The House Next Door

Not to detract attention from the movie that you've actually made or anything, but: out of curiousity, what's the detective novel you're adapting? (The French tend to have good taste in such manners.)

I can't say the title because I don't have a cast or financing yet. I promise I'll announce it as soon as the pieces are in place. It's not a bestseller, I can tell you that much, but it's written by one of the most acclaimed new crime writers of recent years, and it's very much atmosphere and character driven. Kind of a "Friends of Eddie Coyle" vibe.

I sort of figured you might not be able to say yet but figured there wouldn't be harm in asking. (And, on a tanget, I love "Friends of Eddie Coyle.")

Oh, and congratulations, which I forgot to say before.

Good luck. It must be weird to be on the other end of this thing. I can't imagine what it's like.

Are there other critics who make movies? If so, who are they?

Richard Schickel makes documentaries, and my colleague Godfrey Cheshire is working on one as well. Katherine Dieckmann, a critic whose work has appeared in The Village Voice, directed a very good movie in 1998 called "A Good Baby." Chris Gore of Film Threat directed a spoof of indie films called "My Big Fat Independent Movie," and there are other examples. And of course if you reach back a bit you can pull in people like Paul Schrader and Peter Bogdanovich. And Canada's Guy Maddin seems to write prodigiously on movies when he's not making them. But there is generally not as much of a vibrant tradition in North America of the critic/moviemaker as there is in other parts of the world.

MZS, did you forget Mssrs. Truffaut and Godard?

I hope you're not going to pull an Ebert and review your own movie. If you do, you'll rip a hole in the space-time continuum.

Nah, I wouldn't do that. It would be like me telling you that my kids are the most beautiful kids in the world. Which they are, of course.

Speaking of reviews, you should find me and kick my ass because I never gave you my review for Home. Of course, I'll come out to see it again with a regular (non-film festival, that is) crowd. Break a leg! You can have a sign that says "if you don't like Home, we won't give you your money back, but you can have this life-sized Odie doll! Only one available."

I have a question: How does it feel to be on the receiving end of the film critic? You put a lot of time and effort into the feature. Would you like to borrow my pimp stick for the critic that said "Don't quit your day job?"

And I like the G train! (Viewers of the movie will understand why I said that...)

Unlike in other countries -- where film criticism and filmmaking tend to be seen in a continuum, as different aspects of the same discipline -- the US pretends that there is this hard, nearly uncrossable line between directing and reviewing. Maybe it's because so much is riding on the industries in the US, but it's a silly differentiation -- and one which, for all intents and purposes, doesn't really exist.

Ebert wrote a fricking Russ Meyer film, several of Scorsese's films have been penned by a former Time critic, and Pauline Kael once even flirted with a career in Hollywood. It's absolutely not unheard of. And as I said, in other countries, especially before the popularization of film schools, one of the first steps towards making films was often writing about them.

Odie: It feels a lot better than I thought it would feel. I was annoyed when The Village Voice panned the movie, but we've gotten some really good reviews, including our very first one from the San Jose Metro out at Cinequest, which seemed like good karma. I've been a critic long enough to know that no movie is going to get a unanimous response. I feel 100 percent confident that this is a rich, original take on the genre that requires but rewards serious scrutiny. The biggest hurdle is budgetary: it's a microbudget movie that's all about observed behavior, no backstory, no three acts, and for many characters, no last names. So people who aren't down with that are going to have a tough time slipping into the groove. But people who like that sort of movie seem to become quite attached to it.

I knew when i was making it that it was a cult movie and people would have very strong either/or reactions to it. For some people the reaction is, "There's nothing happening here, this is a movie about nothing, they're just talking in a house." For other people it's a very intense, emotional experience, and they want to see the movie again to pick up on small details they missed the first time, like the repetition of certain camera moves or certain motifs in the dialogue. The latter people are the people for whom I made the movie. People like me, basically. It's an extremely selfish movie in that sense; I really only made it for me, and frankly I'm kind of stunned that it's gotten this far. So give it a look. There is no such thing as an invalid take on the movie. It's kind of a Rorschach test, but with a lot of furtive kissing.

And to anyone reading this who does not live in the greater NYC area, e-mail me and I'll put you on a list to get information about this movie and future projects.

I expect and in some ways look forward to a wide spectrum of reactions, from ecstatic to poisonous, because that's what real filmmakers get, and deserve. I'm going to be doing this for a long time so it's good to get used to the process now.

And just in case that's not enough information, here's a link to a feature article about the movie which ends with what has be the single most mortifying quote I've ever given.

