SpoutBlog on spout.com

In the liner notes to the Criterion edition of writer/director Whit Stillman’s debut film, Metropolitan, cultural critic/historian Luc Sante notes that the picture, “which looked like a perverse bit of daring in 1990, today seems like an artifact from an earlier century.” Sante is likely referring to the debutante culture in which the film is set, but the story of how the movie itself not only found an audience but rose to classic teen movie status among a certain class seems equally antiquated in this age of indie film Chicken Littles.

Made for a reported $250,000, starring a full cast of young unknowns, and consisting primarily of one long scene after another of rich kids sitting in a palatial Upper East Side apartment discussing Jane Austen, Charles Fourier, their mostly unfashionable morals and fears of failure, all the while dressed in evening clothes, Metropolitan played in theaters for seven months, eventually grossing $3 million and earning Stilman an Oscar nomination (he lost to the screenwriter of Ghost).

But if Metropolitan traveled a commercial road that seems nearly unnavigable today, the film itself has perhaps never been as in tune with popular culture. From Best Week Ever pundits to big-traffic bloggers, it’s become the standard mode of digesting the world around us to stand outside of it, employing caustic, self-deprecating humor as a defensive mechanism. It’s like we’re all Chris Eigeman characters from a Whit Stillman film––except, in some cases, stripped of the anxieties of old-money entitlement.

With Metropolitan premiering tonight on Hulu, I chatted with Whit about his films, the state of the indie film industry, his alleged political agenda, the state of the Last Days of Disco DVD, the project he’s getting ready to shoot, and why it’s taken ten years for him to make a fourth film.

——

Karina: I want to get the inevitable elephant out of the room, which is of course the “What have you been doing for 10 years?” question. The most recent stories that I can find about projects that you have in the works were the Jamaica project, and then Little Green Men [based on the novel by Christopher Buckley]. Are either of those still happening?

Whit: Yes, they’re both happening, and I’ve been writing on both. And that’s what I’ve been doing: I’ve been writing scripts. And so, in addition to those scripts, I’ve written a number of other things. But, I think, the one that is set to go, as soon as the financing falls into place, is the Jamaica project, which is now called Dancing Mood. The characters are black Jamaicans in Kingston in the early ’60s.

Karina: Your previous films were so autobiographical. Is this one, in any sense?

Whit: I take the Fifth Amendment. I think, when I write things, usually there’s some autobiographical stuff that comes out, but in each case, it’s pretty fictional, too.

Karina: I actually watched Metropolitan last night, and of course, it starts with the “Not so long ago” title. But, I read something saying that it has to take place in the mid-to-late ’60s because the sexual revolution would have come along and swept away deb culture and the moralities and the formalities that are associated with it. But, I always thought it took place a little bit later.

Whit: We couldn’t really do period. And the idea was, pretty much, to stick with what we said in the movie, which was “Not so long ago.” And anyone can interpret that as they want it. And my own experience is I snuck into a couple of parties with my sisters at the end of the ’60s, and I became a convert to it. So, I kept going in the ’70s. So, my memories were from that period: the end of the ’60s and the ’70s.

But, I couldn’t do it in period, and I didn’t really want to. And one thing I found is that people assume it was from their period. So, I heard of someone from the ’50s, it would dip right in the ’50s. It was sort of either before or after the Hippie-drug era, because things looked very different then, with their very long hair.

So, we were shooting it in ‘88, ‘89. And we tried to, as much as we could, not put in new things. And we got kind of lucky because a lot of the things we photographed had been around in the ’60s and ’70s, and then disappeared, like the Bacharach studio, like the old Scribner’s Bookstore - I think it was actually a Brentano’s when we shot it, but then it became, I think, a Sephora or something like that.

And so, there were a lot of sort of New York landmarks we were able to memorialize before they disappeared. I think, there is sort of an emotional realism and human realism that’s very important, but the small things about like what year car is in the shot, I don’t really care about.

Karina: Right. The thing I read that placed it in the 60s was a long consideration of Metropolitan and Last Days of Disco, saying that as a filmmaker, it’s your mission to telegraph a conservative agenda.

Whit: Oh, no.

Karina: [laughs] You can correct me if I’m wrong on this, but people have suggested that all of Chris Eigeman’s characters are basically alter egos for you. But even if he’s sort of espousing what would be considered traditional conservative morals or politics, he also gets deflated in a lot of ways. So, I would never see it as a pure, moral agenda or argument. But, I don’t know…do you feel uncomfortable with the suggestion that it is?

