Some of you might have noticed my effusive praise for a podcast called Filmspotting on the site for the past few weeks. I have to say, listening to the film discussions by Adam Kempenaar and Sam Van Hallgren is one of the highlights of my week, each and every week. We here at DVD Snapshot strive to bring you all the news and reviews we can in the world of DVD's, but we really don't focus too much on current, theatrical movies. That's where Filmspotting comes in. We highly recommend it as your number one source for current movie views and insights. The show is funny, intellectual, always interesting, and as passionate about films as you can find.
I recently had the chance to learn more about the show from it's hosts, Adam and Sam, who are both extremely gracious, friendly, and downright cool. Read on to learn all the details about one of the best shows you can find about movies anywhere.
-Mike Spring
Editor - DVD Snapshot
MIKE: Let's start at the beginning. How did you two meet and how did Filmspotting come about?
ADAM: Sam and I met back in 2000 when I was still living in Iowa City. Sam was in Chicago and had become really good friends with my college roommate, Kevin Rich. Kevin kept saying I had to meet this guy Sam... he was really cool, really into movies. We finally met when I came to Chicago to watch a play Kevin had written (Sam: I'm not sure Adam remembers, but I was IN that play) and when I started a movie blog in 2002, Sam became a regular contributor. I stopped the blog in early 2003 and for two years we talked off and on about starting a new one but would never actually follow through. When I read a Wired article in February 2005 about podcasting, I knew we had to try it. He was interning at Chicago Public Radio; I had done a radio show called Burn Hollywood Burn back as a grad student at the University of Iowa. I actually called Sam at work and asked if he wanted to be a radio star. Of course, I was kidding. But we did think that if we could establish our show before podcasting really took off, and put together a really professional show -- one that sounded like it could be on the radio from both a content and audio standpoint -- we could find an audience.
MIKE: You have a unique format for your show in that you focus equally on current blockbusters, art house films, and your famous marathons. How did you decide to focus on more than just the latest Spielberg film?
ADAM: The format wasn’t something we planned so much as we just think it’s better to talk about what we’re truly interested in. We enjoy seeing blockbusters and discussing them, but if it comes down to a choice between John Tucker Must Die, for example, or the latest Ingmar Bergman or Michael Haneke movie, we’re going to go with the arthouse film because we know our conversation will be more interesting simply based on the fact that we’re more excited to see those movies. Even if we know more of our listeners may end up seeing John Tucker, we feel that we’re doing them more of a service simply by having a discussion we know that we’ll bring a lot of passion and energy to.
SAM: All true, but one of our most memorable conversations is a film we were both planning to skip, until a couple of listeners suggested we were missing one of the surprises of the summer. The movie? The Lake House. A couple of listeners have pointed out that sometimes our most interesting discussions are about films we don't really have any stake in, that just kind of surprise us. This has happened a lot with the movies we tackle in our marathons (particularly Westerns, Musicals and, recently, Screwball Comedies).
MIKE: You guys do marathons, where you watch (usually for the first time) movies from a particular genre, and the film choices often span years or decades. You've mentioned how sometimes you're not looking forward to watching a particular film, so are the marathons more of the "work" part of the job?
ADAM: I think the marathons are always secondary to our new movie reviews, but I don't think either of us have ever not been eager to watch one of our marathon movies because we're deliberately selecting films we've always wanted to see and most likely felt ashamed for not having seen. The lone exception perhaps would be the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which was part of our Horror marathon, and that was only because neither of us have ever been particularly into watching people getting hung on meat hooks. But TCM ended up just reinforcing exactly why we do the marathons. We both genuinely liked it.
SAM: TCM is a good example of a movie I can't say I was really excited to see, but it's important to point out, I think, that at no point whatsoever has it ever felt like work to watch a movie. It's occasionally been inconvenient, but there's a reason we keep doing this show week in, week out: we love watching movies. I went to see more movies in the theatre last year (70+) than I had in the previous 3 years combined. Going to the movies never fails to excite me.
MIKE: Massacre Theater is one of your most popular features, where you two act out a scene from a movie and offer readers who guess the film a chance to win a prize. How did that get started, and do you guys have any acting experience?
