Marriage

Stu Zicherman and Ben Karlin Discuss the Making of ‘A.C.O.D.’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This article was written in 2013, and it contains spoilers for this film.

Stu Zicherman and Ben Karlin are best known for their work as writers in film and television. Zicherman was one of the screenwriters on “Elektra” which he did not even try to hide his disappointment over, and the Hong Kong action film “2000 AD,” and he is currently working on the FX show “The Americans.” Karlin made a name for himself as a writer and executive producer on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” and “The Colbert Report,” and these days he serves as one of the writers for the acclaimed ABC comedy “Modern Family.” But what you may not know is these two were best friends when they were growing up, and they are also children of divorce.

When they reunited as adults, Zicherman and Karlin began working together on the screenplay for “A.C.O.D.” which tells the story of when Carter (Adam Scott) is tasked to get his bitterly divorced parents, Hugh (Richard Jenkins) and Melissa (Catherine O’Hara), to come to their youngest son Trey’s (Clark Duke) wedding. Writing the script allowed Zicherman and Karlin to deal with their own memories of their parents separating, but they also manage to find humor in a situation which is usually filled with tremendous sadness and anger. In the process, they both succeed in turning a lot of comedy conventions on their heads and give us a movie full of endless surprises.

I got to participate in a roundtable interview with Zicherman and Karlin when they appeared for the “A.C.O.D.” press junket held at the SLS Hotel in Los Angeles, California.

Question: What was the genesis for this movie?

Stu Zicherman: Ben and I have actually been friends since we were born. What’s the quickest way to explain this? Basically, my mom was friends with Ben’s parents, and Ben’s parents were friends with my mom’s first husband who I didn’t even know about. We’ve been friends our whole lives. I have always wanted to do something with this subject matter, this generation of divorced kids. We’re both part of this generation.

Ben Karlin: Yeah. We were friends growing up and our families were friends growing up, but then, when his parents got divorced and shortly thereafter my parents got divorced, we stopped hanging out because that was the end of our families getting together and doing things.

Stu Zicherman: It was a very romantic journey where our families used to go on vacations together.

Ben Karlin: So, when we were both professional and we were established as adults in our careers, I moved to New York, and Stu was working there already and he said, “Hey, I want to write a movie about how messed up we all are” (laughs). I went, “I’m in!”

Stu Zicherman: We grew up on movies like “Kramer vs. Kramer” and dramas that were kind of tragic. Ben and I talked about this when we first started working on the movie. Our parents’ divorces were tragic and sad in their own way, but they were also not to be believed at times (laughs). They were irreverent, funny and weird. We wanted to try and find a way to make light of it and make a comedy that still had some gravity to it because it’s something that people don’t laugh about. What’s been really fun about making this movie and about taking it around and showing it at Sundance and all these places is that people are excited and relate to it. People will come up to me after screenings and want to tell their stories like, “My parents got divorced when I was 8.” We’re almost giving them license to laugh about it.

Ben Karlin: We were shooting in Atlanta, and the night before production started, it was just us. It was me, Stu, a couple of the actors, a couple of the producers, and we were out in the bar at the hotel. There was a wedding going on and there was the after party for the wedding. There was the groom, the bride, the whole bridal party. Everyone was in tuxedoes. So, it was like these two worlds. We were about to make this movie about divorce and these people who were just starting. And they were great. They were lovely people. We closed the bar down with them. And then, a week later, I got a letter from one of the bridesmaids who I had been chatting with, and she told me this long story about her family’s divorce and how it affected her. It was just so weird. Even in that moment, people were just connecting to what we were trying to do, and we found that throughout the whole process, that there seems to be something that everyone can relate to about this subject.

Question: So, everybody is trying to figure out who got married at the movie’s end…

Stu Zicherman: Well, you know, we didn’t really want to give it away. Ben and I always talked about the movie as being an anti-romantic comedy. There were certain beats we would get to in the movie as we were writing it. There’s the obvious romantic comedy beat. We were trying to turn away from that wherever we could, not to the detriment of the movie, but the end of the movie was not so much about who got married. It was more important to us that the characters, especially those three men, have evolved through the movie to a point where it could be any of them. When pressed, I always say it’s all three of them, but we like the idea of leaving it open-ended because it didn’t matter.

Ben Karlin: It didn’t really trouble us, I have to say. We wanted to create a scenario where all three characters were repaired to the point where you’d be just okay with any of them. And it could be all three of them or none of them. The point is that whatever was waiting for them in there in the church was okay.

Stu Zicherman: And it’s funny too, when editing the movie, every single time I would adjust frames or tried a different shot and put it in front of an audience, people always guessed a different person. It was bizarre. I started to lose track of why people felt what. We had to calibrate it so that it’s pretty hard to tell now. We’d had a version where there was a faceless bride running through the background.

