list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Brief Interviews with Hideous Men on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Brief_Interviews_with_Hideous_Men/331961/default.aspx Title: Brief Interviews with Hideous Men
Year: 2009
Director: John Krasinski
Plot: Adapted from the story by David Foster Wallace, Brief Interviews with Hideous Men tells the story of Sara Quinn, a graduate student in anthropology who's left feeling lost after her boyfriend breaks up with her and offers little explanation as to why. With her dissertation looming, Sara begins a project to interview men, all sorts of men, trying to unearth mystery of their bizarre behavior. As her personal life and her academic life continue to mingle, Sara uncovers some strange and disturbing things about the male perspective, but nothing could be quite as strange as what she learns about herself. ~ Cammila Albertson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 3
Number of Lists: 2
Number of blog posts: 5
]]>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:01:21 GMTBrief Interviews with Hideous Men2009John KrasinskiAdapted from the story by David Foster Wallace, Brief Interviews with Hideous Men tells the story of Sara Quinn, a graduate student in anthropology who's left feeling lost after her boyfriend breaks up with her and offers little explanation as to why. With her dissertation looming, Sara begins a project to interview men, all sorts of men, trying to unearth mystery of their bizarre behavior. As her personal life and her academic life continue to mingle, Sara uncovers some strange and disturbing things about the male perspective, but nothing could be quite as strange as what she learns about herself. ~ Cammila Albertson, All Movie Guide3Slightly Tagged (1-5)25http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s331961.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Brief_Interviews_with_Hideous_Men/331961/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/29/40057.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/29/2009 11:01:21 AM
Body: There is a good reason Hollywood continually makes Animal House wannabes and avoids producing films that actually focus on academia. Kids prefer their college movies to be about the fun stuff. And so a movie like Old School grossed $75 million while another Luke Wilson comedy called Tenure currently lacks a distributor. The latter film may also be hilarious, as a satire of the tenure process, but if it doesn’t concentrate more on beer bongs and naked co-eds, it won’t attract as big an audience. And according to some scholars, it may not even resonate with them, because it couldn’t possibly be what the process is really like. Film blogger and associate professor Chuck Tryon was quoted about the film last year as saying, “my ongoing pursuit of tenure typically involves me sitting in front of my laptop until 1 a.m., I don’t know how interesting that would be to watch.” And evident by the scathing reviews from Sundance of John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, it appears another film about academia has failed to make a strong case for the subject matter. Too bad for the late David Foster Wallace, whose stories were adapted for the film, that Gus Van Sant wasn’t at the helm. A decade ago, in an interview with Van Sant, Wallace pretty much gushed that Good Will Hunting is the most accurate film about academia ever made. Do we agree with him? Let’s just say there’s not a whole lot of competition for such an honor. But in our attempt to recognize the ten best films about academia, Good Will Hunting doesn’t quite make the top spot. 9. (tie) Elegy (2005) and The Human Stain (2003) Neither of these films is especially great, but it would be criminal for us not to recognize the work of Philip Roth, an author who depicts the academic world perfectly in his novels, particularly The Dying Animal (which is the basis for Elegy) and The Human Stain. The adaptations of these two books fail to capture much of what’s on the page, but each film has its own merit. Elegy, which primarily deals with an affair between a professor (Ben Kingsley) and a student (Penelope Cruz), is worth seeing for the more interesting relationship between that professor and his Pulitzer Prize-winning friend (Dennis Hopper). Rarely is fraternity between two members of the academic intelligentsia portrayed so enjoyably. As for The Human Stain, which also involves a professor (Anthony Hopkins) and his affair with a younger woman (Nicole Kidman), the film deals primarily with the issue of political correctness within academia. The topic is addressed nowhere near as well as it is in Roth’s novel, but it is at least a starting point for discussion, and it’s also worth seeing for an example in how not to cast a movie. 8. Soul Man (1986) If we are to include The Human Stain, it’s just as well we acknowledge this earlier comedy, which also involves ironic situations regarding race and academia. Hardly a brilliant movie, Soul Man is at least as humorous in its examination of racism as the Harold and Kumar movies. Yet it is far less esteemed. And the whole black face thing can no longer be looked down upon now that Robert Downey Jr. has that Oscar nomination for Tropic Thunder. The movie is a worthy lampoon of the politics of affirmative action and their affect on college admissions (as well as an obvious and general look at racism within the student population), but it’s especially entertaining for James Earl Jones as a professor who refuses to favor the masquerading protagonist (C. Thomas Howell) just because he’s black. 7. Back to School (1986) While Soul Man deals with the benefit of being a minority when it comes to getting into college, this film from the same year deals with the benefit of being rich. The idea that anyone with enough money can get into the school of his or her choice is depicted comically in a two-scene setup. In the first scene, a university dean (Ned Beatty) asks millionaire entrepreneur Thornton Mellon (Rodney Dangerfield) how he could possibly admit him as a student when he has no high school degree, no transcripts and no SAT scores. The movie then cuts to the punch-line scene, in which the dean and Mellon are celebrating the groundbreaking of a new business school for the university, named after Mellon, of course. Another favorite jab at academia is with the famous cameo by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., who is hired by Mellon to write a paper about his own work. The paper earns a failing grade. 