“I’d love to play someone who is extremely charming, but first I’ll have to learn how to be charming.”” — Kate Lyn Sheil

I’ve written enough about Kate Lyn Sheil’s projects I figured she’s due her own post. It’s her birthday today. Sheil is ubiquitous in the American indie scene – and there is still an indie scene, although distribution has changed. If Sheil came up in the ’90s, she’d be way more well-known. People probably know her from House of Cards but … You have to seek out her film catalog, you have to know it’s there and go find it. You won’t be sorry. Many of the films are low budget or micro-budget, and early on, the mid2000s, she was sometimes making 10 films a year. If she were more mainstream, she’d make 1 or 2 movies a year. She “came up” in the New York mumblecore scene, with other artists – all of whom she worked with – many of whom were her classmates at NYU. Like Alex Ross Perry. Perry and Sheil both worked as clerks at the legendary Kim’s Video. In an interview, Sheil talked about the closing of Kim’s Video:

I worry for New York City without that place existing. I would have been completely lost without it, and it changed my life very clearly. I would not have a career if Kim’s Video didn’t exist, ’cause all of my earliest projects were with people I knew from Kim’s. It means more to me than I can even really explain.

This crowd is based in New York. They all come from elsewhere, but New York is where it happened. The people in this scene all collaborate with one another: appearing in each others’ films, writing, directing … the brilliant cinematographer Sean Price Williams lives and works in this scene (he shot one of my favorite movies in the last ten-ish years, Christmas, Again. Other names: Joe Swanberg, Sophia Takal, Lawrence Michael Levine, Kentucker Audley, Dustin Guy Defa, Adam Wingard … (Greta Gerwig is probably the scene’s most famous “graduate”, and … well … I think she might have been the Eve Harrington of the mumblecore scene.) These people have been doing interesting challenging work – in all genres – for 20+ years at this point. Shiel has also worked multiple times with Amy Seimetz and Ti West.


Listen Up Philip, with Jason Schwarzman

Alex Ross Perry has reached indie-darling status, and Shiel is in Listen Up Philip and Queen of Earth … the Kim’s Video connection has served them well. (Perry and I were both interviewed for the documentary about Peter Bogdanovich’s They All Laughed.) Sheil was in the found-footage horror anthology, V/H/S, with different “chapters” directed by this whole crowd – Adam Wingard, David Bruckner, Glenn McQuaid, Joe Swanberg … Shiel starred in the “chapter” directed by Ti West, who has gone to blow my mind in particular with his horror trilogy known as “the X trilogy” starring Mia Goth. Because those films are horror I thought maybe they weren’t getting the kudos they should have gotten: of course, they were hits but each one had its own style and look, steeped in Hollywood history … And the trilogy films came out one after the other … just amazing. Sheil and Ti West worked again in Sacrament.


Kate Lyn Sheil in Green

Sheil has collaborated a number of times with Sophia Takal, whom I wrote about for Film Comment. Takal hasn’t directed much, unfortunately. Her Always Shine knocked me out! Takal works with her husband Lawrence Michael Levine, including the indie hit Gabi on the Roof in July – a mumblecore mystery caper written and directed my Levine, which Takal starred in, along with Amy Seimetz and Sheil. Well worth seeking out. The gem, for me, is Green, written and directed by Takal, starring Takal and Sheil, primarily, with Levine playing the third character. Green haunts me, and Sheil plays a woman with dangerously porous boundaries, who is seemingly “taken over” by Takal’s character, a chatty-Cathy local girl who becomes a little obsessed with Sheil’s more worldly cosmopolitan character. The two women even look alike, and are indistinguishable from behind. It’s a beautiful film, and a precursor of Always Shine.


