposed to look kind a beginner.”

Having worked on both independent films and major studio products throughout his career, one might assume that there may be more opportunity for collaboration on smaller projects. However, Eisenberg insists that that those creative opportunities change from project to project and are less affected by the scope and budget of a film than one might think.

“In terms of collaboration, you would assume that a smaller movie would be more collaborative but actually it depends on the project. I just did Zombieland: Double Tap and that’s probably the most collaborative experience I’ve ever had in the sense that there were many scripts written and the actors were allowed to veto them if they didn’t like them. Then, on set, we were asked to improvise a lot and to do many takes where we’re doing something other than the script. Then in a movie like The Art of Self-Defense, I didn’t change one word because it’s such a brilliant script. You didn’t want to change it. So, it actually just depends on the project. Some just lend themselves to collaboration and require the actors to kind of bring themselves to it.”

With the release of The Art of Self-Defense, Eisenberg is also looking forward to the release of his next project, Zombieland: Double Tap, the long-awaited sequel to one of his signature roles. Despite 10 years having passed since the original, he says the film is a passion project for himself and the cast and that the delay was only due to the fact that they were waiting for the right script. 

“The only reason it took this long is because we were waiting for a good script to come in. All the actors in it are very busy actors but we all wanted it to do this movie so much because we loved it. So, we were just waiting for the right script to come in. We were more interested [in doing the film] than the movie company. At some points, you’d think [the movie company] would just want to capitalize on a hit and make a sequel as if possible. [Here,] the actors were pushing it so much in this case just because we loved it so much. We loved the ensemble so much [and] we were eager to find the kind of worthwhile sequel. That’s why it took so long. Otherwise, we would’ve done it right away.

The Art of Self-Defense roars into theatres on Friday, July 19th, 2019.

For full audio of our interview with Jesse Eisenberg, click here. 

5.05 The Roar of the WIDOWS

by Leave a Comment

When four men are killed on a failed bank heist, their widows are drawn into the criminal underworld to complete the job. Featuring an all-star cast, Steve McQueen’s WIDOWS is a gripping tale of betrayal, courage and power… but why isn’t it making any money? This week, Steve welcomes Julie and Paul Levac to talk about the strength of women and the truth behind the lies.

You can also stream the episode above on podomatic or on Spotify! Or, you can download the ep on Apple Podcasts, Google Play or more!

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

5.05 Widows

Thanks Julie and Paul for joining us!

Widows: When Lionesses Roar

by Leave a Comment

What happens when those that are left behind are forced to clean up the mess of those that have left us?

Directed by Steve McQueen, Widows tells the story of a police shootout that leaves four thieves dead during an explosive armed robbery attempt in Chicago. Their widows — Veronica (Viola Davis), Linda (Michelle Rodriguez), Alice (Elizabeth Debicki) and Belle (Cynthia Erivo) — have nothing in common except a debt left behind by their spouses’ criminal activities. Hoping to forge a future on their own terms, Veronica joins forces with the other three women to pull off a heist that her husband was planning.

Though Oscar-winner McQueen is best known for slower paced dramatic fare such as 12 Years A Slave or Shame, he brings a surprising depth to a film which could otherwise dwell in the sub-basement of pulp action films. Co-writing the script with acclaimed author Gillian Flynn (Gone Girl), McQueen’s thriller proves to be both gripping and engaging from the outset. Though on paper some may liken the film to this year’s ‘other female heist film’, Ocean’s 8, thankfully the comparisons end there. Widows is a smart, energetic thriller that makes use of an extremely talented cast led with ferocity by Oscar-winner, Viola Davis.

A tight, well-written thrill ride, what is most interesting about a film such as Widows is where it falls in the cultural spectrum. As female-led films have finally begun to be recognized for their success, there seems to have been a theme building momentum where women are encouraged to ‘find their voice’. Recent films such as A Star is Born, The Hate U Give to, yes, Ocean’s 8 have all provided opportunity for women to offer their stories in a male-driven culture. However, if these films serve as cries from the desert, Widows roars like a proud lioness. There is a beautiful but wild energy permeating Widows that reveals the strength, courage and power that women can wield when caught in a world dominated by male-oppression. When we first meet our leads, their identities are tied closely to the men that they love (especially Veronica). However, when threatened by mob boss Jamal Manning to recover the money that their husbands stole from him, they are forced to learn who they are apart from their spouses.

