Showing posts with label Jim Sheridan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim Sheridan. Show all posts

Monday, September 15, 2014

Austin Made Austin Screened

Great news for Austin

What a better reward for the short film Austin wrote, directed and starred than having it include in his beloved hometown's film fest.


 My film, STROKER, is screening at the . I'm honored to be included. Come see me in Austin, TX this October.  - AUS10


Today's first #MovieMondays announcement is @aus10nichols' short "Stroker"! Welcome to #AFF2014!
The Austin Film Festival runs from October 23 thru October 30th. 

Good luck Austin!
Being honored at this year's festival with the Distinguish Screenwriter Award is Jim Sheridan,  who directed Jake in Brothers.

Austy- make sure you get them to throw in t-shirt, for all the promo you've been giving the festival all these years. ; )



Saturday, November 28, 2009

Fraternal Paternal

Not sure how many have watched the trailer from the UK. But comparing that clip vs. the trailers that are shown in the US you can see the differences in selling the story of Brothers. One of the biggest difference is that in the UK trailer you see scenes of Sam in the war, scenes of conflict. While it is known in the story, in US that is being downplayed. Why?

Well, movies about war have been a hard sell in the US, and as Jim Sheridan says, "I think the American people just don't think there is a war on, so why should they have to go to a movie about something that doesn't exist? Their state of denial is hard to overcome,"

But Sheridan doesn't see Brothers as a war movie, but really "as a family drama about a man coming home after a long absence, and he just happens to have served in Afghanistan."


Sheridan point of view as a director is about families and relationships. He takes a bigger story, like Christy Brown in My Left Foot and focuses on the relationship between Christy and his mother's to tell it. Or telling the story of immigrating to the US, like in In America, through the relationship of a father and his daughters. The same is true for Brothers. Sheridan emphasized the family's struggle to be whole again. "It is a big thing to me to show the family at war. They are split by an event outside themselves. The war is in the family, you know."


A lot of focus in US campaign has been on Grace (Natalie) and Sam and Tommy. But the story that really emerges is more about fathers than brothers. Hank's (Sam Shepard)relationships with each of his sons. Sam's fatherly relationship with Tommy. His relationship with his girls and how that changes from forces out of everyone's control. Tommy find paternal feelings he never thought he had and stepping in as a father and how that changes his life.



Those relationships create so many themes, of expectations,disappointments, rebellion, anger, resentment, abandonment, love, acceptance, and redemption. It is a story as old as man in a setting while modern is itself timeless.



One critic talked about Jake effortless playing a father. Looking at the place in Jake's life you can see how it dovetailed from real to reel. No doubt Sheridan encouraged Jake to bring all of that into his role, relishing as Jake discovered fatherhood on all levels.


Something you might not know about Brothers. Brothers is a pretty little movie that has a powerful punch. The movie had a budget of only $25 million, with the actors talking "a quarter or maybe even a 10th of what they usually get paid," according to Sheridan.

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

On the couch

Very different, a bit deeper, and somewhat provocative.



This an interesting interview between Natalie Portman and Jim Sheridan on film making and near the end of the interview more specifically about Brothers. Sheridan gives a lot of insight to his philosophy to making movies.

Around the 7 minute mark he talks about Jake in Brothers, and Jake's reluctance let go to get angry in the family dynamic, about Jake not wanting to go there, and how he thinks Jake didn't think it was cool. But I wondered this, that maybe it wasn't about to being cool, but afraid of tapping emotions that you can't rein back in on set, that too much would too open in the process, too vulnerable. Any thoughts?

More in the muddle of movie and emotions, we have long read about Jake challenging directors or disagreeing in the process, while all actors need to bring their viewpoint into their character or story do you think its different for the son of a director. Could it be that the understand the director's job differently because they have a different type of knowledge than other actors, is it because he thinks he could do it better himself, or could it be that director is the parental figure and it becomes a chance for Jake to exercise all those moment and challenges he can't otherwise? Despite the conflicts he still seem to hold the directors he tangles with with a level of respect that is similar to what a son has for a father.


I do wonder if his working relationship with Nicole Holofcener who directed Lovely & Amazing was different.

What do you think?