6. Wet Hot American Summer (2001) You’re probably wondering how a comedy set at a summer camp could possibly be about academia. Well, it’s not specifically about academia, but it does feature a subplot involving a science professor (David Hyde Pierce) that does poke fun of the concept of tenure. This was pointed out by Elaine Showalter, an English professor at Princeton and author of the book Faculty Towers: The Academic Novel and Its Discontents, so you have to accept that it fits the list. Sure, she’s the mother of WHAS star and screenwriter Michael Showalter, but that shouldn’t take away from her observation. 5. The Paper Chase (1973) This film features a plot that could very well lend itself to the other kind of college film, but it focuses its attention on the classroom and the relationship between student and professor rather than the dorm room and social affairs. Of course, the student protagonist (Timothy Bottoms) is getting some action, but it is with the daughter (Lindsay Wagner) of the professorial antagonist (John Houseman, who won an Oscar for the performance), and so even the sex stuff is part of the politics of academia. The best scene is at the end, when Bottoms’ character gives the finger to higher education by not even bothering to look at his final grades. If only the audience was also left unaware of his marks, as the original novel leaves that revelation out. 4. Good Will Hunting (1997) David Foster Wallace may have considered this film to be the best film about academia when he discussed it with Gus Van Sant in 1998, but since that time there have been two more poignant films to deal with the subject. Plus, it never was the best film on academia to begin with. So, as much as he’s right to celebrate the film and in particular the portrayal of Stellan Skarsgard’s character and the issue of professors wanting their students to be brilliant, but not too brilliant, there are three more titles to go. 3. Wonder Boys (2000) Based on Michael Chabon’s novel of the same name, Curstin Hanson’s film cinematically captures the atmosphere of academia as well as Philip Roth does on the page (perhaps Hanson should adapt Roth?). However, one issue with this atmosphere may be that the relationships and characters, though written and portrayed wonderfully, are rather common for such a story. Also, why not change things a bit and have the main character be a film teacher rather than a creative writing teacher, which an overused profession in these kinds of movies. The switch would be more appropriate for the medium, too. Aside from these minor criticisms, though, we can barely take a red pen to this film. It’s terrific. 2. The Rules of Attraction (2002) Probably the most cynical look at higher education ever filmed, Roger Avary’s highly underrated adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’ novel shows us just enough of the classroom and professors (i.e. canceled classes and a single professor who accepts sexual bribes) to let us understand that the joke is in how little of that side of academia is actually necessary to a film like this. In that way it kind of does for college what Heathers does for high school. Neither film is a teen sex comedy in the fashion of most high school and college movies. And neither is a satire of education institutions in the way most of the other films on this list are. Rather, they’re mockeries of the whole education system, but only in that they each consider their respective system to be already a mockery of itself. 1. Horse Feathers (1932) Nobody mocks and satirizes better than the Marx Brothers, and in this film they bring their anarchic shenanigans and brilliant puns to the world of academia. At its core is the basic college sports story, but it’s also one of the first films (if not the first film) to deal with the concept of buying students/players. In addition to lampooning that practice, Horse Feathers makes fun of intellectual gatherings and talk, the influence of trustees and nearly every other aspect of scholarship and higher education you can think of, all in the opening scene. After more than 75 years, it’s still the funniest college movie and the greatest film about academia there is. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:01:21 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/29/2009 11:01:21 AMThere is a good reason Hollywood continually makes Animal House wannabes and avoids producing films that actually focus on academia. Kids prefer their college movies to be about the fun stuff. And so a movie like Old School grossed $75 million while another Luke Wilson comedy called Tenure currently lacks a distributor. The latter film may also be hilarious, as a satire of the tenure process, but if it doesn’t concentrate more on beer bongs and naked co-eds, it won’t attract as big an audience. And according to some scholars, it may not even resonate with them, because it couldn’t possibly be what the process is really like. Film blogger and associate professor Chuck Tryon was quoted about the film last year as saying, “my ongoing pursuit of tenure typically involves me sitting in front of my laptop until 1 a.m., I don’t know how interesting that would be to watch.” And evident by the scathing reviews from Sundance of John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, it appears another film about academia has failed to make a strong case for the subject matter. Too bad for the late David Foster Wallace, whose stories were adapted for the film, that Gus Van Sant wasn’t at the helm. A decade ago, in an interview with Van Sant, Wallace pretty much gushed that Good Will Hunting is the most accurate film about academia