Congratulations -- if you can get a week in a L.A. theater this year, will you start working up those FYC ads for next year's Oscars? Just think -- I'll be able to say I knew you when...

Is there any chance of HOME getting a European release? (The Netherlands, to be more exact?)

I don't consider myself a critic, but I've always found the combination of making films and writing about them inspiring myself. What's funny is when you start seeing the results of this crossbreed. Fiction and suspense are creeping into my theoretical articles, while my audiovisual work increasingly features elements of auto critique. (One has to look for it to see it, of course.)

Matt already said how his visual expressions can be seen as a continuation of criticism by other means. I'll give an example of how it also works the other way round. Last year I had the questionable honor to work for a television station that had a content department in one city and a design department in another. My intense frustration over the screwed-up workflow and lack of synthesis found its natural way into an article on the crucial relationship between form and content in cinema. These kind of parallels happen all the time.

I'm definitely looking forward to see these science fiction shorts you're talking about, Matt!

Hey, Peet: I'm going to be coy about the plot because I want to wait till I'm done before showing it to people -- a recurring theme on this post! -- but here's a link to some preliminary test photos for one of the models , by chief sculptor Gabe Evans. And my production designer, the comic book artist Alex Lamas, has posted some conceptual drawings and paintings. These are very early stage visualizations of designs that might change between now and shooting, but they'll give you some idea of the flavor of it.

I dig! Can I pre-order the DVD? Any Barbarella-ish costumes I can look forward to? ;-)

No Barbarella. Some cool planetary destructo-action, though.

MZS (after several drinks?): “In today’s environment, you need to kick people in the nuts, but I’m not that much of a nut kicker.”

You just knew I wasn't going to let you get away with that, Eric Cartman Seitz! I WISH WISH WISH the quote people had used that in the reviewer quote section of the HOME ads:

"Not much of a nut kicker" -Matt Zoller Seitz, NY Free Press.

Didn't HOME win some festival awards in Trenton (home of governors who rub on Black men for photo opportunities...and pleasure too)? And will this release mean that the major NYC papers will review it (Or have they already)?

I am told there will be reviews in the dailies. I await them with great interest.

Good luck with the film. Any chance it'll be playing in DC in the near future?

Chuck: You never know. I'm always open to the possibility of another showing. In the meantime, e-mail me your address and I'll send you a preview screener.

Matt, I'll do you one better: Musetto's review of my film in the Post actually had the words "he shouldn't quit his day job" in it. Of course, when you're a critic, you're in the tenuous position of people *knowing* what your day job is (or that you even have one) so they can make that crack. (As opposed to, say, Edward Burns with THE BROTHERS MCMULLEN, where few people knew he was an Entertainment Tonight intern, or whatever he was.)

The daily papers will review your film (except maybe the Sun or the Daily News -- not sure what their policies are w/r/t Pioneer releases). The problem you'll find is that since the lead critics all probably know you, the reviews will be relegated to fourth stringers and freelancers and whatnot. This wasn't such a problem with me, for the simple fact that nobody knows who the fuck I am. But for a big shot like you, I imagine things will be different.

Since I don't know Matt nearly as well as some of you, and yet I've seen "Home", I'd like to say (hopefully sans bias) that it's a pretty bitchin' little flick.

I takes a lot of guts to be a critic and a filmmaker here in the U.S., but even more than that, I don't believe that the majority of U.S. critics would even have what it takes to make a movie, certainly not an indie. (I have to wonder how many of them would fare even under "ideal" studio conditions.)

But there is something very odd about watching a film by a critic, as you've been privvy to all of their opinions, ideas and thoughts about the way things should be, and you wonder if they left all that baggage at the door in making their film, or conversely how it affected the film as it went along.

To Matt's credit, there doesn't appear to be anything calculated about "Home" and one of its huge strengths is its looseness and how easily it flows. If I didn't know it was made by a film critic, I never would have guessed. This is, of course, not to imply there's some kind of equation for working such things out, and yet...

I've run out of shit to spew.

My review is under "lynchnut" on "Home's" IMDB page. I like to think I'm a good screenwriter, but I know I'm a lousy film critic, so bear that in mind.

If I'm a big shot, this really is a small world.

Also: I am told Musetto is reviewing HOME. Fingers crossed, but of course I will expect the worst.

I really want to see this film. Any chance it's gonna show in San Francisco anytime soon?

Also, Matt, have you seen Caveh Zahedi's new movie, I am a Sex Addict, yet?

Grand Epic: Maybe, if somebody there feels like showing it. I don't know anything about San Francisco moviehouses, though, so I wouldn't know where to begin. Like everyone else at this level of the game, I'm kind of making it up as I go.

And I have not yet seen "I Am a Sex Addict." I would certainly like to, and when things calm down a bit, I am sure I will.

Well, I may have already said in other comments here that I always thought Mr. Seitz had a filmmaker's eye, so I was not in the least surprised to read that he'd made the leap. Two Boots Pioneer, eh? I'm sure I can make that within the week to come. I'll be very curious what-all ya wrought there.

You specify that this detective author is relatively recent, so it can't be the one I've got my eye on (also popular in France, curiously enough). Best o'luck.

Although it's starting to look like my first feature will be a documentary. Never saw it coming but it was so obvious I can't imagine why we didn't start this earlier. (Well, spending the better part of a year thinking I had financing for the horror movie will do that, won't it.)

Keep me posted, Dan, I am curious to see what you come up with.

This whole idea af a conflict between the filmmaker and the critic is news to me. Certainly they are two different activities, but I don't see why a person can't do one or both, and in whatever combination he sees fit. Who the heck is fussing about that?

I've never been to the Two Boots Pioneer Theater, but a look at its website and program schedule makes me suspect that the closest San Francisco equivalents might be either the Roxie or Artists' Television Access. I don't think the latter is equipped for 35mm screenings, but then I don't know how Home is being distributed either.

Hey, this is old news! I was blowing the "Horn" trumpet last year!!! (Good luck with the movie, Matt.)

Make that the "Home" trumpet. Unless you plan to change the name of the film to "Horn" (message to self: copyedit before posting).

The New York Times weighs in.

Hey Matt - if you ever have the chance to send a screener towards Dallas, I'm still anxious to see the second half of the film - and to review it, of course. In the meantime, best of luck with the run this week, and I'll do my best to force my NYC friends to go see it.

Hey Seitz & "Home" fans & haters,

Check out the awesome interview I did w/Matt(5 questions, very long answers), at Filmmaking for the Poor blog:

http://www.filmmakingforthepoor.blogspot.com/

It'll be up on top of the site for a couple of days. I'll post the direct link soon.

Sujewa
http://www.wilddiner.com/
**************************

MZS, I like the first line of the NY Times review:

"You've probably been to parties like this, even if you wish you hadn't: languid all-nighters filled with vaguely recognizable music and vaguely employed artists."

When I read that, I said "yeah, but I never lasted longer than 10 minutes at any of them." I am thankful for your movie showing me what happens after I leave (and why I'm not sorry I do)!

Seriously, as you know I enjoyed your movie, but I never told you why. In a nutshell, I like being the fly on the wall, especially in situations where I would not find myself in the real world. HOME's camerawork and your direction convey the sense of making the viewer privy to an intimate, private function.

Additionally, I noticed those visual and aural motifs that you mention, and I was intrigued to see what you would try next. It is not done ostentatiously; it's operating on a wavelength beneath the surface of the obvious. I somehow wound up on that wavelength, and I am certain that the director put me there. It's the same feeling I got when I watched Russian Ark: I was fascinated by the structure of the film while being completely detached from the subject matter. I was just a complete observer, watching the lab rats go through their Pavlovian motions. It was a very scientific approach, but it worked for me.

In real life, I would not have lasted five minutes in a situation like HOME. I would have gone upside your characters' heads, with a certain blunt street instrument I occasionally mention here, before running wildly into the night in search of a party where the music was too loud to hear the solipsistic bullshit I grew out of once I left my 20's (your writing was spot on in that regard--thank God I'm not young anymore). The fact that you kept me riveted with your craftmanship is a testament to you as a filmmaker.

I look forward to seeing it again to see if there is anything I missed on that wavelength.

I also liked that the NY Times gave "big ups" (as we say in my 'hood) to your apartment! The property value has gone up!

Odie, that's the best review yet!

Alright, Matt. You win the Vinny Musetto Battle. (Though both of us got two stars. It's almost enough to make me wish he'd given my film one star.)

Also, given the fact that he has made this "Keep Your Day Job" crack twice now, our man might be in desperate need of some originality. Or maybe a *new* day job himself? (That's mean. I kid, I kid...)

You kid because you love.