Ben Karlin: Oh, deep, deep background. A limo, a bride, the whole thing.

Stu Zicherman: Again, it distracted from the movie. It’s such a nice, clean moment with the three of them walking in, and we like it.

Question: Everyone seems to have their own version of the movie’s ending, and that really serves as a testament to your writing because you got us so deeply invested in every single character to where we really want to know what happens to them

Ben Karlin: It’s a very hard thing to do. You want to give in. You want to give people what they want. And then, there’s the creative jerk part of you that’s like, “I know better.”

Stu Zicherman: But also, we thought about a lot of this when we were writing the movie that we didn’t want people to be right or wrong. It’s not a right or wrong thing. It’s the dad who does this impetuous thing and they get back together. He’s not wrong. He’s following his heart. What’s wrong with following your heart? And again, at the end of the movie, I always say to people it’s not a movie about divorce per se. I don’t want people just to think it’s about that. It’s really about if you’re married, if you’re not married, divorced, whatever kind of family you’re from, you’re not destined to repeat the patterns of your parents. You’re free to make your own mistakes. You’re free to live your life. That’s why I always love the word “adult” being in the movie. I always felt like you become an adult when you actually can put your past into perspective. That’s when you really start becoming an adult. And I like that about the ending because, up to that point, everybody is acting like a child.

Question: You have said the script is loosely based on your families. Have you gotten any flak from them about it?

Ben Karlin: We’ve done a pretty good job of hiding or changing details. There used to be more stuff in the script that was literally word for word from our lives. There was an incident in his family and a specific incident in mine that involved the handing off of kids on a bridge, like a prisoner transfer, but it was between the parents. And it literally, at this moment, happened to me in Cape Cod where it was my dad’s new wife actually and her children and her ex-husband, and they had to exchange and they decided the exact mid-point. It was like North Korea-South Korea. Here’s the DMZ and we’re going to trade these children over that line, and we had that exact scene in the movie for years. That probably wouldn’t have gone over so well.

Stu Zicherman: And then there was a thing in my family called the hysterectomy conspiracy that was so absurd that when it was in the script, people would read it and be like…

Ben Karlin: “That’s not real.”

Stu Zicherman: They didn’t believe it. “No, no. It’s real.” We had to take it out because people didn’t believe it. But that happened to me. There’s one moment in the movie that is sort of torn from my life and its funny. It’s the one where Carter sits his parents down. My sister was getting married, and my parents would not agree to come to the same wedding. My brother-in-law and I sat them down. What’s hilarious about that is my parents don’t remember that. They block it out.

Question: How long did it take you two to get this film made?

Ben Karlin: Oh my God! I was just talking about this the other day. I was living here (in Los Angeles) and I moved to New York in 1999, and Stu was already living there at that time. He probably approached me in 2000 or 2001 to start working on it. Obviously, we had other jobs.

Stu Zicherman: Yeah. We had other jobs, so we were working on it nights and on weekends and vacations.

Ben Karlin: The amazing thing is we were both single when we started working on this movie. I have since gotten married, had children, and gotten divorced (laughs).

Stu Zicherman: It’s crazy. We were both single when we started this thing, and now I’m married with two kids and he’s got two kids, which I think helped inform the movie a little bit.

Ben Karlin: Yes, definitely.

Stu Zicherman: It’s been a long process. It’s funny though. The movie almost got going at one point. It came really close to get going. What was great about it was once we committed to Adam Scott, the movie started to finally roll. Finally, eventually, you get so frustrated with all the games you have to play to try and get a movie made. The thing is that we always loved Adam for this. And again, it fits in a little bit with the anti-romantic idea. He’s got an anti-romantic lead in a way because he’s got a very cynical humor and perspective on life. It just worked really well. And once we got Adam, then we got Richard Jenkins. It just started to roll.

Ben Karlin: Once you have those first few pieces in place, it starts to gain a terminal velocity.

Stu Zicherman: Right. The phone starts to ring and all of a sudden people want to be in your movie. That was very exciting.

Question: What I like about the script is that you don’t know where it’s going to go. From a distance, it looks like your typical formulaic comedy, but it really isn’t. How did you go about that? Were you looking to avoid certain things that you see in a lot of comedies like this?

Ben Karlin: Yes. There are so many tropes to these kinds of movies. Because we always were around, we were like, “How do we deal with the subject of a wedding in a movie that’s essentially about divorce?” We were very resolute that if we were going to have a wedding, we were going to do it differently than that typical moment at the end of the movie where people are walking down the aisle. So, we knew we wanted that outside the wedding moment to end it. We just were acutely aware of convention and trying to understand why those conventions worked and why they existed, and then trying wherever we could to tiptoe around the obvious thing.