Sophia Takal and Kate Lyn Sheil in Green

Speaking of Amy Seimetz: she’s a wonderful actor and also a director and writer (I served on a jury with her at Indie Memphis). Her Sun Don’t Shine, starring Sheil and Kentucker Audley (whom I’ve written about ad nauseum: he’s a fave). Seimetz made headlines a while back for being “let go” from that horrible series The Idol, because The Weeknd thought she brought too female a perspective. Don’t get me started. You don’t DESERVE Amy Seimetz. So sick of this shit. Sun Don’t Shine takes place in sun-blasted strip-mall-littered Florida, with an aimless “couple” – played by Audley and Sheil – on the run after she murders her husband. The film has this languid flat-affect eeriness, these people seem incapable of strong feeling, both exude a scary passivity … like attracts like?


Kate Lyn Sheil and Kentucker Audley Sun Don’t Shine

The film may “borrow” from every couple-on-the-run movie ever made but Seimetz’s approach destabilizes the expected tropes. It’s like the characters are circling the drain, their interiority is barred from us. Maybe because there’s no “there there”, which is an even scarier proposition. Because the characters seem opaque even to themselves, the whole thing feels like a fever dream, with characters running from a threat, but not even fully realizing what’s actually happening. These two seem capable of literally anything. The final shot, Sheil swimming in a backyard pool, and then confronted by the owner, stays with me. Terrific film.


Both from Sun Don’t Shine

Sheil worked again with Seimetz in the quietly terrifying She Dies Tomorrow, which I reviewed for Ebert. Sheil is the lead here, and she starts out in a frightening state of deterioration, completely shattered, until she sees …. it. And when she sees it, she has these moments when she looks into the camera, dazzled – but frozen – Is what she sees beautiful? Is it a gaping black abyss? We eventually know what this … swirling light … does, but before then and even after … She is caught in its glow, and the look on her face is truly mad in an ecstatic way. (Sheil would make a great nun, one of those ecstatic people who see the Virgin Mary weeping in a cave somewhere in Albania, and people flock to her for healing.) We never see what she sees. We don’t need to. Sheil works from a liminal space, much is unspoken – we see this in Green, in Sun Don’t Shine … but we are never unclear. Some of the mumblecore acting style was almost non-acting and often it lacked focus, nothing cohered – which can be valid, but sometimes it just felt like actors flailing through an improv in a small apartment. Sheil works from a deep, real, and even existential place, and the the hard-to-pin-down-ness of it makes her powerful. She knows why she’s doing everything.


Kate Lyn Sheil, She Dies Tomorrow

The nameless terror we see in her face in She Dies Tomorrow is mixed with a swoon of need … which we somehow connect with the opening sequence, pre-discovery of swirling colored lights, where she lies prostrate, outside, in a glittering green cocktail dress, beside herself with anguish. She’s already ready for the colored lights. This reminds me a little bit of the look on Jane Fonda’s face at the end of They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? The ecstasy and RELIEF of knowing your end is near, the nihilistic desire to be done with it all. Not too many actresses can go there, the way Sheil does.


Kate Lyn Sheil, She Dies Tomorrow

A couple more notable excellent performances – and movies – to highlight. Like I said, Sheil’s career is extensive.

Zachary Wigon’s The Heart Machine is a harrowing film about obsession and John Gallagher Jr. captures a man’s descent into monomaniacal romantic obsession in such uncomfortable ways there are times it is almost unwatchable. But so very real. A man and a woman meet up on Tinder over Skype. When the film opens, they speak every day in a totally familiar way, it’s been going on for a while. They have never met in person because she is living in Berlin for a couple months. They can meet up when she gets home.


John Gallagher and Kate Lyn Sheil, The Heart Machine

We only see her on Skype. The story is really from Gallagher’s point of view: the subway rides, the parties, the East Village bars – it’s a great New York movie and very very familiar if you lived here at a certain time in your life, before things were settled, before you “settled down”, the challenges of finding a person to date in New York. I found it a horrible adjustment after careening through the social scene in Chicago, where the men were aggressive (in a good way), and came up to you to chat you up, intentionally, and then got your phone number at the end. Maybe it’s because it was before online dating? And so if you wanted to date someone, or go on a date, or even hook up, you had to get yourself together to do it in person. The Heart Machine takes place in the Tinder era and these two feel a connection, and immerse themselves in a relationship before they ever met. I had a couple of those once I lived in New York, and once the online thing was happening. I learned a lot of lessons, one of which was: force the in-person meeting as early as possible. Don’t get into a long back and forth online thing.