The NY Post headline is hilarious. Don't worry too much about it Matt, lots of great artists (Walt Whitman, Blake, Fugazi [for a couple of years into that bands life]) had to keep their dayjobs temporarily or permanently while turning out fine & or challenging works, & some work that failed but lead to successful art. Creative risk taking is always more exciting then damning critical commentary.

Sujewa
*******

I actually love that headline. I'm thinking of having it printed on a T shirt!

Yet the Post still gave it "two stars". It looks like the reviewer has more love for the film through the star rating than the actual review.

And everybody knows that most people only look at the star rating of reviews, because it's easier than reading. Bonus!!!

Ugh, that "day job" thing. Do they say that in other countries? It seems like only the US would equate the ability to learn a living from an inherently unprofitable medium with artistic failure. There are lots of people whose "day job" is making movies who shouldn't be allowed near a film set, and tons of talented filmmakers who can't catch a break, even those who've completed several features. Hell, from what I understand, even Errol Morris still has to shoot commercials to pay the rent. I can't swear up and down I've never used the line, but it seems like the most snide, knee-jerk and ultimately unrevealing thing you could say. Lazy, too.

Also, hey! I'm in the ad!

Yeah, and the strange thing is, I've never actually met or spoken with you. Our only communication has been through the comments section of this blog. For a while there, the first few times you posted in the comment section, I wondered if you were that Sam Adams or just a guy who liked the beer.

I am relieved you liked the flick, though. You've stripped the flesh off many a movie's back, so when I heard you'd been sent a screener I feared similar treatment. Maybe someday if I get to Philly I'll be able to put a face to the name.

I wish to God I'd seen this when it was screening in San Jose. Any chance of your bringing it back to the Bay Area?

How did the opening night go Matt? Spare no details.

Sujewa
*******

Hey, Sujewa--

A detailed account will have to wait until Saturday. My first obligation is to Robert Altman. Suffice to say I could not be happier.

Maya--

I'd love to show the movie in the Bay Area, and I've already gotten suggestions for venues. We'll see.

Hey, so I'm a day late and a dollar short... as usual.

But in my (ahem) unbiased critical opinion this is one lovely little movie.

The Conflict-Of-Interest Police can take a breather, because I didn't meet its maker until after the screening at the Boston Fest last year.

And rest assured, if I hadn't genuinely dug HOME a whole heckuva lot... well, I probably would've just avoided Matt like the plague for the rest of the weekend and gone home miserable because one of my heroes let me down again (not exactly a new experience.)

But what a strange and wonderful movie!

Eleven months and three viewings later, it's still sticking with me like crazy. There's just such a generous, humanistic gaze in this picture -- so warm to all the characters and capturing such a collection of odd, fleeting moments (I know I said it about ten times already over way too many beers, but that's some wicked awesome furtive kising, bro.)

What initially appears cluttered and chaotic eventually reveals itself as an intricately structured series of variations on the same theme -- "put-up-or-shut-up" moments as the same recurring dream keeps turning real for most of our characters.

Meanwhile that amazing house is gorgeously anthromopothized... it's a breathing, nurturing, welcoming HOME. (If more people see this flick, I fear your rent is gonna skyrocket, pal.)

And Richard's soundscape is so amazingly dense. As I recall, this was the main topic of conversation at all those Bean-town after-parties. (Nobody could figure out how he did it so cheap!) There are so many jokes and asides buried so deep in the audio track it's frankly impossible to catch them all the first time around.

So, belatedly, my dearest kudos and hats off. But if I may quote Mr. Musetto - please don't quit your day job... we need you too badly out there. (You can still do both, right?)

And if V.A.'s review is rehashing what he wrote about Bilge's film - well, you're in damn some fine company, pal.

Okay, the blow-job is over now.

The saddest six words in the English language.

Thanks, folks!

A flayer? Moi? I try to avoid kicking the little guy (except if the little guy is a prick), and for me, whatever HOME's failings might be are overcome by the simple fact that it gets the milieu unfailingly right. My cursory impression of the reviews is that the people who "get it" almost invariably tend to say something along the lines of, "I've feel like I've been to this party." It reminds me, very broadly, of how I felt about the novel HIGH FIDELITY: shortcomings notwithstanding, it was a book that was about something real, something I knew from life, and something no one had actually written about before. (Too bad the movie missed the mark.) It's not like all movies have to reflect my personal experiences (c.f. my love for KUNG FU HUSTLE), but it's rare enough when they do that it's worth drawing attention to them.

Glad u r happy with the opening night experience. Looking forward to reading the detailed account. Now I have to go figure out who this Robert Altman kid is, he makes movies you say?