Stu Zicherman: But the big thing was stakes. I mean, there were so many times where we were hyperconscious with the movie, and we would do readings just to find out where we were with it. The main character, Carter, is in every single scene of the movie and he doesn’t have cancer. He isn’t beaten. It’s the kind of thing, at a certain point, where the audience could be looking at him and go, “Hey dude, get over it.” And so, there were scenes we really liked but we felt like we were going to lose the audience. We said, “We have to keep the audience rooting for him.”

Ben Karlin: We didn’t want to turn the guy into a jerk.

Stu Zicherman: So, it was this balance. At times, people would read the script and say, “Why doesn’t he want his parents to get back together?” We just had to find a way and we kept trying to find ways in through relationships. But we did at times always try to move away from the tropes like the scene with the ring that turns into the key, and moments like that. It was funny. I did a Q&A; in New York the other night and someone asked me about the whole cheating thing with Jessica Alba and how he never gets caught. In the classic romantic comedy, you always get that scene where she’s like, “What were you doing with that girl?” It never crossed our minds to go there, and the truth is because in real life most people don’t get caught. You’re just forced to live with it. And that was the great liberty of making this movie independently. We’re not beholden to a studio to hit certain tropes. Also, it made the tone what it is, because the movie is funny but it’s also got some gravity to it and it’s got this balance. I’m excited. The fact that the movie is finally coming out, I’m excited for people to see it, but I’m also going to miss it because we’ve just been carrying it around like this for so long.

“A.C.O.D.” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.

‘Bridesmaids’ – Do Not Mistake This Film for an Average ‘Chick Flick’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

“Bridesmaids” looks like it has “chick flick” written all over it to where many, including myself, were not quick to rush out and see this film when it arrived in movie theaters everywhere. But having since watched it, I can confirm this is not your average “chick flick” in the slightest. Moreover, it will appeal to a wider audience than its title might suggest. There is nothing groundbreaking about “Bridesmaids” as it initially comes across as a typical formulaic comedy, but the laughs do come at us fast, many of them gut busters. But seriously, it also has a lot of heart and makes you care about the characters very much to where we can easily relate to their struggles.

Kristen Wiig, one of the most acclaimed alums of “Saturday Night Live”  who co-wrote this film’s screenplay with Annie Mumolo, stars as Annie Walker, a single underachiever whose cake shop went bankrupt due to the recession, and who is currently having sex with Ted (an uncredited John Hamm), a man who sees her as nothing more than a fuck buddy. Then she finds out that her best friend since childhood, Lillian (Maya Rudolph, another “SNL” vet) has gotten engaged, and Lillian asks Annie to be her maid of honor. From there, we know things are going to go south between these two as the road to any marriage is filled with endless speed bumps which lead many to encourage others to elope instead.

Complications arise almost immediately when Annie meets Lillian’s other BFF, Helen Harris (Rose Byrne), a beautiful and wealthy woman who seems to have everything together in her life. The resentment and insecurity between these Annie and Helen are evident on their faces following their first encounter. This is made even clearer when both toast Lillian and then try to top each other in showering their love on her, attempting to prove who is the better best friend.

Things get even more complicated when Lillian selects the rest of her maids of honor. They include Becca (Ellie Kemper) who loves wedding and pities Annie because she is not currently engaged to anyone, Megan (Melissa McCarthy) who is as aggressive as they come, and Rita (Wendi McLendon-Covey) who may very well be the unhappiest wife and mother on the face of the Earth as well as the most consistently drunk of the bunch. With all these different personalities working together, will the road to this wedding be a happy one? Was Donald Trump always faithful to Melania?

What I really loved about “Bridesmaids” was the same thing I also loved about “Knocked Up;” the characters are very down to earth and easy to relate to. Being that Judd Apatow is a producer on both films, this should have been obvious from the start. These characters are real people with real problems which are not far removed from our own, and we come to care deeply about each and every character here. It does not matter if none of you have ever been a bridesmaid. As for you men, being groomsman is enough qualification to understand the headaches in planning matrimony.

“Bridesmaids” also a film where facial expressions at times speak more loudly than words. It certainly does have great dialogue, but the looks on these actresses’ faces is what really cracked me up. They say one thing, but their eyes tell us what is really on their mind. This goes for the men in as well, and they all seem to pale in comparison to the females in terms of inner strength. We see right through each character, and the tension resulting from a possible slip of the tongue is always in the air.