ever made. Do we agree with him? Let’s just say there’s not a whole lot of competition for such an honor. But in our attempt to recognize the ten best films about academia, Good Will Hunting doesn’t quite make the top spot. 9. (tie) Elegy (2005) and The Human Stain (2003) Neither of these films is especially great, but it would be criminal for us not to recognize the work of Philip Roth, an author who depicts the academic world perfectly in his novels, particularly The Dying Animal (which is the basis for Elegy) and The Human Stain. The adaptations of these two books fail to capture much of what’s on the page, but each film has its own merit. Elegy, which primarily deals with an affair between a professor (Ben Kingsley) and a student (Penelope Cruz), is worth seeing for the more interesting relationship between that professor and his Pulitzer Prize-winning friend (Dennis Hopper). Rarely is fraternity between two members of the academic intelligentsia portrayed so enjoyably. As for The Human Stain, which also involves a professor (Anthony Hopkins) and his affair with a younger woman (Nicole Kidman), the film deals primarily with the issue of political correctness within academia. The topic is addressed nowhere near as well as it is in Roth’s novel, but it is at least a starting point for discussion, and it’s also worth seeing for an example in how not to cast a movie. 8. Soul Man (1986) If we are to include The Human Stain, it’s just as well we acknowledge this earlier comedy, which also involves ironic situations regarding race and academia. Hardly a brilliant movie, Soul Man is at least as humorous in its examination of racism as the Harold and Kumar movies. Yet it is far less esteemed. And the whole black face thing can no longer be looked down upon now that Robert Downey Jr. has that Oscar nomination for Tropic Thunder. The movie is a worthy lampoon of the politics of affirmative action and their affect on college admissions (as well as an obvious and general look at racism within the student population), but it’s especially entertaining for James Earl Jones as a professor who refuses to favor the masquerading protagonist (C. Thomas Howell) just because he’s black. 7. Back to School (1986) While Soul Man deals with the benefit of being a minority when it comes to getting into college, this film from the same year deals with the benefit of being rich. The idea that anyone with enough money can get into the school of his or her choice is depicted comically in a two-scene setup. In the first scene, a university dean (Ned Beatty) asks millionaire entrepreneur Thornton Mellon (Rodney Dangerfield) how he could possibly admit him as a student when he has no high school degree, no transcripts and no SAT scores. The movie then cuts to the punch-line scene, in which the dean and Mellon are celebrating the groundbreaking of a new business school for the university, named after Mellon, of course. Another favorite jab at academia is with the famous cameo by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., who is hired by Mellon to write a paper about his own work. The paper earns a failing grade. 6. Wet Hot American Summer (2001) You’re probably wondering how a comedy set at a summer camp could possibly be about academia. Well, it’s not specifically about academia, but it does feature a subplot involving a science professor (David Hyde Pierce) that does poke fun of the concept of tenure. This was pointed out by Elaine Showalter, an English professor at Princeton and author of the book Faculty Towers: The Academic Novel and Its Discontents, so you have to accept that it fits the list. Sure, she’s the mother of WHAS star and screenwriter Michael Showalter, but that shouldn’t take away from her observation. 5. The Paper Chase (1973) This film features a plot that could very well lend itself to the other kind of college film, but it focuses its attention on the classroom and the relationship between student and professor rather than the dorm room and social affairs. Of course, the student protagonist (Timothy Bottoms) is getting some action, but it is with the daughter (Lindsay Wagner) of the professorial antagonist (John Houseman, who won an Oscar for the performance), and so even the sex stuff is part of the politics of academia. The best scene is at the end, when Bottoms’ character gives the finger to higher education by not even bothering to look at his final grades. If only the audience was also left unaware of his marks, as the original novel leaves that revelation out. 4. Good Will Hunting (1997) David Foster Wallace may have considered this film to be the best film about academia when he discussed it with Gus Van Sant in 1998, but since that time there have been two more poignant films to deal with the subject. Plus, it never was the best film on academia to begin with. So, as much as he’s right to celebrate the film and in particular the portrayal of Stellan Skarsgard’s character and the issue of professors wanting their students to be brilliant, but not too brilliant, there are three more titles to go. 3. Wonder Boys (2000) Based on Michael Chabon’s novel of the same name, Curstin Hanson’s film cinematically captures the atmosphere of academia as well as Philip Roth does on the page (perhaps Hanson should adapt Roth?). However, one issue with this atmosphere may be that the relationships and characters, though written and portrayed wonderfully, are rather common for such a story. Also, why not change things a bit and have the main character be a film teacher rather than a creative writing teacher, which an overused profession in these kinds of movies. The switch would be more appropriate for the medium, too. Aside from these minor criticisms, though, we can barely take a red pen to this film. It’s terrific. 