ADAM: Massacre Theatre was a segment I did back at Iowa on "Burn Hollywood Burn." I have absolutely zero acting experience other than actually mustering enough courage to audition for some one-act plays my senior year of college. Sam does have an acting background, which I think comes through in his infamous Al Pacino and Christopher Walken impressions.
SAM: I'm embarrassed to admit that, yes, I do have an acting background. In fact, I was awarded the Paul Newman Award at my alma mater, Kenyon College for "Best Actor." (Paul Newman is a Kenyon alum.) But Massacre Theatre has very little to do with acting. The only skill I'm bringing to massacre theatre is my ability to do cold reads. (Usually the first time I'm reading the script is when we're recording the show.) And Adam claims to have no acting experience, but I think he usually ends up giving the "better" performance. He's got a great ear, and a gift for mimicry that I just don't have (hopefully he'll have a chance to do his Tom Cruise again sometime soon).
MIKE: You read listener feedback on every show, and it's clear that your listeners are a vital part of the show. What are the pluses and minuses of having such a vocal and involved fan base?
ADAM: The only minus I can think of is that every week we get at least 5-10 emails that remind us how much dumber we are than our listeners. Also, we're fortunate enough to average more than 200 e-mails a week, and it's simply impossible to respond to every e-mail. But we read everything and respond to as many as we can. More often than not, our listener feedback segment will end up being the most entertaining part of the show. Plus, most of our top 5 and marathon topics come directly from listener suggestions. The show wouldn't be half as much fun to do or half as interesting without the input we get from our listeners.
SAM: Agreed. Our listeners are amazing. Really bright and funny, some of whom work in "the industry" and contribute really great insight into the movie-making process.
MIKE: Occasionally, you two strongly disagree with each other (such as in your recent review of The Lake House). How does that impact a particular episode? Is it sometimes fun when you two disagree or do you prefer to be in accordance with each other's opinion? And which makes for a better episode?
ADAM: Well, personally, I'd like every show to be one where we agree. Because then, regardless of whether you loved or hated a certain film, you're having that experience validated by someone whose opinion you really value. We're never going to go out of our way to be antagonistic. But all that said, I agree wholeheartedly with the bulk of the feedback we get saying that the shows where we disagree are the most fun to listen to. The ‘Battle of The Lake House’ didn't seem like a great show at the time we were arguing, but when I listened to it later, it cracked me up just as much as it did most of our listeners.
SAM: It's interesting because we'll go a couple of weeks in a row agreeing on everything and I wonder if we're ever going to disagree again. And then a month will pass and we haven't agreed on anything. It's great to have that reminder that everything is subjective. And it's made movie-watching even more fun.
MIKE: Your Top Five lists are easily one of the most popular (and controversial) parts of the show. What do you take into consideration when coming up with your lists, and what are some of the difficulties involved in trying to limit your choices to just five? (Or ten or fifteen, depending on the list!)
SAM: I think one of the things that makes the lists interesting (other than the natural suspense that's built into list-making) is that we never made an effort to pass our lists off as a list of unassailable classics. We had no interest in putting together pantheon lists like you find at AFI. Our lists are personal and reflect our lack of enthusiasm for discussing movies that have been talked (and top 5-listed) to death. Sure Darth Vader is a great villain, but does anyone really need to hear Adam and I name him as a Top 5 villain on our show? How about Alec Baldwin from Glengarry Glen Ross instead? And as far as the difficulty in limiting ourselves to a Top 5 ... well, it says something that the "Top 5" always includes at least 10 movies... sometimes as many as 15. After 120 shows, the really hard part is coming up with a Top 5 theme and a list of movies that will allow us to discuss films we haven't discussed dozens of times before -- or at least be able to discuss them in a fresh way. Listeners have been a huge help with Top 5 theme suggestions.
MIKE: You recently started airing the show monthly on Chicago Public Radio WBEZ. How did that come about, and in what ways has that changed the show?