This film proved to be the true cinematic breakthrough for Wiig. When I have seen her in other films, she always seems to be doing a riff on her most deadpan characters from “SNL” whether she is appearing in “Knocked Up” or “MacGruber.” But as Annie Walker, Wiig really inhabits this character and gives her life in a way we did not get to see her do previously. She makes us embrace Annie as a kindred spirit because we have all felt the way she feels; lost in a world she feels betrayed by, and desperately trying to hold on to what means the most to her.

Maya Rudolph is equally wonderful here as the bride to be, Lillian. She previously showed us in Sam Mendes’ “Away We Go” what a great actress she can be, and she vividly reminds us of our best friends from childhood. Lillian runs through a gamut of emotions as her road towards marriage start off wonderfully and then eventually turn into an unmitigated disaster. In a pivotal scene in which Lillian about to leave her apartment for the last time, Rudolph shows us a worry and concern which we all see within ourselves from time to time. Not once does she portray Lillian as your usual clichéd character, and this says so much about what she is capable of.

Rose Byrne proves to be a delight as Helen, and her beautiful face and eyes cannot quite mask the growing resentment she has towards Annie. This character could have easily turned into your typical one-dimensional villainess, but by the end we discover tshe and Annie are not all that different. Byrne makes you like Helen despite her overly meddling ways, and she has since proven to be a strong presence in every motion picture she has appeared in.

But out of all the characters here, the one who stands out the most is Megan who is portrayed in a deservedly Oscar nominated performance by Melissa McCarthy. Overweight and raunchy whenever she wants to be, McCarthy is a trye comedic powerhouse when the camera focuses on her. Seducing airplane passengers and showing no shame in what she is, she makes Megan a strong character and never once digresses into making her a cloyingly sentimental one.

“Bridesmaids” was directed by Paul Feig, Mr. Eugene Pool from “Sabrina, The Teenage Witch” and the creator of “Freaks and Greeks;” a brilliant show that like many other brilliant shows which aired on network television lasted only one season. With this film, he manages to find humor even in the most painful of moments and never makes the comedy too overly broad. Sure, some scenes are broadly played, but Feig remembers comedy can only work if you truly care about the characters.

Looking back, “Bridesmaids” proved to be one of the best comedies to be released back in 2011, and no man out there should dismiss it as a film only women would be interested in. The audience for this one proved to be far more diverse than its promotion may have suggested. Plus, you have Wiig and Rudolph on display here, and they always kick ass! If you liked them on “Saturday Night Live,” you are bound to love them here.

* * * * out of * * * *

WRITER’S NOTE: This film marked the very last screen performance of actress Jill Clayburgh who passed away in November 2010 from leukemia. She is a wonderful presence here as Annie’s mother, Judy Walker. May she rest in peace.

‘The Kids Are All Right’ is About Marriage, Period

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

The Kids Are All RIght movie poster

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written back in 2010.

Lisa Cholodenko’s “The Kids Are All Right” takes its title from one of many great songs by The Who. However, I kept wondering about the movie’s title in regards to the way it is spelled. The Who’s song is entitled “The Kids Are Alright” while the movie splits “Alright” into “All Right.” What exactly does this mean? Are the kids infinitely more intelligent than the parents in this movie? Do they make better decisions in their lives than the adults? We all know kids have a stronger detector system when it comes to exposing the hypocrisy of parents and adults in general, so perhaps the movie’s title means to spell this out literally. Or maybe it’s because The Who made a rockumentary a number of years back called “The Kids Are Alright,” and perhaps Focus Features didn’t want to confuse the two. Anyway, that’s just a thought.

I was lucky enough to catch a screening of this movie on the day Proposition 8 was overturned by the California Supreme Court (YES!!!). This was the same proposition which barred gay couples from getting married and found funding from people who didn’t even live in California. However, to call this a gay or lesbian movie would make audiences completely miss the point as that is like calling “Brokeback Mountain a “gay cowboy” movie for crying out loud. What the couple of Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Julianne Moore) go through is not any different from what many “straight couples” go through, and it really gets to the truth of what hard work marriage can be.

Nic and Jules are a very loving couple indeed, and there is no doubt about how deep their affection for one another is. Furthermore, they have two wonderful children: a 15-year-old boy named Laser (Josh Hutcherson), and an 18-year old girl named Joni (Mia Wasikowska) who is about to head off to college. The major difference between Nic and Jules is while Nic has had a successful career as a physician, Jules has failed at just about every business she has tried to start up on her own. It gets to where Jules starts to wonder if Nic is really just belittling everything she does, and a resentment between the two grows quickly.

But what really throws a wrench into the family’s dynamic is when Joni, after being pushed by Laser to do so, contacts their biological father. Both were conceived by artificial insemination, and the sperm donor turns out to be a very nice guy named Paul (Mark Ruffalo) who has a phobia of commitment and leads a decidedly bohemian life. Upon meeting these two kids, he warms up to them immediately and finds himself changing in ways he didn’t expect. But then he meets the parents, and things get really crazy.