The Heart Machine shows the dangers of feeling such a connection and pinning hopes on it before it’s been tested in the real world. The film is not didactic: it’s made by a younger person who knows this world well. He’s not some older person judging “the kids” for their online shenanigans. It’s so easy to meet someone you really feel something for online … but (in my experience) that way danger lies. Gallagher’s obsession is the real deal: not exactly Rupert Pupkin or Travis Bickle level but … close.


John Gallagher, The Heart Machine

I wrote a long piece about the film. (There are some spoilers there. I’d suggest going into it semi-cold.

Here, Sheil plays a mystery woman. Seen only on a Skype screen at first. She exists (again) in a liminal space: here but not exactly here, an image but not corporeal … She exudes warmth and closeness but there’s something unreachable there, and it’s seductive. Not exactly Vertigo-level but … close. A millennial Vertigo. She’s there but not there.


Kate Lyn Sheil, The Heart Machine

A film like The Heart Machine depends solely on the power and reality of the performances. You need to enter their world and relationship, you have to be pulled down into Gallagher’s obsession: you feel how crazy he’s getting, and you feel alarmed, but you’re only with him for long stretches of the film: his headspace gets more and more claustrophobic, at the same time she’s retreating into a remote idealization and maybe even something either sinister or supernatural. Gallagher is so obsessed you start to wonder if the whole thing is a delusion, if she isn’t real at all, she exists only as a fantasy of the perfect woman. I can’t say enough good things about it.

Last, but far from least, is Kate Plays Christine, by documentary filmmaker Robert Greene. The film got a lot of press and won a lot of awards when it played the festival circuuit in 2016. In fact, Kate Plays Christine was my introduction to her and I was so intrigued I went back to watch the rest of her filmography.


Kate Lyn Sheil in Kate Plays Christine

The film is hard to explain as is a strange coincidence happened in 2016. Another film came out in 2016 called Christine, starring Rebecca Hall. I reviewed for Ebert. Christine was about Christine Chubbuck whose main claim to “fame” was shooting herself during a live news broadcast in 1974. She was a reporter reading the news. She had a gun in her purse. Except for one in-depth article back then, where the writer interviewed her friends and colleagues who spoke of her increasing desperation and mental problems, the entire event is cloaked in mystery and – naturally – the television station had no desire to set the record straight. They wanted to erase her memory and have people forget what happened at their station – traumatizing viewers. The film Christine is really good (for whatever reason I had reservations about it at first, reflected in my review. This is what happens when you write about a film a couple hours after you’ve seen it. Sometimes things are revealed on re-watch, and I’ve re-watched Christine many times. It is excellent and one of the best portrayals of unshakable depression – and the helplessness others feel when watching the descent – I’ve ever seen.)

Kate Plays Christine also came out in 2016, and while it is – essentially – a documentary, it also focuses on Christine Chubbuck, albeit taking a totally different approach. 2016 wasn’t an anniversary year or anything, and the story isn’t well-known at all, so what are the odds of two films coming out in the same year on this subject? They are interesting companion pieces, almost as though the Rebecca Hall version is an alternate version of the film we see being prepared in Kate Plays Christine. Kate Plays Christine details Sheil’s acting process in preparing to play the role (for a film that never happened). Christine Chubbuck was in the air. Strange.


