By Andrea Gronvall andreagronvall@aol.com

MOVIE LIFE IN THE POST-THEATRICAL AGE? AN INTERVIEW WITH DIRECTOR/WRITER/ACTOR EDWARD BURNS

The Gronvall Files

There’s a lot about Edward Burns that’s just so likeable—he’s sharp, talented, and industrious, but also easygoing, and a generous ensemble player. Since breaking out with his acclaimed 1995 writing/directing/acting debut, the low-budget indie The Brothers McMullen (shot over weekends so as not to interfere with his then day job as an Entertainment Tonight gofer), he has worked as an actor for other directors, including Steven Spielberg (Saving Private Ryan), James Foley (Confidence), and Nancy Meyers (The Holiday), while enhancing his own profile as a filmmaker with art-house features like She’s the One and Sidewalks of New York. These days, however, he’s aiming for more eyeballs than can fit in the local cineplex. His latest film is Newlyweds, an edgy romantic comedy about a recently married Manhattan couple (Burns and Caitlin Fitzgerald) whose relationship is tested by some highly strung relatives. The film bowed on VOD at the end of December; on January 13th Tribeca Film begins a theatrical release with a limited run at Chicago’s Gene Siskel Film Center. I spoke with Burns over the phone about his movie, his enthusiasm for the new technologies that are reshaping the business, and his upcoming stint in front of the camera, opposite Tyler Perry in I, Alex Cross.

Andrea Gronvall:  You shot your 2010 feature, Nice Guy Johnny, with the digital Red One; for Newlyweds you chose the smaller, lower-priced Canon 5D. What did you like about each camera?

Edward Burns:  When the Red came out, my DP [cinematographer William Rexer] and I both wanted to buy one. We thought we could afford it, and wanted to play with it to see what it could do. We first shot a web series [The Lynch Pin (2009)] with it, then made Nice Guy Johnny, a $25,000 small, run-and-gun movie. It’s amazing how it looks in a theater; Nice Guy Johnny played on huge screens at film festivals around the country, and really held up. Flash forward to Newlyweds. We’d heard a lot about the Canon 5D. So we went up to B& H Photo and bought one at 11 AM, headed over to this guy’s gym to do a camera test, and then dumped the footage into Final Cut Pro on my computer. We liked it so much, that shot ended up in the movie.

When I talk to aspiring filmmakers, I tell them that with these new technologies, the playing field has been completely leveled, depending on the scale of your project. If you’re making small comedies or small dramas, then get to it. We shot Newlyweds in just 12 days over the course of four months, and for only $9,000. After post-production, the total came to $120,000.

AG:  A lot of documentary filmmakers like the smaller cameras because of their relative unobtrusiveness. You adopted a pseudo-documentary style for Newlyweds. Sometimes viewers feel like they’re eavesdropping on your ensemble; at other times the characters directly address the camera, allowing for some neat solo riffs. How did you know that these actors—Caitlin Fitzgerald, Kerry Bishe¢, Max Baker, Marsha Dietlein Bennett, Dara Coleman, and Johnny Solo—would mesh so well?

EB:  With the exception of Caitlin, I had worked with everyone before. I wanted this to be a companion piece to Sidewalks of New York, but I thought, let’s go even further with that concept, and use a documentary-size crew, just three people. The actors would wear their own clothes and do their own makeup. We would film in real locations—apartments and public spaces like the gym, the recording studio, coffee shops, etc., which would remain open for business while we’re shooting. To do this, you have to know beforehand that the actors will be game. I brought all of them in after I’d written my second draft; I hadn’t even changed the characters’ names in the script to fictional ones—they were still “Marsha,” “Dara,” and so on. I sat the actors down, and walked them through their scenes. Like, this scene starts from A and gets to B, these are the beats, and then I’d encourage them to improvise. I gave direction when I needed something to change. Because all of them were allowed to have their own voices, it doesn’t feel like a scripted screenplay.

AG:  Six of your films have played the Tribeca Film Festival. Did your relationship with the festival influence your decision to have Tribeca Film distribute Newlyweds?

EB:  In 2010 we were at the festival again with Nice Guy Johnny and my lawyer John Sloss was beginning to field offers from buyers. Most of the deals being offered were of the “no advance partnership” variety, where the distributor only guarantees two screens, one in New York and one in L.A. I already knew from the past what it costs to roll out a film in a platform release, and how that kind of theatrical release can be a loss leader. So John tells me to imagine that tonight I’m going on Jimmy Fallon, where I tell everyone who lives in New York and L.A. to go out and see the movie, and everyone else watching the show in the rest of the country to try and remember to look for it. Then compare the size of audiences in New York and L.A. theaters with the number of viewers in 45 million homes across America who for $6 can see it on demand on TV. So we launched Nice Guy Johnny on VOD, and more people saw it then than would have if the movie had had a typical indie theatrical release.

AG:  And you also put Newlyweds on VOD. So why is Tribeca Film handling a theatrical release of the movie? Why put it in theaters at all?

EB:  My producer Aaron Lubin is from Chicago; he grew up on the city’s South Side. Then there’s another Chicago connection: I was in town to speak at the Tribeca Flashpoint Media Arts Academy, and met Adam Kempenaar [host of Filmspotting on WBEZ Radio], who has become a friend. And Adam was going on about how movies always open first in theaters in New York or L.A., and that when we opened our next film, we should open it in Chicago. So, here we are; we’re experimenting with Chicago. Our second theatrical experiment, a couple of weeks later, will be on Long Island, where I’m originally from. If we make money, or break even—if we don’t lose money–then we’ll decide what a third city might be. If we don’t do well in these first two runs, then we’ll know a theatrical release is dead.

AG: You’re still keeping busy as an actor for hire; I just watched you in Man on a Ledge. And you can be seen later this year in a high-profile movie, I, Alex Cross, alongside Tyler Perry, who plays James Patterson’s famous fictional detective. I’m looking forward to it, in part because it stars two independent filmmakers whose approaches to acting are probably very different. Without giving any spoilers, can you tell us something of what we can expect to see?

EB: First of all, it was great making it; the first scene we shot together is actually the last scene in the film. It’s where we reminisce about our childhood; our characters have been friends since they were young, and in that scene we had to summon up 35 years of history together. We hit it off right away. Tyler has become a really good friend of mine, and given me some incredible advice about my career. One day he told me that he had watched The Brothers McMullen again over the weekend, and wanted to know why I didn’t ever make a sequel. And what about She’s the One, my first commercial success? No sequel, either. He pointed out that in 15 years I hadn’t made another film about Irish-Americans, and told me, “You have to super-size your niche.” So, I’m doing it. After I finish my next film, Fitzgerald Family Christmas, I’ll make a sequel to The Brothers McMullen.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon