WBEZ | Film

The Jon Ronson interview

Fri, 10 May 2013 08:01:00 -0500

Jon Ronson is one of those writers who embodies what creative nonfiction is all about by demonstrating just how strange and wonderful the world can be. A Welsh journalist, documentary filmmaker, radio presenter and nonfiction author, his books include Them: Adventures With Extremists, The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry and most recently Lost At Sea: The Jon Ronson Mysteries. His book The Men Who Stare At Goats was turned into a movie starring George Clooney. You can learn a lot more about him here.

I saw that you have a standing reply on your website that you will not investigate people’s claims that they are victims of mind control. Aside from that, what personal information do your readers tend to volunteer to you most frequently?

That they are married to psychopaths. Or that they're worried they may be psychopaths. There is an adage in psychology that if you're worried you may be a psychopath that means you aren't one. Because psychopaths never worry about being psychopaths. They're FINE with it. Which makes me suspect that psychopathy is the most pleasant feeling of all the mental disorders.

Isn't it interesting that so many people share the exact same delusion - that they're being mind controlled by the CIA. When our brains go wrong they go wrong in uncannily similar ways. It shows that we aren't all individual snowflakes. My guess is that some of the people who believe they're mind control victims actually suffer from a rare disorder called Delusional Disorder. The symptoms include 'non-bizarre' delusions. That delusion is non-bizarre because some people over the years HAVE actually been mind controlled by the CIA.

Of the different cultures you’ve written about, what have been some that seemed most tempting to join up with, even if just in theory?

I had a good time writing the story Running Through Cornfields for my first book, Them, about Rachel Weaver, one of the survivors of Ruby Ridge. But that's just because I liked Idaho and Montana. The rivers and mountains. But I guess that's not a great reason to become a white separatist. Anyway, they'd never have me.

How can you tell which media are right for which subjects (what works well for radio, web, books, etc?)

Sometimes it's just whoever is interested in having me work with them at any particular time. I go in and out of favor with different people. For instance, British nonfiction TV has no interest in me at the moment. Sometimes the subject matter dictates it. I once made a documentary about the band The Shaggs that I knew had to be for the radio. There was no way I could do that story without getting to play their music. Here it is:

But the thing I'm always looking for is an adventure that might become a book. Whenever I do a documentary or a feature I'm always wondering if it could be a rabbit hole that takes me to a book.

I remember asking Christiane Kubrick - when I was making my film Stanley Kubrick's Boxes - what her husband was looking for during those ever lengthening gaps between films. She said, "The magical moment of falling in love with a story." I know that feeling well. Whenever I start a story I look for that magical moment of falling in love with it enough that it may become a book.

Who are some of your "favorite" criminals ("favorite" of course meaning compelling, not as in you’d want to move in with them).

I loved my adventures with David Icke and Alex Jones in Them, infiltrating Bohemian Grove with Alex. Not sure he counts as a criminal. Tony in The Psychopath Test. I liked him personally, and also he was mysterious. He claimed to have faked madness to escape a prison sentence and now he was stuck in a hospital for the criminally insane and nobody believed he was sane. I loved trying to work out if he was insane or not. It opened up such an interesting area about how we view and judge other people, how we read between lines, how morally corrosive it can be.

If you had to teach a ten-minute course on interviewing, what advice would you be sure to impart upon your students?

This could be terrible advice, but don't plan any questions in advance. That way you have to listen. You have to be a twig in the tidal wave of the conversation. But not preparing any questions doesn't mean don't do research. Do lots of research, just assimilate it, rather than plan and structure the interview. As I say, that might be the worst advice.

You immerse yourself so fully in the stories you write. What have been some scenarios where you were conducting research or interviews and then found yourself in a potentially unsafe environment?

The most recent time was writing The Amazing Adventures of Phoenix Jones, which is in my new collection, Lost At Sea. He's the real life superhero I was patrolling with in Seattle. He took me to Belltown to break up a gang of armed crack dealers. They were, "What the f*ck are you doing coming here in your costumes? This is not fun and games to us. If you don't get off our block we're going to shoot you." And Phoenix said, "We're staying."

What are you reading right now?

Nothing. I'm watching Freaks and Geeks on Netflix. I think it's just about the best thing I ever saw. It breaks my heart that they only made one series. It makes me feel so helpless that I can't go back in time and fix it so they made more. It's like finding out someone died. Although I did notice one or two jumping the shark moments in the last episode or two - like James Franco liking Dungeons and Dragons. So maybe it was for the best that it died young and left a good looking corpse.