Kate Lyn Sheil in Kate Plays Christine

As I’ve discussed, Sheil works from a fluid space: she’s orbiting the earth AND she’s in the dirt. Kate Plays Christine makes this explicit. Sheil and Greene and a small crew travel to Florida to research Christine Chubbuck, in preparation for a proposed and/or potential film about Chubbuck. I actually haven’t researched whether or not Greene decided to pivot into a film about process solely, to document Sheil’s process, emotional, physical, investigative … and give up on making the actual film … or whether … they actually did plan on making a film and this was meant for behind-the-scenes footage, and Greene decided to leave as is. Either way, it’s one of the great films about acting preparation. I’m in heaven watching it.


Kate Lyn Sheil in Kate Plays Christine

Greene comes from a documentary background and so Kate Plays Christine also includes footage of Greene and Sheil tracking down people who knew Chubbuck, to find out their impressions, their memories, all to be used by Sheil in her portrayal. People are hard to find. People have died. People are also hesitant to talk to them. This tragedy happened in 1974 and it covered the television station in shame and infamy (the news broadcast footage is nowhere to be found. It was only seen once, and live.)


Kate Lyn Sheil in Kate Plays Christine

Sheil also works on Christine’s physicality, studying the existing footage of Chubbuck from her various broadcasts (Chubbuck was not an anchor. She was a local reporter, frustrated with the stories she was assigned – strawberry festivals, etc. The stuff she was interested in was considered boring – re-districting, land laws, school board, etc. Not exactly money-makers for the station). Sheil studies Chubbuck’s walk, her posture, her odd intense physicality – the long mane of black hair, the slouched posture. She tries wigs. The process is not haphazard. The wig is important.


Kate Lyn Sheil in Kate Plays Christine

Disappearing into the role is the goal. Not because it will win her an Oscar but because she wants to inhabit Chubbuck, who remains a mystery. Sheil is confronted with the mystery, the gap in between what we know and what Chubbuck did ultimately. How could she have done what she did? Sheil resists the confrontation. She can’t go through with it. She can’t re-create the broadcast, she resists reaching into her purse for the gun. She confronts the gap in understanding, the abyss Chubbuck was in which allowed her to do such a heinous thing, and Sheil’s knowledge of how much she doesn’t – and can’t – know.

There’s a dream-like quality to the film. The stormy skies, the dark green gulf, Sheil in a motel room staring at footage, or wandering up to a house, wearing huge sunglasses, hoping someone will let her in and talk to her about Christine.

I haven’t written a full piece about Kate Plays Christine, although I do discuss it briefly here. I’d suggest starting with Kate Plays Christine and then watching Christine.

There aren’t too many films like Kate Plays Christine, and the film speaks to Sheil’s status in the “scene”, among her peers.

“Kate”. That’s all you need to know.

Posted in Actors, Movies, On This Day | Tagged , | Leave a comment

“That is no country for old men.” — William Butler Yeats

“I thought we might bring the halves together if we had a national literature that made Ireland beautiful in the memory, and yet had been freed of provincialism by an exacting criticism, a European pose.” — W.B. Yeats

William Butler Yeats was born today in 1865. Yeats is a great poet and all that, but I grew up pretty much “over” him because he was omnipresent in our household. We were made to memorize his epitaph in order to receive 25 cents for our allowance:

Cast a cold eye
On life on death
Horseman pass by.

There was a framed copy of the epitaph on our dining room wall. You feel me? That’s the level we’re talking about. He seemed like a revered ancestor.

More below the jump.

Continue reading →

Posted in Books, On This Day, writers | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Review: O Horizon (2026)

Despite an appearance by Aimee Mann – playing herself – where she sings two songs in their entirety – O Horizon is a slow generalized chore. Plus there’s the Sackler connection, which has to be acknowledged. I reviewed for Ebert.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