As a result, there is a complexity to these women as they both grieve the loss of their loved ones yet also begin to step out into the light and discover who they are.

From Davis to Debicki (in what may be her breakout role), each female character finds different ways to stand-up against the emotional and physical barriers that have been placed on them by men misusing their power and authority. (With this in mind, it’s no accident that Davis’ Veronica growls that ‘no one thinks [they] have the balls to pull this off.’) Although they find themselves trapped in a ‘man’s game’, these widows prove that their identity and inner strength aren’t decided by a man’s world.

Armed with a whip-smart script and excellent cast, Widows is a film that will surprise you with its depth and emotional punch. Though more popcorn flick than Oscar-fare, the film shows the power of discovering who you are when you’re forced to start over.

Widows is in theatres now.

Chasing the Truth: 1on1 with Chanya Button (VITA AND VIRGINIA)

by Leave a Comment

Directed by Chanya Button, Vita and Virginia tells the story of the passionate love affair between iconic authors Vita Sackville-West (Gemma Arterton) and Virginia Woolf (Elizabeth Debicki). Through her unique vision, the film explores not only the impact of these women as writers, but their progressive feminist voices as well. Having loved the works of Virginia Woolf since her youth, Button argues that there is much for a story like this to say in our current cultural climate. As a result, in many ways, she feels that the lives of these women projected contemporary values and ideas.

“I think the past has a lot to teach us about the future, especially at a time sort of globally, politically, where we’re really uncertain about [things]…,” she believes. “I think the past has a lot to teach us about the future. That’s not why I made Vita and Virginia but my love of literature and history makes me believe that the past can tell us a lot about the future. Also, it’s a film set in the 1920s, but Vita and Virginia lead lives that would be progressive even for now. They were both married and their marriages were incredibly open and supportive. Their husbands were incredible men… who never held their wives back from anything personally, professionally, [or] romantically. They were enormously progressive about gender and sexuality and art. So, [the film is] set in the 1920s, but it feels like a very progressive subject matter for me. They were such unconventional women and they had such an unconventional relationship [that] I knew I would need to approach the film in a very unconventional way to be true to the sort of the spirit of that.”

One manner in which these women were unconventional for their time is revealed through their views on masculinity and femininity. With views that on gender equality that were extremely progressive, the women found genuine energy from each other that fed their creativity.

“What Virginia understood was that your essential self can have both masculine and feminine qualities. Vita enacted that in her life by having relationships with both men and women. I think she had a sexual appetite and approach to romance that was more stereotypically male in that she would pursue and conquer mainly women, sometimes men. I think our film explores that too. There is masculine and feminine in everyone and I think our film has a very specific approach to vulnerability. That’s one of the reasons I wanted to make the film as well because it’s a film about Virginia who is a person who was treated by her community and by the outside world as someone who was incredibly fragile because of the struggles she had because of [her] emotional, psychological challenges. Whereas actually this relationship which everybody presumed would really overwhelm, her own creative genius came to her rescue and she wrote this novel as a way of sort of digesting and conquering this experience. In a way, it’s a film as well about a woman’s heart and mind and soul and the creative genius rescuing herself from what is a very universal experience, which is a very sort of intoxicating love affair that isn’t going well.”

In development of the film, Button was as thorough as possible in her research, making sure to get the support of the families involved. However, she also feels that there’s a subjectivity to the film that makes it exciting for her.

“I was really, really keen to bring our own response to it,” Button explains. “I think what’s different is that it’s mine, Gemma and Elizabeth’s version of this story. It’s a really expressionistic piece. Judith Nicholson (Vita Sackville-Wests granddaughter) and Viriginia Nicholson (Vanessa Bell’s—Virginia Woolf’s sister—granddaughter) have been incredibly supportive of the film and our research was very respectful and detailed. So, it had their blessing, which was very. But it’s also our response to it. It is in itself expressionistic. I love that none of our actors look exactly like them or sound exactly like them. I wanted to take these actors who are so wonderful and it’s their approach. It’s what we can know about Virginia Woolf and Vita Sackville-West from their writings, their letters, their work, their families, mixed with Gemma’s voice and Elizabeth’s voice.”