What I really liked about “The Kids Are All Right” was that after a summer of superheroes and high concept movies, here’s one which deals with real people and situations we all recognize from our own lives and the lives of others. The characters conceived here are all well meaning people who never come across as contrived or clichéd in the usual sense. Director Lisa Cholodenko, along with co-writer Stuart Blumberg, succeed in creating some wonderful characters, and they give them with hilarious dialogue which is also insightful and refreshingly down to earth. These are people with visible flaws which make them all the more human, as if we need to be told this.

I never found myself taking sides or hating any of the characters. Like I said, each one is well meaning and comes into this situation with the best of intentions. Of course, we all know where the best of intentions can lead us. When these people stray from one another, we may disagree with what they do, but Cholodenko uses this to make us understand why some end up doing the things they do. Everyone is complicated in their own way, but labeling people as bad for doing certain things only serves to blind us from understanding them as individuals.

All the actors are clearly in love with playing the intricacies of their roles, and each one creates a character we quickly become emotionally invested in. Annette Bening is perfect as Nic, the bread winner of the family. While at times very high strung and a bit overprotective of her family, she imbues Nic with a strong sense of commitment while losing sight of what brought her into this relationship in the first place.

Julianne Moore shines as she always does as Jules who feels increasingly neglected in her role as housewife, and her fear that Nic is not taking her career endeavors seriously feels very much justified. In many ways, Jules gets looked down more than anyone else in the script, but Moore never makes Jules a pitiful creature and gives her a strong center which she finds her way back to. Also, her speech on marriage is one of the movie’s best moments, and it comes from an honest place.

Mark Ruffalo continues his reign of great naturalistic performances and makes film acting look effortless. His character of Paul could have been the bad guy of the piece or some sitcom-like character, but you never doubt his sincerity in how he grows to love these kids which he had a hand in bringing into the world. Even when he missteps (and he really does), I found it impossible to dislike the guy. Of all the characters in “The Kids Are All Right,” he is the one who grows the most, but his revelations come in a way which is not exactly appropriate.

Both Mia Wasikowska and Josh Hutcherson are great as the kids, and Cholodenko keeps them from becoming conventional in the teenager mainstream movie kind of way. Wasikowska gets to be much livelier here than she was in Tim Burton’s bland remake of “Alice In Wonderland,” and she radiates intelligence which makes her character wise beyond her years to where she comes across as the most mature one in the film. Hutcherson also makes Laser into an interesting kid caught up in friendships which aren’t really sound and finding a father figure in the last place he expected to. Seeing him discovering his parents’ videotape of gay male pornography leads to one of the funniest scenes this movie has to offer.

If there is any complaint I have with “The Kids Are All Right,” it’s the ending. The plight of Ruffalo’s character is frustratingly left unresolved, and we never do learn if he will keep in touch with Joni and Laser. Nic and Jules do get a satisfying conclusion, but seeing Paul getting cut loose was an unfortunate disappointment. I was eagerly waiting to see where he would end up after all which had ensued.

Still, “The Kids Are All Right” is one of the nicest surprises of the 2010 summer movie season, and it deservedly got a large audience for an independent film. It has what I would like to see more of in movies: regular, down to earth people with problems and flaws much like anyone else’s. I also think it involves a relationship which any couple (and I strongly stress the word ANY) can relate to in different ways.

By the way, for those of you who think that gays getting married is still a threat to the “sanctity of marriage,” I got two words for you: Donald Trump. End of story.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

‘Unfaithful’ is More Than Just a Gender Reversal on ‘Fatal Attraction’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Unfaithful movie poster

“Unfaithful” could easily be seen as a gender reversal on “Fatal Attraction” as this time the wife cheats on her husband. Plus, both movies were directed by Adrian Lynne, and “Fatal Attraction” inadvertently created a formula of psychotic attraction which lasted for many years to where we got “Unlawful Entry,” “Single White Female” and “Swimfan” among other movies. “Unfaithful,” however, is not held captive to this formula, and it becomes not so much a thriller as it is a drama with profound conflict. It doesn’t end with an audience pleasing conclusion as it does with ambiguity over how to resolve a situation bound by inescapable moral complications.

The movie stars Diane Lane as Connie Summer, a happily married wife to Edward Summer (Richard Gere) and mother to Charlie (Erik Per Sullivan). On one massively windy day in downtown New York, she accidentally runs into French bookseller Paul Martel (Oliver Martinez) who invites her to his apartment to take care of her painfully scraped knees. This ends up with her meeting Paul again several times before they embark on a passionately sexual relationship which contrasts with the loving but average marriage she has with Edward. But it all ends up becoming an addiction she can’t quite tear herself away from, and the destruction of her marriage becomes more and more imminent as a result.