“I am the most famous unknown of the century.” — Djuna Barnes

When Barnes called herself a “famous unknown” she may have been being elliptical or ironic, or she may have been just telling it like it is. Her writing didn’t have literal chronological through-lines and some readers found it challenging. So SHE was more famous than her WORK. Her fame came from her love affairs with women, and her immortalization in all the memoirs written by members of the vibrant bohemian lesbian ex-pat community in Paris, particularly its main scribe, the Amazon (her actual nickname) Natalie Clifford Barney. Djuna Barnes was a huge “player” in that scene, and in the ex-pat writer “scene” in general. She knew everyone. She was pals with James Joyce, Hemingway, Sylvia Beach. She was a writer and illustrator, and is most remembered for Nightwood (1936), a lesbian cult classic, written in a curlicue almost Gothic style but flavored with ironic Modernist detachment. Djuna Barnes shows up briefly in Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris (played by Emmanuelle Uzan) – an event gratifying to any Barnes fan. She dances with Owen Wilson, and he comments afterwards: “That was Djuna Barnes? No wonder she wanted to lead.” Ba-dum-ching.

Barnes worked on Nightwood for a number of years, giving public readings, editing, passing the manuscript around for feedback. Nobody wanted to publish. It is a difficult book. Nightwood eventually landed on T.S. Eliot’s desk. It was just ten years after his Wasteland cracked apart the certainties of the literary tradition. He was not afraid of difficult. He edited Nightwood, and eventually published it in 1936, with Faber and Faber. (He also said, famously, of Barnes: “Never has so much genius been combined with so little talent.” He wasn’t the only one who felt this contradictory way.) Nightwood is a roman a clef, with barely-disguised portraits of Barnes, her lovers, all of the women in that fascinating crowd.

Continue reading →

Posted in Books, James Joyce, On This Day, writers | Tagged | 4 Comments

“People always think of me as Maria and I think of me as Maria all the time.” –Sonia Manzano

marialove-640x360

“I realized that I was going to end up being my own role model. I became what I myself needed to see growing up as a kid, and I think I succeeded as Maria by never forgetting that there was some kid out there, in the outer boroughs, stressed out maybe, feeling invisible, looking to me the same way that I looked at television, trying to find someone like me.”
–Sonia Manzano on getting the role of Maria on Sesame Street

Sonia Manzano played “Maria” on Sesame Street for 45 years before retiring in 2015. In 2016, she received a Lifetime Achievement Daytime Emmy. She is also a very successful author of children’s books. I am a child of the 1970s. I was a first-generation Sesame Street fan. Maria was part of the family.

Of all of the memories I have of “Maria”, her moment in Christmas Eve on Sesame Street is the one I want to talk about today.

Continue reading →

Posted in Actors, On This Day, Television | Leave a comment

“I really genuinely look forward to coming to work every day.” — Treat Williams

It’s his birthday today. His death is such a loss!

In Sydney Lumet’s Making Movies, he talked about the choice to cast Treat Williams in Prince of the City:

I wasn’t sure whether we were in drama or tragedy territory [with Prince of the City]. knew I wanted to wind up somewhere between the two, leaning towards the tragic. Tragedy, when it works, leaves no room for tears. Tears would have been too easy in that movie. The classic definition of tragedy still works: pity and terror or awe, arriving at catharsis. That sense of awe requires a certain distance.

It’s hard to be in awe of someone you know well. The first thing affected was casting. If the leading role of Danny Ciello was played by DeNiro or Pacino, all ambivalence would disappear. By their nature, stars invite your faculty of identification. You empathize with them immediately, even if they’re playing monsters. A major star would defeat the picture with just the advertising.

I chose a superb but not very well known actor, Treat Williams. This may have defeated the commerciality of the movie, but it was the right choice dramatically.

Then I went further. I cast as many new faces as possible. If the actor had done lots of movies, I didn’t use him. In fact, for the first time in one of my pictures, out of 125 speaking parts, I cast 52 of them from “civilians” — people who had never acted before. This helped enormously in two areas: first, in distancing the audience by not giving them actors with whom they had associations; and second, in giving the picture a disguised “naturalism”, which would be slowly eroded as the picture went on.

If you’ve seen Prince of the City, and for a long time it was very hard to see – which is why I held on to my battered VHS tape – then you know the intelligence of Lumet’s choice. Williams owns that movie.