Sujewa
*******

Sean, Thanks for you kind words about the sound. We were all very excited last night about the sound system in the Pioneer theater. It's the best we've heard yet!

Hey All,

If anyone posts or sees any blog entries about last night's "Home" premiere @ Pioneer (or any of the upcoming 6 shows there), post a link here please. Such entries may be useful to me as I continue to blog about "Home" from time to time at my blog.

2006 is The Year of DIY Distro in the US indie film world, I am going to follow "Sex Addict", "Home", my own "Date Number One" & several other self-distributed/partially self-distributed (Sex Addict) feature projects at my blog.

Thanks!

Sujewa
http://www.filmmakingforthepoor.blogspot.com/

Well Matt, I didn't make it to the Pioneer after all, which might be especially ridiculous considering I did manage to see Frank Marshall's EIGHT BELOW (hey, if the Pioneer had matinees ... ) So when's the DVD?

I'll be honest when I say that this sounds like the kind of thing (HOME) that I probably wouldn't even bother with if I didn't know who was behind it, although a properly adroit friend and/or reviewer might have pointed me to it (just as I did force a buddy to watch LAST NIGHT AT THE ALAMO, although we both agreed it kind of needed subtitles - not so much the accents, you can't quite mishear a line like "if we didn't have all the pussy in the world, there'd be a bounty on our heads," but because the sound recording was dreadful.)

Anyways, my budget for the past week was not considerable and I just HAD to see John Waters introducing and post-morteming this Marguerite Duras movie THE TRUCK, and that's 12 bucks just to start (I am a poor man, same reason I still haven't gotten my real computer back to work), so I'm afraid that HOME fell between the cracks of both budget and timing (just couldn't make it and I'm so sorry, Matt, I really want to see this; will it play anyplace else?)

And since you asked, I will keep you updated on this putative documentary; what I think we do is go over there and just shoot a couple weeks' worth of test footage, because I have the feeling we don't even genuinely know what we've got yet. We know the subjects but not where it will GO, which is what's always exciting about WATCHING a documentary; I've just never made one before, less videotapes of other subjects. I already have the feeling that there's a subtext that's really the subject I'm curious about, and this is an unexpected but perfect motor. (I shouldn't be using your own blog just to be coy and self-flattering, but you did ask about updates. When I get my own machine back up and working, I shall be hopefully less harried. Only so much you can do in this library window.)

Is HOME Oscar-qualifiable? (C'mon now, if CRASH could make it ... still haven't seen it and curiously now that it's won the principal award, I have no desire to see it AT ALL. I said elsewhere it was probably just another example of Angeleno navel-gazing; if FALLING DOWN had been released in December instead of March of its year, Michael Douglas and Robert Duvall would surely have gotten Oscar nominations, and ten to one Tuesday Weld would have won.)

(I kinda liked FALLING DOWN the first time, but the second I got hung up on the endless close-ups.)

Oh, I thought of something else, the idea of the "line" that should exist between film criticism and filmmaking. Nonsense; I wish more film critics had the eye that Matt does, he's one of the few in the business that actually understands how the craft works (hence my lack of surprise that he'd crossed over). Truffaut and Schrader, just to name two, were critics before they were filmmakers; Kurosawa passed his assistant director's test at PCL because he wrote basically a screed against how Japanese movies were being made at the time (I may be badly paraphrasing here but I'm in a rush, just five minutes to go). I've been a published critic and I've made amateur movies (which thank God I have the only copies of, and no one will ever see), and am up to other stuff. George Orwell is one of the greatest writers of the prior century, and he made a lot of his living being a book reviewer. Frankly I trust his word over that of someone who didn't know how to write anything besides a review.

The idea of a movie as tiny as HOME getting to the point where it could be Oscar nominated is really funny. It's a homegrown product, held together with spit and baling wire, with no stars and a director nobody's heard of outside of a few east coast newspaper readers. And as you say, it's the sort of film some might skip on the basis of its synopsis, which places it squarely in the mini-genre of the party movie. Its interest lies entirely in the intricacies of how it's put together, and even that is no guarantee of popular success. The characters are neurotic and needy and selfish and often cruel, and the film makes no attempt to beg you to love them, the structure is elliptical and opaque and despite its title, it doesn't invite people in. It's a cult film in pretty much every way, and I knew that when I directed it. But cult movies have legs, and I am confident that this one will too.

Tonight's the last show at the Pioneer Theater (Wednesday March 8 9 p.m.). By all means, come out. We'll get a beer afterward.