2. The Rules of Attraction (2002) Probably the most cynical look at higher education ever filmed, Roger Avary’s highly underrated adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis’ novel shows us just enough of the classroom and professors (i.e. canceled classes and a single professor who accepts sexual bribes) to let us understand that the joke is in how little of that side of academia is actually necessary to a film like this. In that way it kind of does for college what Heathers does for high school. Neither film is a teen sex comedy in the fashion of most high school and college movies. And neither is a satire of education institutions in the way most of the other films on this list are. Rather, they’re mockeries of the whole education system, but only in that they each consider their respective system to be already a mockery of itself. 1. Horse Feathers (1932) Nobody mocks and satirizes better than the Marx Brothers, and in this film they bring their anarchic shenanigans and brilliant puns to the world of academia. At its core is the basic college sports story, but it’s also one of the first films (if not the first film) to deal with the concept of buying students/players. In addition to lampooning that practice, Horse Feathers makes fun of intellectual gatherings and talk, the influence of trustees and nearly every other aspect of scholarship and higher education you can think of, all in the opening scene. After more than 75 years, it’s still the funniest college movie and the greatest film about academia there is. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/27/39964.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/27/2009 1:01:19 PM
Body: John Krasinski is best known for his role as Jim on NBC’s The Office, but he originally got into acting because he’d attended a table reading of David Foster Wallace’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, and he decided he wanted to stick with it when he realized how smart acting could be. He began pursuing the film rights to Brief Interviews, and at a suggestion from co-star Rainn Wilson he decided to direct it himself. Cut to Sundance 2009, where his adaptation of Brief Interviews With Hideous Men was in competition. Spout attended a small press conference with Krasinski at Sundance where he spoke about adapting Foster Wallace’s collection of short stories, his first time directing, and why he’s not ready to leave The Office. John Krasinski: It took a while actually. What I first did was I had to edit the material, which is actually one of the hardest things, because David Foster Wallace is without a doubt one of the greatest writers to have ever written, so cutting down his work just felt wrong. It was just bad news. But cutting it down into acting length was the first difficult thing, I’d say. I always knew that Julianne [Nicholson]’s character would be key to the whole movie. I think that you can’t emotionally attach to any of these guys, other than the minute you are with them. There’s no lasting affect unless you have someone to bring to the movie. So as soon as I knew what Julianne was doing and why she was doing it, that really opened things up for me. Then really after that the characters sort of lent themselves to a tonal shift, in the beginning is sort of the embarrassing interviews and things that are slightly more funny. Then you graduate into guys who are sometimes super-intellectual talking over their own heads. Then you move into darker material and even darker material. That really felt really good on the page, but really none of it made any impact or any sense until we got a cast. So really all of these actors brought every single moment of my script to another place. And really my script, I will say, is nothing more than his material. It wasn’t like, “How am I going to make this an incredibly cool movie?” All I kept thinking was that it would be more interesting to just watch 17 guys deliver monologues one after the other, and then I wasn’t doing my job. So I owe everything to them, because they really brought this incredibly unique perspective to the characters. I never really wanted to direct. I never really wanted to write. When you are on a show like The Office, it is not a place where you immediately start saying to yourself, “I want to spread my wings. I want to expand.” It’s actually something hold onto very tightly and try to ride it out for as long as they’ll have you. This project, because it meant so much to me, I always wanted to get it out there. Really at the end of the day, all I wanted was for people to see how incredibly moving his work is. I think everybody who sees the movie will hopefully see an ounce of what his writing can do. I fully admit that this is only a faction of the imagination that he can inspire as a writer. But it was something that I wanted to get out there. I never knew that I was going to direct it. Believe it or not, we went to a couple of directors and it wasn’t for them. Believe it or not, I was sitting with Rainn Wilson at a Sharkey’s in L.A. He said, “Why don’t you just direct it?” I said, “Because I am not a director.” He said, “Who cares? As long as you just adhere to what you believe in the book and shoot it very simply, don’t do that first-time director thing of having a helicopter shot moving over a scene. Just do it.” He said, “It sounds like you would be the only person to do it because you know what you are talking about with it.” Really that day I called my manager and I was like, “Can I direct it, question mark?” That really started it off there. Julianne Nicholson: Did he say yes? John: I don’t know that he did. I think he was like, “Let’s see how other people react to that.” I started pursuing the rights before we shot The Office. I think I had gotten the pilot. I had gotten the pilot of the show the same week or two weeks in between of getting the pilot and the rights together. So it was a pretty big two weeks for me. But rights in general, I hadn’t really thought through. So again, ignorance is bliss. I was running around like, “Let’s make this movie! I know it can be incredible.” People were like, “We should go get the rights.” I was like, “That’s is a bummer. Why would we do that?” I give so much credit to David Foster Wallace’s agent. Really, I was 23 and I had just stopped waiting tables with the money I had from the pilot. So I don’t know why I’d be a candidate to do this if I walked