Unlike the average formulaic thriller which clearly delineates good and bad to where the wicked get the punishment they deserve, “Unfaithful” never lets the viewer off easy. It poses questions to the audience which they might not want to answer, and they linger long after the movie is over. The film was adapted from Claude Chabrol’s 1968 French film “The Unfaithful Wife,” and it doesn’t feel like much was changed in the translation. Connie’s affair ends up creating a ripple effect which severely affects those people she loves the most in life.

Edward is no idiot as he suspects something is up, and the stress and confusion we see on his face gets worse and worse. What he discovers leads him to commit an act of which he never felt capable, and we are left to wonder if he should be punished or forgiven. Lynne never leaves us with any easy answers in “Unfaithful,” and this makes this film all the more compelling.

Lane already had a long and successful acting career before this movie came along, but this is the role which brought her the audience she long deserved, and there is no forgetting her after this. The role of Connie Summer is a great one for any actress, and Lane more than rises to the challenge. While she is cheating on her beloved husband, she still makes her character very sympathetic and brilliantly portrays her conflicting emotions. The scene where she is heading home on the subway after her first sexual tryst with Paul is a marvel of film acting as her face is a stunning portrait of regret and excitement. Seeing Lane experiencing various emotions makes for an unforgettable acting moment which deserves much study for future generations of actors.

Gere, considered by People Magazine to be one of the sexiest men alive, is every bit her equal as Edward. It’s almost weird to see him in this kind of role because we have previously seen him play characters who either cheat on their spouse or run off with someone else’s wife. Here, he plays a loving husband who hasn’t done anything wrong, so this situation provides much confusion for him as well as a pain he hoped never to experience.

As for Oliver Martinez, it’s easy to see why anyone could easily fall for him. He exudes sexiness both in appearance and the way he speaks. But more importantly, he never makes Paul Martel a character with overtly evil intentions. This is not a man who can be easily described as a villain, but one who follows through on his passions regardless of the consequences they may bring about. When he comes face to face with those he has hurt, Paul never flaunts his ego or berates them. The way he sees it, he has done nothing wrong and never intended to wound anyone so deeply.

If “Unfaithful” were directed by anyone else, it would have made the wife more sympathetic and the husband a one-dimensional bastard to where you’d want the wife to cheat on him. But Lynne is far more interested in providing a fascinating portrait of a relationship which is not bad off, but instead one which turns out to be more susceptible to temptation than at first glance. The good guys and bad guys are never easily told apart in this story. There is a darkness in all the characters here, and it’s a darkness they don’t see until it’s much too late.

There was much talk after “Fatal Attraction” of how the original ending was changed to something more audience pleasing, but turning Glenn Close’s character from a wronged person into a psychotic menace who met a deadly end never sat well with many people. It’s as if Lynne has been paying a price for this ending ever since, and “Unfaithful” almost serves as a make up for him taking the easy way out back in 1987. Whatever the case, “Unfaithful” is a compelling drama which allows its actors to shine in ways we have not seen previously. Lane is a revelation here, and her performance, like this movie, is hard to shake.

Of course, “Unfaithful” still leaves the audience with one other burning question much like the one posed in “Fatal Attraction:” Why cheat on your spouse when they are played by Anne Archer or Richard Gere? Well, we may never know.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

Exclusive Interview: Kris Perry and Sandy Stier on ‘The Case Against 8’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

The Case Against 8 Kris Perry and Sandy Stier photo

“The Case Against 8” is a highly in-depth documentary about the historic federal lawsuit filed to overturn the discriminatory (and completely unnecessary) ban on marriages for gay couples. This fight for marriage equality went on for five years, and filmmakers Ben Cotner and Ryan White were there for it all as they went behind the scenes with the legal team of David Boies and Ted Olson (the same two lawyers from the “Bush v. Gore” case) and the four plaintiffs named in the suit. HBO aired the documentary on June 23, 2014 which coincided with the first anniversary of the Supreme Court rulings which restored marriage equality to California and ended federal discrimination against gay couples under the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

I was very excited to talk with Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, two of the plaintiffs in the case, when they arrived in Los Angeles in 2014 to talk about “The Case Against 8.” We see them both getting married at the documentary’s beginning, and it’s a wonderful ceremony to watch. But then came the passage of Proposition 8 which defined marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman, and their marriage was soon declared void. After five years of fighting for marriage equality, Kris and Sandy succeed in getting married again and they are still trying to adjust to the reality of that.

The Case Against 8 poster

Ben Kenber: When the idea of the documentary came about, was it something you were initially open to or were you hesitant to participate in it?