Whit: I feel very uncomfortable, because I really resent reviews that try to force you to take a stand one way or another. I really resent that kind of filmmaking. I want people to be able to come with their own point of view and leave with their own point of view. And I’d hope it’ll be open enough so that they’ll have an experience while they’re there, and I really don’t want to stack the deck in one way or another.

And I don’t feel closer to the Nick character at all in Metropolitan, I would identify much more with Taylor Nichols, the Charlie character or the Tom Townsend character. That was much more autobiographical. The Nick character was sort of the funny guy in the room, who would influence us and we’d laugh and be amazed by him, but he wouldn’t be me. As soon as you write characters, something must be coming out there, and then your life sort of follows the pattern of the character you wrote, and it all goes back and forth. But, I felt closer to those other two characters.

Karina: Are you still living in Paris?

Whit: I’ve shifted a bit to Madrid. I had a period when I really didn’t know where I was living because it was so divided between Paris, London, Madrid, and the States, and then with the trips to Jamaica. So, I really felt completely “not living anywhere, living everywhere.” And I think, I’ll be in Madrid through the end of the year, and then I hope we’ll be doing the Jamaican film.

Karina: I wonder how involved you are in some of these issues that are going on with American independent film right now - the fact that all of the indie arms are kind of closing down, and all of the debates about the future of financing and distribution. Do you pay attention to this stuff?

Whit: I really do pay attention to it, because I’m in the thick of it and I feel I’m suffering from it a bit, because I don’t really understand why the Jamaican film didn’t get financing three years ago. I mean, I’m happy with the changes to the script I’ve made, but I think we could have made a very good film and a popular film with the script we had two years ago.

It’s a very strange situation. And I didn’t understand it all, because the other films did pretty well, and this one, I think, will do much better, and I just think it’s a huge business opportunity for the person who does it.

Karina: Were you in a situation where you had money set up and then it disappeared?

Whit: No, not really. I don’t have a producing partner. And recently, I’ve had the good fortune to sign up with Jeremy Thomas, the British producer, to do the Jamaican film, to do Dancing Mood. The Recorded Picture Company has been a prodigious producer. And so I have the advantage now of working with a really good company.

My feeling about the independent business is, for one thing, it’s cyclical. And we’re at the low end of the cycle, but I think it’ll go back up. And I think it’s actually very good to launch a project at the low end of the cycle, if you can launch it.

And I think that, often, when things are bad, the way I like to look at it to make it seem better is that bad situations are just business opportunities. And there’s just a huge opportunity now to make good independent films and have them successfully released, ultimately, because there’s no easy money now, and everyone, I think, is going to be in a much tighter, more serious game. And I think that the person or the company that steps up to finance our film is going to do very well with it.

And I think, the other films were kind of anti-popular in their subject matter. It was off-footing to people.

Karina: That was actually something I wanted to ask you about, because Metropolitan came out of the same early-’90s, film festival world as the Kevin Smiths and the Quentin Tarantinos, who were so much more obviously talking about the kinds of people who consume disposable pop culture. Do you ever sort of feel like you got maybe a short shrift, in terms of what kind or size of audience you were able to reach, because you weren’t necessarily talking about a popular audience?

Whit: Well, I don’t feel that competitively with other people. But, I’m aware of the fact that, sociologically, the subject matter of our films were unpopular, or anti-popular. And so, to attract a big audience to a sympathetic film about debutantes or a sympathetic film about yuppies being obnoxious Americans in Barcelona or about people getting into discos, there’d be a lot of resistance to identification with those characters. They’re not underdog characters, particularly.

In Metropolitan, there was an underdog character, in Tom Townsend, that I think made it accessible to people, initially. And in certain ways, once they got into the cinemas, they’d stay if they came. But then, he really wasn’t the hero in his point of view and what he does.

And so, I think that there’s a commercial challenge for those three films. And that’s why I’m a bit frustrated now that the Jamaican film hasn’t immediately attracted financing, because I think this is my chance to make a film about people who really are sympathetic, and sympathetic every which way. But, because you’re doing something that’s a different subject matter, people think, “Oh, why are you doing this different subject matter?”

But, I think, what’s important is what is sort of within the character, what’s in their hearts, and the treatment of the film, the approach to the material. And I think, when people talk about a lot of films, they focus too much on what the subject of the film is. And I’m interested sort of in the journeys of young people, what groups of young people can do and how they resolve their problems in their lives, wherever they are.

And I often get the question: “Well, have you lived in Jamaica that much?” And I haven’t lived in Jamaica that much, but I’ve spent much more time in Jamaica than I did in debutante parties. And I had a huge advantage. I mean, it was very hard to get Metropolitan distributed. It was just nothing but rejection.