Williams said in a 2011 interview, “It’s a big film. It’s big emotionally. It’s operatic. It’s a great, great film, I think. I wish I’d had more experience and been a little older when I did it, but it’s the best I could do at the time, and I’m very proud of it.”

More after the jump!

Continue reading →

Posted in Actors, Movies, On This Day | Leave a comment

Happy Birthday, Chips Moman

g_mehr1_7037129_ver1.0_640_480
Elvis Presley and producer Chips Moman, American Sound Studio, Memphis, 1969

Great music producer, songwriter, and American Sound studio owner Chips Moman was an essential part of the thrilling warp-and-weft of the Memphis music scene from the 1960s on. His work at Stax resulted in hits. He could be a visionary. He was very tough, very dedicated to what he saw, and how to bring it about. He did not want to coast on an artist’s established reputation. He wanted to move into uncharted waters. He encouraged risk-taking. One of his specialties was providing an injection of new energy for an artist whose career was coasting or flat-lining. He created a space where artists took risks, moving in new and bold directions. Dusty Springfield’s legendary album Dusty in Memphis, produced by Jerry Wexler, Arif Mardin and Tom Dowd, was recorded at Moman’s American Sound. Not a coincidence. Moman created an electric atmosphere of possibility and risk.

More after the jump.

Continue reading →

Posted in Music, On This Day | Tagged | 20 Comments

Physical Media Booklet Essay: Being scholarly about movies that don’t exist

It’s okay now to talk about what I wrote about for Sean Abley’s zine PHYSICAL MEDIA BOOKLET ESSAY. Sean’s pitch was along the lines of: “You know how some movies show fictional movies within them?” Examples: the soap opera in Twin Peaks. The movies Meryl Streep is seen filming in Postcards from the Edge. There are many many more examples. So Sean’s idea was to have his writers write 2,000 word essays, along the lines of a Criterion or Vinegar Syndrome booklet essay, for a 4k edition and/or restoration of a film that does not exist. He had this idea, and he reached out to a couple of writers, and asked if we’d be interested.

This was such a fun and funny idea, and I’ve had writer’s block for months now. I’ve got family things happening, I have not been at all well, and also I think I’m just tapped out from the last two years. But enough is enough. I jumped at the chance to do this fun random thing. Something different. The project was, essentially, fiction. And I haven’t written fiction since I wrote my script in 2009, and before that … I wrote a novel in the early 2000s called The Enchantment of Things, which naturally never saw the light of day, but I was very engrossed in writing it. I never write fiction anymore. So … basically making up a fake movie and then pontificating on it as though it exists in our world … sounded hilarious.

We each chose a movie-within-a-movie, something existing within the confines of another movie (or television show), that does not exist in our world.

Here is our Table of Contents:

I chose to write a lengthy “erudite” essay about Living in Oblivion, not the 1995 film directed by Tom DeCillo – one of the great films about film-making and such a ’90s New York staple – but the movie they’re seen shooting in the film, which is also called “Living in Oblivion”. So Catherine Keener plays a fictional actress, and I built out her entire biography in my piece. I created out of whole cloth the entire filmography of the director Nick Reve, played by Steve Buscemi. Literally every crew member, down to the gaffer, I created a biography for them. I wrote about a fictional not-real film as though it is real and I created this whole world including made up academic dissertations, scholarly quotes from scholars who do not exist, and made-up rabid fan bases on made-up Reddit boards. I chose to make the fake Living in Oblivion a “lost” film, only seen by a handful of people in a tiny film “festival” held in a basement in Bushwick. The reels disappeared at the festival wrap party. The film was never released, but its reputation in the intervening years ballooned, with all kinds of rumors proliferating about the shoot and what the hell happened. I made references to the Orson Welles’ cut of Magnificent Ambersons and Erich von Stroheim’s 9-hour version of Greed which only twelve people in the history of the planet ever saw. Coleridge and “Kubla Khan” makes an appearance.