into her office. But instead she really heard me out and she really took the time to understand what it was about the project. Like I said, about the state of the union; how much of an impact it was to me. So many of my friends had really been a voice at that time in my life when I was still trying to figure out who I am. But when one is trying to figure out who they are, I think that honesty is very rare. So to have this material really changed me; I just wanted to convey that to her that I wanted to do that for more people. I said right to her, “You have an incredible author and I think more people should hear his voice.” She was very, very nice in letting us do this. When [David Foster Wallace] had passed, we had locked the picture, but we were still doing sound editing and things like that. This movie that I wrote, I am proud to say on behalf of him that we set out to do it because of what he had written, and we ended because of what he had written, not because of what had happened in the world. So I would never say this is in memoriam because we finished the movie before he had passed. But I pray that it is even a fraction of a tribute that he deserves, because the material that he writes is just astounding and no one will do it again. His passing is a tragedy in every way, starting first and foremost with his family and friends. An abrupt loss like that, I don’t think any of us can really fathom. And then for any fans or readers, to know that voice will never be heard again is a tragedy. Honestly, I just hope more people go out and read his stuff now that he is gone. I actually went and saw him speak twice. We were supposed to meet afterwards, but scheduling — he had to go teach in the morning and we never got to set it up. But there is something kind of nice about the fact that we did this because of our love for him and what he does, rather than being swayed in any way. Because I will fully admit, I would have been that guy that after having a conversation with him I would have run right back to my computer and written down everything he said. I would have been a total fraud had I talked to him earlier on. James Rocchi of Cinematical: When can we expect your adaptation of Infinite Jest? John: Well, I’m working on it. Good luck to anybody who goes and does that. There is definitely a script circulating. James: How heavy is it? John: Exactly. I don’t know. I’m really looking forward to seeing that. I hope somebody does make it. It’s an incredible book. There is a lot going on there. This is like the JV version of that book. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:01:19 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/27/2009 1:01:19 PM John Krasinski is best known for his role as Jim on NBC’s The Office, but he originally got into acting because he’d attended a table reading of David Foster Wallace’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, and he decided he wanted to stick with it when he realized how smart acting could be. He began pursuing the film rights to Brief Interviews, and at a suggestion from co-star Rainn Wilson he decided to direct it himself. Cut to Sundance 2009, where his adaptation of Brief Interviews With Hideous Men was in competition. Spout attended a small press conference with Krasinski at Sundance where he spoke about adapting Foster Wallace’s collection of short stories, his first time directing, and why he’s not ready to leave The Office. John Krasinski: It took a while actually. What I first did was I had to edit the material, which is actually one of the hardest things, because David Foster Wallace is without a doubt one of the greatest writers to have ever written, so cutting down his work just felt wrong. It was just bad news. But cutting it down into acting length was the first difficult thing, I’d say. I always knew that Julianne [Nicholson]’s character would be key to the whole movie. I think that you can’t emotionally attach to any of these guys, other than the minute you are with them. There’s no lasting affect unless you have someone to bring to the movie. So as soon as I knew what Julianne was doing and why she was doing it, that really opened things up for me. Then really after that the characters sort of lent themselves to a tonal shift, in the beginning is sort of the embarrassing interviews and things that are slightly more funny. Then you graduate into guys who are sometimes super-intellectual talking over their own heads. Then you move into darker material and even darker material. That really felt really good on the page, but really none of it made any impact or any sense until we got a cast. So really all of these actors brought every single moment of my script to another place. And really my script, I will say, is nothing more than his material. It wasn’t like, “How am I going to make this an incredibly cool movie?” All I kept thinking was that it would be more interesting to just watch 17 guys deliver monologues one after the other, and then I wasn’t doing my job. So I owe everything to them, because they really brought this incredibly unique perspective to the characters. I never really wanted to direct. I never really wanted to write. When you are on a show like The Office, it is not a place where you immediately start saying to yourself, “I want to spread my wings. I want to expand.” It’s actually something hold onto very tightly and try to ride it out for as long as they’ll have you. This project, because it meant so much to me, I always wanted to get it out there. Really at the end of the day, all I wanted was for people to see how incredibly moving his work is. I think everybody who sees the movie will hopefully see an ounce of what his writing can do. I fully admit that this is only a faction of the imagination that he can inspire as a writer. But it was something that I wanted to get out there. I never knew that I was going to direct it. Believe it or not, we went to a couple of directors and it wasn’t for them. Believe it or not, I was sitting with Rainn Wilson at a Sharkey’s in L.A. He said, “Why don’t you just direct it?” I said, “Because