As is the case in any biography, there is a balance between truth and fiction within the film. Regarding this balance, Button argues that there is only so much that one can understand about a person given the information available.

“In a way that film’s got sort of this amazing kind of meta thing going on where it is a film with a biographical leaning about Virginia writing a sort of non-biography of Vita. If you looked at my text messages today and said what I was saying to everyone, you would go to certain picture of what’s going on in my life in your mind that might not be true exactly what’s going on. So, letters and writings are only fragments that suggest what’s going on so we can’t know exactly. I was very aware of that making the film in a quite liberating way because we’re saying that we will do this extensive research and be as authentic as we can, but… I think biography is fascinating. You can chase the truth, but you can never know it.”

In our current cultural climate, Vita and Virginia continues the growing trend of allowing the opportunity for different voices to speak to the masses. According to Button, it’s stirring to be a part of something on a broad scale that is opening the door for others to find their voice.

“I think it’s really exciting because, as filmmakers, we can often feel really isolated from each other,” she states. “Actors know more about directors than directors [know about each other] because they work with more of them. We can feel really isolated from each other, so I think it’s really exciting [for there to be] a wind where we’re all going in the same direction. That’s really cool. I think it’s really exciting. I think it does have an overlap with a kind of political conversation where we’re talking about how can we open up the spectrum and hear different voices.”

“I think there absolutely is that sense of finding a voice [within the film] but I think that, in the case of Vita and Virginia, these women have found their voices. There’s nothing adolescent about them. There’s nothing pubescent about them. It’s not coming of age anything. These women are of age and I think more films should be made about women of age. I see a lot of kind of younger women on screen and I think that’s brilliant too. You’re either pubescent or you’re an elderly sage–sort of Yoda–and there’s a lot that goes on in between I think. These women aren’t finding their voices, but they’re being heard. We’re listening to them for the first time. They are heard by their husbands in the film. They’re heard by their communities in the film. They’re making brilliant work that people think is fantastic. So I’ve tried to make film where they’re not finding their voices. They know them. They’re listening to each other. They’re listened to within their worlds and it’s us who’s listening to them for the first time.”

In light of this, as a woman director, Button is also thrilled at the opportunity to have a chance to speak her own voice through film as well. Nevertheless, she also maintains that her motivation remains her desire to offer a different perspective as opposed to any direct political agenda.

“I think the kind of the work is very separate from the movement,” she reflects. “I think it’s really important that I keep that very much in the front of my mind. I think I wouldn’t make good films if I cooked up an agenda and then tried to make films that chase that agenda. In my mind I keep things very, very separate. There’s an intersection because I’m interested in a female perspective on life… What I’d like to do is make films that offer a different perspective, whether that’s a female perspective, whether that’s has to do with class or race or whatever. I think we’ve talked a lot about the male gaze and I think we’ve talked less about the female gaze. I’d like to make films that have a female gaze because I don’t know what it is. I’d like to make something that tries to look for it. but there’s not an agenda. Both things really interest me and, in my mind, I keep them very separate. I enjoy having conversations about it, but it’s not why I’m on set.”

Vita and Virginia premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival.

5.01 Bringing THE PREDATOR Back to Life

by Leave a Comment

With the return of The Predator, writer/director Shane Black wants to take you back to the 80s for some good old-fashioned violence and horror… but do other stereotypes and issues come with that? In the Season 5 premiere, Steve welcomes Peter Adourian to talk about The Predator‘s views on hyper-masculinity, mental health and throwback films in the modern era.

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

5.01 The Predator

Thanks Peter for joining us!

DF-14814_R2 – A deadly Predator escapes from a secret government compound in Twentieth Century Fox’s THE PREDATOR. Photo Credit: Kimberley French.