Look at that title, absolutely dripping with bullshit.

As I worked on it, I actually started believing my bullshit. I wanted to see this fictional film. I believed in the lost reels. I hoped they’d turn up. The whole thing was so random and so fun. It felt like an acting exercise and it’s been a long time since I’ve done one of them.

Reading everyone else’s essays has been hilarious and awesome, because everyone is so smart, everyone just went with the ridiculousness. Sean was a grand master of ceremonies. Physical Media Booklet Essay was his brainchild and he made it happen! You can purchase the zine in Sean’s store. Over the next couple of weeks, interviews with each writer about our process for this will roll out on Sean’s podcast so I’ll be sure to link to it.

Let’s hear it for Living in Oblivion, the fake one and the real.

Posted in Movies | 11 Comments

“Language most shows a man. Speak that I may see thee.” — Ben Jonson

“O rare Benn Johnson.” — Jonson’s incorrectly-spelled epitaph in Westminster Abbey

It’s his birthday today.

Ben Jonson did everything. Plays, poems, satires, elegies, epigrams. His talent was wide and flexible. Everything he wrote feels inevitable. However, as Michael Schmidt writes in his wonderful Lives of the Poets: “Jonson suffers one irremediable disability: Shakespeare.”

When people have discussed him, throughout history, more often than not they do so in comparison to Shakespeare. Shakespeare is the context, Jonson is in that context’s shadow. As giant as Ben Jonson was, and he was a GIANT, he is not allowed to stand alone, because Shakespeare hovers over all. One cannot exist without consciousness of the other.

The men are placed in opposition merely because of their closeness in the timeline.

Bing Crosby once said something along these lines in re: Frank Sinatra: “Frank is a singer who comes along once in a lifetime, but why did he have to come along in my lifetime?”

One can imagine Ben Jonson thinking something similar about Shakespeare.

More beneath the jump:

Continue reading →

Posted in Books, On This Day, Theatre, writers | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

“What good is a character who’s always winking at the audience to let them in on the secret?” –Gene Wilder

giphy

It’s his birthday today.

Where does the humor lie? Can this moment be broken down to discover its secret? Is it the eye pan to the right? Is it the delayed eyebrow raise? Is it what’s happening with his mouth? Is it that it’s one of his specialties – the comedic pause?

Trying to describe in words why this moment is so funny is like trying to describe in words how a complicated calculus equation works. At a certain point, you just have to be good enough at calculus to even understand the lingo. Same here. All is really left is to sit back and be awed at someone who is this good at what he does.

Humphrey Bogart said that good acting was “6 feet back” in the eyes. Gene Wilder went that deep. Like … where WAS he? When he was at his most lunatic – he – whoever he was – was gone. All that remained was a devotion to the maniacal moment.

For example this:

Actors watch a moment like that and have the same reaction a young violinist probably has to seeing Ihtzak Perlman. You are in the same field as the genius, but in watching you realize it is in name only. You’re not even in the same hemisphere, really. A moment like Wilder’s turns the actors I know into Salieris. That’s the breaks. Just be grateful there are such artists who come down among us for a short while and grace us with their presence, their generosity, their gifts. We can learn from them and be inspired to be better.

gene-wilder-435

This is a famous story, but worth repeating:

In Gene Wilder’s book Kiss Me Like a Stranger, he describes his first meeting with the director Mel Stuart, before he had decided to do Willy Wonka. Wilder had reservations about the script as is. He had an idea. Listen to him, and learn. This is how specific he was as an actor. This is how much he understood story and character and AUDIENCE, too, let’s not forget. Those who think actors just do what the director tells them … well, they haven’t ever ever been involved in a creative process. Ever.

Although I liked Roald Dahl’s book Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, I wasn’t sure if I wanted to play Willy Wonka. The script was good, but there was something that was bothering me. Mel Stuart, the man who was going to direct the movie, came to my home to talk about it.

“What’s bothering you?”