I am not a director.” He said, “Who cares? As long as you just adhere to what you believe in the book and shoot it very simply, don’t do that first-time director thing of having a helicopter shot moving over a scene. Just do it.” He said, “It sounds like you would be the only person to do it because you know what you are talking about with it.” Really that day I called my manager and I was like, “Can I direct it, question mark?” That really started it off there. Julianne Nicholson: Did he say yes? John: I don’t know that he did. I think he was like, “Let’s see how other people react to that.” I started pursuing the rights before we shot The Office. I think I had gotten the pilot. I had gotten the pilot of the show the same week or two weeks in between of getting the pilot and the rights together. So it was a pretty big two weeks for me. But rights in general, I hadn’t really thought through. So again, ignorance is bliss. I was running around like, “Let’s make this movie! I know it can be incredible.” People were like, “We should go get the rights.” I was like, “That’s is a bummer. Why would we do that?” I give so much credit to David Foster Wallace’s agent. Really, I was 23 and I had just stopped waiting tables with the money I had from the pilot. So I don’t know why I’d be a candidate to do this if I walked into her office. But instead she really heard me out and she really took the time to understand what it was about the project. Like I said, about the state of the union; how much of an impact it was to me. So many of my friends had really been a voice at that time in my life when I was still trying to figure out who I am. But when one is trying to figure out who they are, I think that honesty is very rare. So to have this material really changed me; I just wanted to convey that to her that I wanted to do that for more people. I said right to her, “You have an incredible author and I think more people should hear his voice.” She was very, very nice in letting us do this. When [David Foster Wallace] had passed, we had locked the picture, but we were still doing sound editing and things like that. This movie that I wrote, I am proud to say on behalf of him that we set out to do it because of what he had written, and we ended because of what he had written, not because of what had happened in the world. So I would never say this is in memoriam because we finished the movie before he had passed. But I pray that it is even a fraction of a tribute that he deserves, because the material that he writes is just astounding and no one will do it again. His passing is a tragedy in every way, starting first and foremost with his family and friends. An abrupt loss like that, I don’t think any of us can really fathom. And then for any fans or readers, to know that voice will never be heard again is a tragedy. Honestly, I just hope more people go out and read his stuff now that he is gone. I actually went and saw him speak twice. We were supposed to meet afterwards, but scheduling — he had to go teach in the morning and we never got to set it up. But there is something kind of nice about the fact that we did this because of our love for him and what he does, rather than being swayed in any way. Because I will fully admit, I would have been that guy that after having a conversation with him I would have run right back to my computer and written down everything he said. I would have been a total fraud had I talked to him earlier on. James Rocchi of Cinematical: When can we expect your adaptation of Infinite Jest? John: Well, I’m working on it. Good luck to anybody who goes and does that. There is definitely a script circulating. James: How heavy is it? John: Exactly. I don’t know. I’m really looking forward to seeing that. I hope somebody does make it. It’s an incredible book. There is a lot going on there. This is like the JV version of that book. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/23/39818.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/23/2009 10:00:35 AM
Body: My Bloody Valentine 3D isn’t worth watching in one dimension, let alone three. But it does serve to spark some good conversation. What other gimmicks have boosted the box office of sub-par films? What does good contemporary horror look like? Neil Marshall’s The Descent offers a refreshing palette cleanser. Also, what do horror and porn have in common, besides cheap nudity? Karina checks in from Park City with some hits and misses from this year’s Sundance Film Festival. Moon, Hump Day, and The September Issue were worth writing home about, while Paper Hearts and Brief Interviews with Hideous Men will quietly fall into obscurity (we hope). Listen to FilmCouch and win free stuff! Send us an e-mail telling us the most absurd piece of merchandise you’ve seen branded with an image of Che Guevara, and you can win a program from the Che roadshow signed by Steven Soderbergh, a copy of Che’s Diaries, and the soundtrack to the film. Send e-mails to filmcouch (at) spout (dot) com. (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday) 0:00 - Intro 3:22 - Psychoanalyzing a listener based on his favorite films 8:15 - My Bloody Valentine 3D, gimmicks throughout movie history 16:22 - Humanizing horror vs. porn with blood 31:12 - Sundance filmcouch-105 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:00:35 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/23/2009 10:00:35 AM My Bloody Valentine 3D isn’t worth watching in one dimension, let alone three. But it does serve to spark some good conversation. What other gimmicks have boosted the box office of sub-par films? What does good contemporary horror look like? Neil Marshall’s The Descent offers a refreshing palette cleanser. Also, what do horror and porn have in common, besides cheap nudity? Karina checks in from Park City with some hits and misses from this year’s Sundance Film Festival. Moon, Hump Day, and The September Issue were worth writing home about, while Paper Hearts and Brief Interviews with Hideous Men will quietly fall into obscurity (we hope). Listen to FilmCouch and win free stuff! Send us an e-mail telling us the most absurd piece of merchandise you’ve seen branded with an image of Che Guevara, and you can win a program from the Che roadshow signed by Steven Soderbergh, a copy of Che’s Diaries, and the soundtrack to the film. Send e-mails to filmcouch (at) spout (dot) com. (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday) 0:00 - Intro 3:22 - Psychoanalyzing a listener based on his favorite films 8:15 - My Bloody Valentine 3D, gimmicks throughout movie history 16:22 - Humanizing horror vs. porn with blood 31:12 - Sundance filmcouch-105 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/9/15/35167.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 9/15/2008 4:02:15 PM