Kris Perry: Well we were a little hesitant about media in general at the beginning of the process. We didn’t know how it would turn out, we didn’t know what was going to happen, and we knew people would be opposed to marriage equality and they might direct it at us personally. So we were pretty reticent about media, but the filmmakers were sort of in a different category. They obviously were supportive of Sandy and I and everybody on the team. The obviously had good intent, they were incredibly trustworthy and thoughtful and supportive, so we always felt like they were different and they did something different than what a lot of people did which was just cover a minute or two here and there. They lived through it all with everybody and I think that sets them apart and made them special for us, so we were really happy they were around actually.

Sandy Stier: They became invisible very early on which is kind of interesting. They were very quiet so they set up the cameras quietly everywhere and they were such sweet guys. It was easy to accept them being there, and they also seemed protective of us in some really nice ways. I always felt like they wouldn’t include anything that we didn’t feel comfortable with, and they were very open to our perspective and what we felt okay with being in it or not. And also, on some level, I don’t really believe they would make a documentary or that it would really even happen because we had no idea what would happen with the case. We didn’t expect it to be as big a deal as it was, and I thought these nice guys are here filming and that’s great. They might make a documentary, but it’s probably kind of a long shot that it’ll be something that’s that big of a deal. So I know that sounds kind of crazy but I thought that they were so sweet and I hope that this works out okay for them, but I kind of thought that they were wasting their time.

BK: Is there anything that you wish was included in this documentary but wasn’t for one reason or another, or are you perfectly happy with the way it turned out?

KP: We’re very happy with it. We were just on a panel with the editor (Kate Amend) the other night, and somebody asked her that question because she looked at all 600 hours and was the one with the job of deciding what was in or out and had to fight with Ben and Ryan about what they wanted in. Her answer I thought was beautiful as she said, “Now that I’ve seen it this many times, I think I wouldn’t change one bit of it. I wouldn’t put anything in that I took out, and what’s in is what should have been in.” I was happy to hear her say it because she saw everything and we never did and yet I think it couldn’t be longer, it couldn’t have more in it, and I think they made some beautiful decisions.

SS: I think they did certainly a fantastic job, and we will never really know about all the footage that they have. I’m sure we would be kind of blown away by some of what they have that we will probably never see. The one thing is when I watch our wedding, I loved the way they captured it but hoped so much that are four boys would’ve been there that day we got married, and they couldn’t be there. It’s always a reminder of how we had only one out of the four and that was just painful, but they could not have done a better job putting it together and making it make sense. It’s a complicated case to make sense of and they did a great job of weaving it together.

BK: The voice of love speaks louder in this documentary than any other voice that’s featured in it. What was it like watching your wedding as it is presented here?

KP: It’s great. I mean who gets to see their wedding on a full screen in a movie theater with Dolby? That’s like a really lucky thing. I like seeing Sandy’s face again because it really was such a blur that day and there was so much happening and there were so many people including the Attorney General and all the people standing there all of a sudden. To be able to focus just on the person I was marrying was like, “Oh right, that was what was happening too.” There were the two of us and then there was everybody else, but you get pulled into that everybody else part. So I like how easy it is to focus on the two of us in the way that they included it in the film, but you can see everybody else too. But they are not the point of the wedding.

SS: To see all the people that were there supporting us at our wedding, it’s a rare wedding where you don’t know most of the people. But that’s how it happened. It’s kind of fun to see all those faces again.

BK: Now that the documentary is finished, what effect do you think it has had on your life so far?

SS: So far I think it has been a wonderful gift to us to go back and see people and see how it comes together and relive it. Every time we get to relive it slightly differently and focus on a different part of the film. It’s been a very positive impact on us so far. I think it that what will honestly be a little weird is that once it’s on TV on HBO, there are all these people we don’t know who will see it and they peer into your lives. People are in your kitchen with you and at your child’s graduation, and it’s just an odd thing knowing that so many people we don’t know will have been viewing our lives. But it’s okay.

KP: Yeah, I really think it’s been positive so far. The people who have seen it like you who have come in and say, “Wow, I didn’t realize how much was going on because I didn’t track it every day,” I’m really glad for someone like you that’s open to looking at the bigger story. It gets interesting again, and now when you hear about Utah or you hear about Pennsylvania or Illinois you’ll go, “Wow! Now I know what it takes to fight something in court. Now I know what it takes to be a plaintiff.” It gives you new perspective.

BK: What was your first reaction when you found out that Ted Olson, the lawyer who essentially gave us George W. Bush as President, would be representing you in this case?