“When I make my first entrance, I’d like to come out of the door carrying a cane and then walk towards the crowd with a limp. After the crowd sees that Willy Wonka is a cripple, they all whisper to themselves and then become deathly quiet. As I walk towards them, my cane sinks into one of the cobblestones I’m walking on and stands straight up, by itself … but I keep on walking, until I realize that I no longer have my cane. I start to fall forward, and just before I hit the ground, I do a beautiful forward somersault and bounce back up, to great applause.”

” … Why do you want to do that?”

“Because from that time on, no one will know if I’m lying or telling the truth.”

Mel Stuart looked a little puzzled. I knew he wanted to please me, but he wasn’t quite sure about this change.

“You mean – if you can’t do what you just said, you won’t do the part?”

“That’s right,” I answered.

Mel mumbled to himself, ” … comes out of the door, has a cane, cane gets stuck in a cobblestone, falls forward, does a somersault, and bounces back up …” He shrugged his shoulders. “Okay!”

Imagine Willy Wonka without that tumble.

Best of all: Mel Stuart filmed it exactly as Gene Wilder told him to. Shot for shot.

Wilder was RIGHT.

He was also right about Willy Wonka’s costume. Mel Stuart sent Wilder some sketches. Wilder looked them over, and wrote Stuart a note back with his thoughts.

Don’t miss Wilder’s letter. “The hat is terrific, but making it 2 inches shorter would make it more special.”

Gene Wilder came and spoke at my grad school. He would say something, or pause to think a bit before saying something, and the moment wasn’t even funny but his TONE and his TIMING had us roaring. He would stop when he heard us laugh, and say, “Y’know, that happens to me all the time.” He wasn’t annoyed. He calmly accepted that when he spoke in a serious way large groups of people began to laugh.

His timing was otherworldly.

My favorite Gene Wilder story (it’s in his book, but he told it to us when he visited my school) was about his first day on Bonnie & Clyde, his debut in film. He had done tons of theatre, but no movies.

He’s in the back of the car for the scene where the criminals take him hostage, and director Arthur Penn yells, “ACTION” and Wilder immediately started the scene. Penn stopped Wilder and said, “Just because I say Action doesn’t mean you have to start. It means that we are ready for when you are ready.” In other words, Penn felt Wilder’s nerves, and wanted him to chill. “Just take your time, and start when you’re ready.” Wilder was grateful. He took a moment after Penn called “Action”, got himself together, and then played the scene brilliantly. Afterwards, someone on the crew said to him, “Don’t get used to that.”

Wilder told that story in praise of Arthur Penn as a director (who was present in the room, this was an Actors Studio event), but also to illustrate that it’s an actor’s job to get himself together, however he has to, in the middle of the chaos of a set, so that you’re ready to go when everyone else is ready. That’s the job. Be ready when the director calls “Action.” And Penn gave him the space to learn that lesson on his first day on a movie set, without being yelled at/shamed/scorned.

He also told the story of seeing Charlie Chaplin’s The Circus when he was a kid, and having an “A-ha” moment in re: comedy. There’s the bit with the little boy and the hotdog.

Wilder watched it, agog, his analytical mind trying to break down WHY it was so hilarious. There was the timing of the bit with the hot dog, and Chaplin making goo-goo faces at the baby and then eating the hot dog, etc. Finally, Wilder realized that why the scene was so funny was that nobody in it – including Chaplin – was “acting funny.” The situation was funny. Chaplin played it for the reality of it. Wilder said that that one moment in The Circus inspired his whole career and he would come back to it if he got stuck. It was a roadmap of what to do, how to solve any given problem. Create a situation that is so funny that nobody needs to “act funny.”

Which brings me back to him saying something serious and all of us bursting into laughter.

His genius was untouchable. It’s like musical genius or a genius for math.

You can get more proficient in those things. But you cannot learn to do what the geniuses do. You’ll never EVER catch up.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Actors, On This Day | Tagged | 7 Comments