***SPOILER SECTION BEGINS***
Speaking of not wanting to alienate people, the one thing that does seem to be divisive about the film is its ending.
It is! I didn’t even know this until I looked at Twitter a couple of weeks ago and I realized how polarizing it is. I had no idea.
While I didn’t have that negative reaction to it, I did notice, while watching the film, how abruptly it changes tack in those last few seconds. Tell me a little about your thinking there.
It was the ending that we had in place from the first brainstorming session. So this goes back years — we knew it was going to be their escape moment. Whether literal or abstract, that was to be worked out and left up in the air. But as we got closer and closer, I made the decision that I wanted it to be something left up to interpretation.
I do kind of understand, I mean, if you change tone it’s already enough to alienate some audiences to throw them off and suddenly they can’t continue being in the film or story. But then when you change almost an entire style and the tone along with it, I guess that’s the jarring aspect. For me, and of course I can’t think of any examples for you right now, but cinema that takes bold choices — oh God [rolls eyes at himself] I’m not saying I made such a bold choice — but what I’m trying to say is, as a moviegoer, films that have scenes or moments that take you off guard are actually the most interesting things for me. It stirs it up a little bit. And I think some audiences are just used to things being wrapped up with a pretty little bow.
Nobody has told me though, like on Twitter you get “I hate the ending! It really pissed me off!” but nobody is telling me exactly why. I feel if I had to make an assumption, I think it’s because we don’t have like a “Law & Order,” “CSI” wrap-up that shows exactly what happens to Moonee afterwards, and that was never the sort of movie I wanted to make.
I think, if I were to guess, it’s that people could feel it’s an artificially happy ending on something that is not happy.
Which it is! It absolutely is!
Right, and my take on it was when you realize they’re going to be separated, it’s such a violent wrench from the reality of the film we’ve been watching, which has had its undertones of poverty and despair but on top has been such a bright, joyful thing, that it actually skews us into a kind of fantasy world. That was my mental reasoning for it.
And that’s exactly what it is. I think it’s just too jarring for some people.
When you jolt the storyline like that, I think you’re going to lose a certain percentage of the audience.
Sure, but I think it’s pretty obvious where the film actually ends. It’s so obvious. Basically the last 35mm shot is of little Jancey absorbing the [fact that Moonee’s going to be taken away] and then the first shot of our iPhone footage is her grabbing her wrist and running away. So there’s obviously a clear ending to the “real” film. I mean, I hate to say it, to state that this is what it would be, but probably what happens after the end is that the police will show up and she would be taken away…
…and put into the system. For what it’s worth, my comparison point is that there’s a reason we don’t see Butch and Sundance’s bodies riddled with bullets, or Thelma and Louise’s car crashed at the bottom of the Grand Canyon.
Exactly, exactly, those are two great examples.
***SPOILER SECTION ENDS***
So tell me if you have anything new cooking?
Not right now, there are a couple of ideas that are being talked about, but it will be next year before I get into it, one with [“Starlet,” “Tangerine” and “The Florida Project” co-writer] Chris Bergoch, the other that will either be me writing alone or with a new co-writer.
That’s unless Disney or somebody backs a huge truck of money up to your door and you’re actually put on “Thor 4” or the like.
Hahaha! But actually to tell you the truth, there have been some offers for bigger things if I wanted, not franchises but bigger, like genre things. But I’m worried about final cut on those and I think I need to make something else before that. I mean, I think baby steps is the way to go.
But you’re not like morally opposed or psychologically averse to the idea?
Not at all, no. I’m a fan of all cinema so I watch the biggies too. I just watched “Blade Runner 2049” the other day and loved it, so I would love to be able to work with all those tools in that big sandbox. But right now it also has to be… well, every film dictates the next, and while it’s frustrating to think this way, there are audience expectations and critic expectations now. If I went ahead and made a puppet movie right now — which was actually being considered two films back after “Starlet” we wanted to make a big puppet movie, which has its edge but it’s certainly not like social commentary — I think that would maybe piss some people off. And also, I realize every film takes three years and it’s a big commitment to make and as I get older I feel compelled to spend my time in an ethical way, that helps, and that covers subjects that aren’t being covered enough and to use this medium for positive change as well. So there’s that.
Well, I’m glad we’re not going to lose you entirely to The Man.
Haha! No, to tell you the truth there might even be the opposite, there’s the other way it could go which is where I wanted to go so back, to “Tangerine” level which is like seven people running around with an iPhone, and then I’m wondering if that would be a career-killer. Who knows? Look at Lars Von Trier — he did “The Idiots” after “Breaking the Waves.” But then he went way up with “Dancer in the Dark” in terms of commercial appeal. So you wonder whether that was reaction to the boos he got for “The Idiots” even though I consider “The Idiots” his best film? You’re serving so many different masters here — yourself, critics, public.
I think in Von Trier’s case specifically there can also be a healthy dose of being your own worst enemy. Also, I wonder if he’d ever admit that the reception for one film ever influenced another. But it’s certainly an amazing filmography, is it a particular inspiration to you?
Oh yes. 100%. And it’s hard to look at foreign filmmakers for comparisons because the models of filmmaking are so different in each country, but yes, aesthetically and otherwise, I’d look at his career as a model. But from a business side I also have to look at a Paul Thomas Anderson or a James Gray, because they’re U.S.-based filmmakers, as sort of models of the perfect career. Even though I doubt James Gray would think he has a perfect career!
I really don’t think he has any idea that he might have anyone’s idea of a perfect career!
Yes, he’s like “I would have been living in Bel-Air if this was 1976!” But I think we all feel that way, because the industry is just not making as much money anymore.
But then the question comes back to your motivation as a filmmaker and why you are doing it.
Of course, yes.
[As I’ve mentioned already, I do truly believe that Sean Baker is doing it for the right reasons.]
“The Florida Project” is still in select theaters. Go see it.