KP: Skepticism maybe a little bit. But the people that found him and wanted him to do it and hired him are some of the people I respect the most. The political efforts of Chad Griffin and Rob Reiner and Bruce Cohen and Dustin Lance Black, I just thought these are guys who have seen so many battles and have tried to win so many rights that, if they think Ted’s the guy, who am I to question their wisdom? And they were right; he ended up being a terrific champion and still is and will continue to be. So I just was relying on the jury of peers that we had before we met.

BK: We’re so quick to judge people based on political beliefs, and I’m really getting sick of that. One of the great things about “The Case Against 8” is that it strips away partisan politics and forces us to get beyond our own biased beliefs to fight for what’s right.

SS: Yeah, and I think on some level that highlights the fact that we have politicized almost every argument in our country as though they are political arguments and they aren’t. Issues of marriage equality, why is that a political argument? Why are so many other issues… Why do they need to be political arguments also? So the more we can get out of that realm, the more we can actually make progress.

BK: The lawyers representing you at one point talk about how they’re getting more grief from the gay and lesbian groups than the conservative groups, and it shows how the mob mentality can take over on either side of the political spectrum. The documentary aims to be saying that need to be open to people and what they have to offer, and that’s even if you don’t agree with their belief system.

KP: Yeah. I think getting away from the ballot box and raising money for political campaigns and people saying things in political campaigns that aren’t even true and winning is necessary. I think it was the right time to go on to a new path and try to create a new way to solve that problem, and I think it was a better path. It’s harder on some levels as it takes forever. Campaigns are over in a year, and this was a five-year effort so everybody can’t do it but maybe everybody won’t have to.

BK: What are your plans for the future?

SS: Well when we were in the case it was always that and doing that in addition to our lives. Back then we were raising kids and working, and now the kids have launched basically. They take a lot less time. The youngest kids are in college and the older kids are grown-ups so we’re no longer actively parenting on a day-to-day basis, but we both have very big and busy careers that need a lot of attention and a lot of focus. So that’s our immediate thing to just get back to work and make work a huge priority, and we both in our work do a certain amount of advocacy as well. Kris still works in early childhood education advocacy at the federal level now. I work on public health and systems and policy so we want to get refocused on that, but in terms of the issue of marriage equality, the fight’s not over. We don’t have marriage equality in 50 states, so there is a lot more work to be done to the degree that we can help advance that cause in those states. We are absolutely happy and very motivated to participate, and beyond that there are so many other issues. There is employment discrimination, there are still a lot of issues around LGBT rights and, beyond rights, quality of life. It’s just something that I think Kris had a great a-ha moment when she talks about the quality of life as an LGBT kid and what it does to you to feel like you don’t have the same options and that your life is less than others. There’s a lot of work to do.

BK: Do you still encounter a lot of obstacles in life or do you feel like you are on a good path now?

KP: I think because it matters so much to get married and stay married, you have to work at it. You have to work really hard at being grateful that you have that, and you have to keep making it work because circumstances are changing all the time. Even having a situation where we had kids or we don’t, that’s an obstacle. And we don’t know what the future holds. There could be some hard things and you have to keep the bond strong, and we’re just lucky we got married. We are still trying to believe that, you know? That took so long and we’re still digesting the fact that we actually got married.

It was a real pleasure to talk with Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, and I wish them the best in life. “The Case Against 8” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.

Exclusive Interview with Lake Bell and Ed Helms about ‘I Do… Until I Don’t’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

I Do Until I Don't poster

Lake Bell made a name for herself as an actress in television on “Boston Legal” as well as in movies like “It’s Complicated” and “No Strings Attached.” In 2013, she made her feature film directorial debut with “In a World…” and it showed her to be as talented behind the camera as she is in front on it. She now returns to the director’s chair with the comedy “I Do… Until I Don’t” which she also wrote and stars in as Alice. The story revolves around three couples who are at various points in their relationships, and they end up becoming subjects for a documentary directed by the highly regarded, yet hopelessly pretentious, filmmaker Vivian (played by Dolly Wells). What follows is a well-acted, written and directed movie which looks at marriage and asks if it is an institution worth preserving or instead worthy of a reboot.

Bell was joined by actor Ed Helms at the “I Do… Until I Don’t” press day held at the London Hotel in West Hollywood, California. Helms plays Alice’s husband, Noah. As the movie opens, the two of them have been married for 10 years, and they begin to wonder if boredom has become an overriding factor in their relationship as they discuss the possibility of having children. Just when you think you know where their relationship is heading, things end up taking an unpredictable turn.

I spoke with Bell about how the screenplay seemed to come together organically and how it evolved from when she started writing it to where she finished it. With Helms, we discussed how wonderfully he and the other actors worked with one another as their chemistry onscreen is never in doubt.

Check out the interview below, and be sure to check out “I Do… Until I Don’t” when it arrives in theaters on September 1, 2017.