Body: I’m wary of passing along a rumor involving the recently deceased, but I thought this would be of too much interest to too many people to pass up. Devin at CHUD says he has a source who claims that David Foster Wallace was working on adapting his epic, legendary novel Infinite Jest into a screenplay just before he died over the weekend of an apparent suicide. According to Devin, Wallace collaborated with writer Sam Jones (director of the Wilco doc I Am Trying to Break Your Heart) on an adaptation “as recently as last year.” It’s probably worth noting that without Wallace around to refute it, any source could say anything, and even if this project did exist, there’s no guarantee that anything will come of it. Of course, as Devin points out, death sells, so I guess its possible that some exec might take it upon themselves to try to rush out a quickie version of a completely unfilmable novel in an attempt to tempt Wallace’s saddendened fans into the theater. If that does happen, we’ll be the first in line to fantasy cast Joelle Van Dyne, but as of this writing, Wallace’s sole IMDb credit is in association with John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, and we imagine that’s the way it’ll stay. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:02:15 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog9/15/2008 4:02:15 PMI’m wary of passing along a rumor involving the recently deceased, but I thought this would be of too much interest to too many people to pass up. Devin at CHUD says he has a source who claims that David Foster Wallace was working on adapting his epic, legendary novel Infinite Jest into a screenplay just before he died over the weekend of an apparent suicide. According to Devin, Wallace collaborated with writer Sam Jones (director of the Wilco doc I Am Trying to Break Your Heart) on an adaptation “as recently as last year.” It’s probably worth noting that without Wallace around to refute it, any source could say anything, and even if this project did exist, there’s no guarantee that anything will come of it. Of course, as Devin points out, death sells, so I guess its possible that some exec might take it upon themselves to try to rush out a quickie version of a completely unfilmable novel in an attempt to tempt Wallace’s saddendened fans into the theater. If that does happen, we’ll be the first in line to fantasy cast Joelle Van Dyne, but as of this writing, Wallace’s sole IMDb credit is in association with John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, and we imagine that’s the way it’ll stay. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/15/35165.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/15/2008 4:01:57 PM
Body: I’m wary of passing along a rumor involving the recently deceased, but I thought this would be of too much interest to too many people to pass up. Devin at CHUD says he has a source who claims that David Foster Wallace was working on adapting his epic, legendary novel Infinite Jest into a screenplay just before he died over the weekend of an apparent suicide. According to Devin, Wallace collaborated with writer Sam Jones (director of the Wilco doc I Am Trying to Break Your Heart) on an adaptation “as recently as last year.” It’s probably worth noting that without Wallace around to refute it, any source could say anything, and even if this project did exist, there’s no guarantee that anything will come of it. Of course, as Devin points out, death sells, so I guess its possible that some exec might take it upon themselves to try to rush out a quickie version of a completely unfilmable novel in an attempt to tempt Wallace’s saddendened fans into the theater. If that does happen, we’ll be the first in line to fantasy cast Joelle Van Dyne, but as of this writing, Wallace’s sole IMDb credit is in association with John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, and we imagine that’s the way it’ll stay. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:01:57 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/15/2008 4:01:57 PMI’m wary of passing along a rumor involving the recently deceased, but I thought this would be of too much interest to too many people to pass up. Devin at CHUD says he has a source who claims that David Foster Wallace was working on adapting his epic, legendary novel Infinite Jest into a screenplay just before he died over the weekend of an apparent suicide. According to Devin, Wallace collaborated with writer Sam Jones (director of the Wilco doc I Am Trying to Break Your Heart) on an adaptation “as recently as last year.” It’s probably worth noting that without Wallace around to refute it, any source could say anything, and even if this project did exist, there’s no guarantee that anything will come of it. Of course, as Devin points out, death sells, so I guess its possible that some exec might take it upon themselves to try to rush out a quickie version of a completely unfilmable novel in an attempt to tempt Wallace’s saddendened fans into the theater. If that does happen, we’ll be the first in line to fantasy cast Joelle Van Dyne, but as of this writing, Wallace’s sole IMDb credit is in association with John Krasinski’s Brief Interviews With Hideous Men, and we imagine that’s the way it’ll stay. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/relationships/MemberTagFilms.aspxrelationships
Number of films tagged: 203

