[Filmmaker Sarah Kernochan will answer questions following screenings of her films IMPROMPTU at 5:30 pm and MARJOE at 8:30 pm on Saturday March 23rd at the Cleveland Cinematheque.]
Interview by Bob
Ignizio
At the age of 24
Sarah Kernochan co-produced and directed MARJOE, a film about
evangelist (and later B-movie actor) Marjoe Gortner. Released in
1972, the film went on to win the “Best Documentary Feature”
Oscar in 1973 for Sarah and her filmmaking partner Howard Smith. She
then went on to release two albums on RCA records as a
singer-songwriter, and in 1977 her novel Dry Hustle
was published.
After
a little more than a decade away from movie making, Sarah wrote her
first screenplay for the 1986 hit film 9
1/2 WEEKS, and from there
went on to write or co-write several more films, including the critically
acclaimed SOMMERSBY (co-written with Nicholas Meyer and adapted from the 1982 film THE RETURN OF MARTIN GUERRE)
and the hit thriller WHAT
LIES BENEATH? (co-written with Clark Gregg). In 2002 she
won her second Oscar, this one in the “Best Documentary Short”
category, for Thoth,
about the life of New York-based street performer S. K. Thoth. More
recently in 2011, Sarah's second novel Jane Was Here
was published. And those are just some of the highlights of what can
only be described as a varied and interesting career.
Sarah
Kernochan will be at the Cleveland Cinematheque on Saturday March
23rd for screenings of IMPROMPTU,
a film she wrote the screenplay for that was directed by her husband
James Lapine, at 5:30 pm followed by MARJOE
at 8:30 pm. Sarah will answer questions after both films. In the
meantime, I had the opportunity to ask Sarah a few questions of my
own via email, and she was kind enough to answer.
CLEVELAND MOVIE BLOG: So
seriously, what haven't you done? You've been a journalist, a
filmmaker, a musician, and a novelist that I know of. What compels
you to keep doing different things? Do you ever regret that you
haven't been more focused on just one?
SARAH KERNOCHAN:
Well, I haven't conducted a symphony orchestra, which is
disappointing. Seriously, to someone else it may appear that my
career is a jumble, but to me it's all storytelling. Still, people
who like to categorize are very cross with me. Even my individual
films are all over the place: erotica, horror, teen comedy,
biography, ballet, tragedy. I don't take a job unless I'm going to
learn something new.
CMB: Since I'm mainly concerned
with the movie side of things here, what was the main thing that got
you interested in making movies? Who were your big influences in that
respect?
SK: Like
Spielberg (and this will be the last time I compare myself to him) I
made 8mm films in boarding school to entertain all us cooped-up
girls. Actually, Glenn Close was a classmate and I made the first
movie she ever starred in - though I don't think you'll find it on
imdb.com. My only influence was LAWRENCE OF ARABIA which,
even today, I consider the ne plus ultra of cinema.
At that time there
was no evidence of women directing films, so I thought I would be a
novelist. It was a complete surprise to find myself making a
documentary at age 24.
CMB: How did you wind up doing a
film on Marjoe Gortner, and what interested you about him? What did
you hope the movie would achieve?
SK: My
co-producer-director Howard Smith had a radio show. A would-be actor
approached him for an interview. The young man had an interesting
story to tell: he had been a preacher since the age of 4, a big hit
in the Bible Belt, and now he (Marjoe) wanted to blow the lid off the
whole business. I convinced Howard we should shoot a documentary
about Marjoe. Neither of us knew anything about how to make a
documentary, and we'd never been within a zillion miles of a
Pentacostal church. But Marjoe was such a charming con artist with
such a unique tale. We hoped that people should have a peep at the
underbelly of religion. We thought the movie might help the victims:
a sort of voyage of the scammed.
CMB: I would imagine when making
a documentary, especially a biographical one like MARJOE,
it can be hard knowing when to stop filming. How did you know you had
reached the end of the story you wanted to tell about Marjoe, and
given his interesting path as a cult actor after your film, do you
ever wish you had kept filming, or at least done a follow up of some
kind?
SK:
We had to shoot the film quickly. Since the whole crew was pretending
to be born-again Christians, we were always afraid of being found
out. Really, it was a great relief to get it over with. I'm glad we
got what we needed, and I wouldn't have continued filming for love or
money.
CMB:
Are you surprised that, despite exposés
like MARJOE, people
still buy into that kind of religious snake oil?