SAM: The WBEZ opportunity was a result of great timing... and my connections at the station. This past Spring, Chicago Public Radio shifted formats, moving away from the music programming that had filled most of its evening and weekend slots towards a talk format. That left some holes in its schedule for local programming. Joe DeCeault, a producer who had been given the responsibility to fill some newly vacant slots on Saturday nights, had listened to our show back when I was working at the station and contacted me about doing a WBEZ version. Originally, the show was to be a recap of sorts from the previous month's podcasts (which you can still kind of hear in our first WBEZ show), but Adam and I figured out a way to make the show relevant to listeners in Chicago, while staying relevant to our regular subscribers. How has it changed the show? We have to watch the clock a little bit closer (and/or Adam has a harder job editing the show). But we'd already gotten pretty good about keeping segments to a reasonable length -- in the neighborhood of 15 minutes. And four segments at 15 minutes each is an hour. So the show really didn't have to change too much.
MIKE: Let's talk about your "penalty box" a little bit. What are your all time favorite movies?
ADAM: Blade Runner and Kill Bill are both in my penalty box, which means I’m forbidden from including them on any top 5 for an indeterminate amount of time. And it’s funny because while I obviously like both films quite a bit, neither ranks among my top 10 or maybe even 20 favorite films of all-time. But for whatever reason they were coming up a lot, so they got bounced to the box. The other movies currently in the box for me – GoodFellas and Chinatown – are two of my all-time favorite movies and, frankly, should probably be put in the pantheon with Citizen Kane and the first two Godfather movies as permanent non-choices. Throw in Raging Bull and those six films could be on just about every one of my top 5 lists, which would be really boring.
SAM: Favorite movies? Well, the only (official) penalty box movie for me is One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest. Which is a little strange because although it's a film I really love and admire, it's probably not in my Top 10 all time favorites. When people ask me what my favorite movie is I usually go with Wes Anderson's Bottle Rocket. I've mentioned the movie quite a bit on the show, and it should probably go into the penalty box; but unlike Goodfellas and Chinatown -- or Citizen Kane or The Godfather -- Bottle Rocket could under no circumstances be defined as a perfect movie. It's just a perfect movie for me. Great characters, great relationships, great music... and just about every single line makes me laugh or makes me feel something.
MIKE: Very often, when you guys rave about a movie, you qualify it by saying "it's not a perfect movie..." Are there any perfect movies?
ADAM: If there is anything wrong with the six movies I just named, I haven’t found them.
SAM: The thing is "perfect" sounds scientific when it's actually being used to express an emotional feeling about a movie. I probably used "perfect" to describe more movies before I did the show that I do now. The fact is, when you're watching a movie knowing that you're going to have to defend your response to it, you end up paying closer attention to it. Imperfections are going to be more glaring. And memorable. But I don't think that ruins movies at all. Because it also means you're paying more attention to why something is working. Instead of using the word "perfect," I end up using the word "masterpiece,” which is even more over-the-top and arrogant. I've probably called half a dozen movies "masterpieces" since we started doing the show. I remember saying about Gus Van Sant's Last Days that I was "impatient for the movie to end so I could call it a masterpiece." I'm not even sure I know what that means anymore. I also used the term to describe Tokyo Story and Steven Soderbergh's Bubble (for the record, I think I called it a "minor masterpiece").
MIKE: Sam, is the 'Van' here to stay?
SAM: Yes, it is. My wife Carrie and I filed our paperwork last week. It's not an easy change, but I like it more and more every day. It's fun to be Dutch.
MIKE: What can we look forward to in the future for Filmspotting?
ADAM: Hopefully we’ll just continue to have fun and add some more interesting guests for interviews. It’s been great to have Ed Burns and Rian Johnson on the show recently. We also have an idea we’re cooking up about holding a short film competition where the best films will be made available for download via our video feed and on our site. The winner will be determined by our listeners and a special panel. Should be exciting, but we haven’t finalized the details yet.
SAM: We're always thinking about the show, about ways to make it better. We're always listening to our audience. They have been the force of most of the change the show has undergone. I don't expect much in the way of format to change. And I don't expect we'll venture into the world of video podcasting again anytime soon. We do, however, have fantasies about making a movie together. We'll see.
|
|