Number of people who tagged: 74

Number of times used: 249

]]>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:40:59 GMT20374249Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dating/MemberTagFilms.aspxdating
Number of films tagged: 326

Number of people who tagged: 39

Number of times used: 88

]]>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:02:31 GMT3263988Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Sundance/MemberTagFilms.aspxSundance
Number of films tagged: 154

Number of people who tagged: 24

Number of times used: 161

]]>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:57:41 GMT15424161Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/class/MemberTagFilms.aspxclass
Number of films tagged: 37

Number of people who tagged: 23

Number of times used: 39

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:58 GMT372339Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/break-up/MemberTagFilms.aspxbreak-up
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 13

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:46 GMT101013Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/men/MemberTagFilms.aspxmen
Number of films tagged: 16

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 17

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:41 GMT161017Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/interviews/MemberTagFilms.aspxinterviews
Number of films tagged: 20

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 21

]]>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:49:19 GMT20621Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/masculinity/MemberTagFilms.aspxmasculinity
Number of films tagged: 29

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 6

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:48 GMT2956Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/male/MemberTagFilms.aspxmale
Number of films tagged: 6

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 6

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:50:03 GMT646Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/behavior/MemberTagFilms.aspxbehavior
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 5

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:50:00 GMT535Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/academia/MemberTagFilms.aspxacademia
Number of films tagged: 3

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 3

]]>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:09:25 GMT323Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/graduate-school/MemberTagFilms.aspxgraduate-school
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 2

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:38 GMT212Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/social-cues/MemberTagFilms.aspxsocial-cues
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:52 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sundance-2009/MemberTagFilms.aspxsundance-2009
Number of films tagged: 117

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 117

]]>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 18:32:37 GMT1171117Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/teaching-assistant/MemberTagFilms.aspxteaching-assistant
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:49:55 GMT111Tag