And as I think about “the market will speak” or something like that, 50 years ago, the only way someone like Preston Sturges got a chance to make films was there was a good film executive at Paramount, Bill LeBaron, who was a former writer-playwright and very sensitive guy, who gave him his chance, and he was able to make those films. If there hadn’t been a William LeBaron, we probably wouldn’t have seen any Preston Sturges films.

And my experience was the same. Metropolitan wouldn’t have seen the light of day if it hadn’t been for maybe five people. And if each one of those five people hadn’t contributed, it never would have been seen anywhere.

Karina: From my point of view, it seems like there still is the possibility for the right person to support the right independent artist and have a film get seen. But, I mean, that level of success that you reached, with spending so little money on the film and then getting the Oscar nomination, is something that most filmmakers who are making their first film today just can’t even hope for.

Whit: Oh, gosh. I hope they could still hope for that. It is exciting, these breakout films. I remember being in Spain when Clerks came out there. There was just so much interest in talking about it. There was a period when low-budget, independent American films were getting wonderful reception abroad. I think that would continue or come back.

I felt very much in the path of other people. In those days, you had the Samuel Goldwyn Company as an active player. I hope they come back because there are not that many companies who are good at putting across small comedies. We really need these players. So, for us, with Metropolitan, Sara Richter and Bob Shaye at New Line were really important. As much as they are inactive, that hurts people in our situation. But, I think, Sara is continuing and Bob is going back.

Karina: I was reading the diary that you wrote for Slate when Last Days of Disco came out…

Whit: [laughs] That is some real digging.

Karina: Well, there is a lot of interesting stuff in it. But, you said something about how you were getting kicked out of your apartment and that the only things that you owned were the films’ negatives and copyrights, except you weren’t so sure that Warner Bros agreed with you on that.

Whit: Yeah.

Karina: Does that have anything to do with why there is no Last Days of Disco DVD in print?

Whit: Yes. Last Days of Disco - there should be a Criterion edition. But, that contract has not been - I think Criterion is negotiating with one of the studios to bring it out. But, those negotiations are taking a very long time.

It is available in a cheap edition if people can play Region Two. It’s great what you can find on the Internet––here is a DVD review out of England of the French edition of Last Days of Disco. But, you can only find it if you go to Amazon.fr and put in the French title, which is Les Derniers Jours du Disco. If you put in “The Last Days of Disco” at Amazon.fr, they just give you the US edition with the US price, which is astronomical.

If you get the French edition, it essentially is the film. You can just turn off the French subtitles––unless you want to watch the French dubbed version. I think, it is $20 or something.

Karina: Well, that is good news. Are the music rights one of the issues there?

Whit: No, there are no rights at all. It is just that the film was owned. Castle Rock was then having the film financed by PolyGram and Warner and either PolyGram would take international or North America. Warner would take the other one.

In our case, Warner took international and PolyGram took domestic. So, it went out through Gramercy. Then, when PolyGram went down, the rights… It was issued by PolyGram video right away. Then, they had some problem with their licenses. It was going from laserdisc to DVD.

It came out on DVD, I guess in a small edition in ‘99 I believe, through PolyGram Video. A studio has the rights now, I think it is Universal. But, maybe it has been shifted over to MGM or something or Sony.

So, it has been in an enormous film library, where they have tons of films to exploit. It has not been a priority perhaps because it’s a split rights thing, where it is not all their money. So, now theoretically Criterion is trying to license it and it will come out on a good Criterion edition.

Karina: Well, that will be really exciting for all of us who have been looking forward to that for a while. It seems like it’s the one of your films that people haven’t seen as much.

Whit: Yeah. It was very tough, the way it was released. We were very fortunate in our releases with Metropolitan and Barcelona. And we were very unlucky with the timing of Last Days of Disco in the States. It just came out at the worst imaginable time.

Karina: Because of the 54 movie?

Whit: Well, it’s because of the 54 movie in the sense that there was a feeling of rushing it out. I think Russell Schwartz at Gramercy had a better idea of bringing it out in early May. I thought certain work needed to be done to set the stage. So, I pushed for a delay of two or three weeks.

It was just a disaster. I shouldn’t have done that. We just were run over by… Normally, if you are an independent film coming out against be big studio blockbusters, you are the ‘good’ kind of programming. Normally, [your competition] are just sort of stupid action movies or ’shoot-them-ups’ or whatever. But, in our case, the big summer movies were also critical favorites and Oscar favorites. So, we came out against Truman Show, Saving Private Ryan, The independent films were also very strong - The Opposite of Sex, Henry Fool. There were just so many things just at the same time. Even the Soderbergh film, I think, it was Out of Sight?