SK:
There is a beautiful unity of spirit and catharsis at the heart of
these meetings. People feel they can rise above their (often
difficult) lives. But it's like they have to take a messed-up drug to
get there, and their dealer - the preacher - is manipulating them for
profit. So I understand why the parishioners get hooked and choose to
believe, because the alternative is to be shut out of community and
thumped back into the reality of suffering.
CMB: The conventional wisdom, I
suppose, is that after winning an Oscar, you'd capitalize on that.
You, however, didn't get back into the movies until 1986 with your
screenplay for 9 1/2 WEEKS.
Why didn't you keep going in film, and what finally brought you back?
SK:
As I said, there was no welcome in the film business for women of
ambition. I split up with my partner Howard after making MARJOE,
and I think the assumption was that he did all the work and I tagged
along. This is pre-women's liberation. So while Howard got another
film to direct, the Oscar did next to nothing for me. It made me into
a kind of curiosity, and that was useful for getting me into people's
offices to peddle my wares. Female singer-songwriters were big in the
recording industry, I had a bunch of songs, so my 15 minutes of fame
bought me an audition. The result was a recording contract and my
next career.
CMB:
I read in a 1998 Salon interview that you weren't particularly
thrilled with 9 1/2 WEEKS
and look at it as more of a learning experience. Nonetheless, it's
one of those films that, love it or hate it, has become very much
ingrained in pop culture. What is it about that movie that you think
connects with so many people? Is it just the illusion of its
relatively safe kink being somehow dangerous, or is there something
at the heart of the movie that goes deeper than that?
SK:
I thought the film began really well but the rest was just
arty vamping until the non-conclusion. Still, it was made with great
style and atmosphere, and basically just turned people on, which is
the job of erotica after all. Mainstream erotica is an oxymoron in
American cinema. I don't think there's been a single mass-audience
sex film between 9 1/2 WEEKS and 50 SHADES OF GRAY. If
the latter is a huge hit then finally America will start making the
kinds of films that Europe has been making for decades.
CMB: Having
been both a writer and director, do you find it difficult to turn
over a screenplay to someone else and more or less lose control of
it?
SK:
The scripts I'm hired to write don't belong to me. I always accepted
the possibility of losing control of them. That's why screenwriters
often feel like whores. We get paid a lot of money to have no pride.
CMB:
Did you write IMPROMTU
with the idea of your husband James Lapine directing it in mind, or
did it just work out that way after the fact? What are the pros and
cons of working on a film project with someone you're married to?
SK:
James had always encouraged me to turn down work-for-hire and write a
script for myself. IMPROMPTU
was the first time I had no employer to please, and I owned what I
wrote. I had a ball scripting that one, and in my gratitude I gave it
to James.
That
said, making the film was a tough test of our marriage. I didn't
always know my place. I will admit to having a few hissies over why
he shot this scene that way or why he didn't shoot that scene this
way. Sometimes I was frustrated that I wasn't the director, but then
I would have had to deal with Judy Davis and I wouldn't have traded
places with James for anything. In the end he did a fantastic job and
really respected the writer's work. Or else.
CMB:
Finally in 1998 you directed again, this time a fiction film (THE
HAIRY BIRD aka ALL I
WANNA DO). Why did it take so
long for you to finally get back in the director's chair?
SK:
It took seven years to get a production of what was a larky, fun,
commercial teen comedy. The trouble was that the cast was mostly
girls and one older woman. Nobody knew how to market to young
females. Even Miramax couldn't figure it out, so they dumped it. But
when it got to video, it found its intended audience. Thankfully,
film executives no longer tell you there's no market for chick
flicks.
CMB:
Thirty years after you won an Oscar for MARJOE,
you returned to documentary filmmaking with THOTH
and won another Oscar. Are we going to have to wait that long before
your next doc? What are you currently working on?
SK:
I never set out to make documentaries. Those two films came about
because I came across two amazing characters whose stories had to be
told. I suppose I won't make another doc unless fate brings me
another subject; I'm certainly not looking for one. At the moment I
have two scripts with directors and stars attached, so I'm waiting to
see if either or both get their financing. In the meantime I've
published a paranormal thriller (Jane Was Here) and am working on a
memoir of my encounters with ghosts.
For more information about Sarah Kernochan, visit her website.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We approve all legitimate comments. However, comments that include links to irrelevant commercial websites and/or websites dealing with illegal or inappropriate content will be marked as spam.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.