Karina: Yeah.

Whit: Everything that came out was not only a good film, but a critical favorite. I don’t think Gramercy had a lot of money then. They were essentially closing down. We just got run over. I mean, it initially did well. We had great weekends in the cities. But, we were steamrolled.

Karina: Were there higher expectations because of the higher profile actors?

Whit: I don’t know. I guess so.

Karina: Because it’s not like it completely bombed.

Whit: No. I know a lot of people think it was a big success. People who were just in cities thought it was successful in its release, too.

I could see what a difference it makes when you get lucky with your release pattern. I mean, when you compare it with Barcelona and Metropolitan, Metropolitan came out the first weekend in August. It was just a wonderful time to come out. We got a lot of good attention. Barcelona was the last weekend in July. So, that had always been a great time for us.

I think, the fact that Castle Rock really wanted to beat 54 out, pushed us earlier and then right into the maelstrom.

Karina: How much of contemporary independent film do you see? Are you going to festivals?

Whit: I don’t know how much I see. I try to see things that I think won’t shock or depressed me. I’m very pleased with some of the stuff I catch.

I really like, when I get back to the States, being able to see things on the movie channels and catch up with stuff from the last five or 10 years.

Karina: Have you seeing anything lately that you think was really great?

Whit: I think, I definitely have, but as soon as I am in the throes of writing a script, I don’t go out to movies that much.

Karina: So, I imagine that you are not seeing summer blockbusters either.

Whit: No. I mean, we have a really good cinema here in Millerton, New York. Often going to the cinema has been a good part of summer. Some of the films I know are probably pretty good. and I think I will catch up with them one way or another. The other ones are just so off-putting. Seeing the trailers puts me off many more films than makes me want to see, seeing their trailers. I’m not sure if they are just badly cut or if the films are worth avoiding.

I like a lot of things. I liked Sex in the City. Is it Sex in the City or Sex and the City? I think it is Sex and the City. I thought that was a pretty good job for what they had to do. It was better than I expected. I enjoyed it. And that was shot by the cinematographer who did our films, John Thomas.

Karina: As far as catching up with films later, it leads to the question of putting the movie on Hulu. Are you in the practice of watching movies on the Web or looking at YouTube or anything?

Whit: I look at YouTube and short things that people send me. I haven’t looked at anything really long form. I think, I caught up with some TV shows that people had bought from iTunes, TV shows that I wanted to catch up with.

Karina: What do you think about the idea of showing films online, especially with your film going into that realm right now? Do you think it is an ideal situation?

Whit: Well, I much prefer it being done legally than illegally. And I think, it’s good that things be made easily available for people legally so there is less temptation for it all to be illegal.

I like suiting people’s schedules and their convenience as much as possible. I like all the old windows too, all the pattern of distribution. I hope that is conserved because I like being in theaters and being available on DVD and pay-TV and basic TV and different forms. So, I like all that.

Sometimes the best way to catch a film is just to tune in without being aware of what is on, to a commercial-free movie channel and have a movie on, maybe something that you had written off or didn’t think that you would have liked and enjoying it. And if you don’t catch the beginning when you first see it, being able to go back and see the beginning the next time it’s on. I love being taken unawares by a good film.

Karina: Yeah, that’s actually probably how I first watched your first two films, is catching them on IFC and then waiting for them to come on again so I could see the part that I had missed.

Whit: It couldn’t have been IFC. It must have been one of the Sundance or the Showtime channels.

We had an odd situation because one of the people who made Metropolitan possible was Lindsay Law when he was buying for American Playhouse. I had been very disappointed he hadn’t bought one of my Spanish American independent films. He walked out of that screening without liking it. But, he came to a screening of Metropolitan when we were in pretty desperate straits. He really liked it and he bought it. He allowed us to take the deposit money out of escrow to pay DuArt Laboratories. So, thanks to that money, we were able to take it to Sundance.

Then, we had a very quick window on PBS. A lot of people saw it on PBS. That was great because I guess we were able to have a video release. We were in cinemas for a long time.

I think that one of the reasons why we were able to get a nomination without a campaign for it was that in those days you could run for a long time on screen. We were on screen in New York for seven months, which is fantastic.

Karina: Yeah, and very unlikely now.

Whit: Yeah. So, yes, I would like a new way for people to see things easily. But, I hope the old ways will continue too.