Do you stay in touch with anyone you write about?

I would like to stay in touch with everyone. I consider it a real honor and compliment if people want to stay in touch with me after I've written about them. Even if we massively disagree with each other politically, I always think we've been thought something intimate together when we've had some kind of encounter or adventure. They feel like family members.

What have been some of your most recent obsessions, even if they were only fleeting? (I for instance spent part of today googling Aleister Crowley and his ilk.)

Ha. Last few days I've looked at the disappearance of Maura Murray, workplace bullying and Amanda Palmer.

What’s a potential story topic you figured would be rich for material but turned out to be relatively banal, and then another where you stumbled upon a wormhole in an unexpected place?

The saddest example of a story that went nowhere was the months trying to write a book about the credit card industry. This was before the crash. I realized was that all these people who work in the credit industry – the list brokers, all these people who’ve got these devious tricks to keep us ensnared – are really important. But they are also incredibly boring. They couldn't light up the page for me. So I abandoned the book. And instead I went to Alaska to write my story Santa's Little Conspirators, that ended up in Lost at Sea, my new collection. That was about shenanigans in a Christmas theme town.

The opposite - a story I wasn't into but turned out to be extraordinary - was going to Hawaii to interview a soldier called Glenn Wheaton. He had been part of the US Military's remote viewing program. The psychic spies. I really didn't have any interest in them. The writer Jim Schnabel had already written a very intricate book about them called Remote Viewers. I felt like I was telling a story that was already known. It was really miserable for me. While I was interviewing him we got talking about the 'other stuff' they were doing. He said they were trying to become invisible and kill goats just by staring at them. So the wormhole opened up. And I ended up writing The Men Who Stare At Goats.

Factchecking your work must be thrilling and exhausting. Which stories of yours were the most difficult to clear before publishing?

I don't remember ever having much of a problem. I'm pretty assiduous when I'm gathering the stories. So fact checking is usually fine.

How does it feel to be the 348th person interviewed for Zulkey.com/WBEZ?
It feels good!

Elizabeth Smart decries abstinence-only sex ed, and her message hits home

Wed, 08 May 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Before Amanda Berry, Gina DeJesus, Michelle Knight and Berry's young daughter were discovered in the basement of a Cleveland home on Monday, held captive by a neighborhood man for over 10 years, the nation was captivated by another abducted girl-turned miracle story: the case of Elizabeth Smart.

In 2002, 14-year-old Smart was kidnapped from her bedroom in Salt Lake City. She was found nine months later, only 18 miles from her home, and her captors (who also raped her repeatedly and threatened to kill her) were sentenced to life in prison.

Today, Smart is working on behalf of the Elizabeth Smart Foundation for abduction awareness, and in light of recent events in Ohio, speaking out against abstinence-only education and its detrimental effects on victims of rape and human trafficking.

During a panel at John Hopkins last week, Smart (now 25 and finishing up a music degree at Brigham Young University) described how intense guilt and shame kept her from escaping her abusers:

"I remember in school one time, I had a teacher who was talking about abstinence,” Smart told the panel, “And she said, 'Imagine you’re a stick of gum. When you engage in sex, that’s like getting chewed. And if you do that lots of times, you’re going to become an old piece of gum, and who is going to want you after that?’ Well, that’s terrible. No one should ever say that. But for me, I thought, ‘I’m that chewed-up piece of gum.’ Nobody re-chews a piece of gum. You throw it away. And that’s how easy it is to feel you no longer have worth. Your life no longer has value."

I received a similar abstinence-only lecture while attending Catholic school in Texas. As I sat in a gymnasium with 200 other girls between the ages of 12 and 14, a speaker put on a pair of velcro garden gloves ("Barbie and Ken," he called them), slapped his hands together and then pulled them apart with a loud, drawn-out ripping noise.

"That's the sound of your virginity being taken away," he said.

On another occasion, my middle school classmates and I were shown pictures of aborted fetuses, then given white cards that we had to spray to reveal our pink stains of STDs from pre-marital sex.

I got chlymadia on the card, but not in real life. Meanwhile, the abortion scare tactics seemed to have little effect on my peers, as many of them went on to have sex behind the bleachers in high school.

Unfortunately, this "virgin purity" absurdity is perpetuated by faiths the world over, and causes religious victims of rape and molestation to feel even more worthless than they would already.

After being raised in a Mormon household, Smart attests that she felt "so dirty and filthy" for being forced into pre-marital sex, and understands why victims don't run for "that alone."

However, she also believes that instead of slut-shaming children with creepy used gum and premarital-sex-is-like-being-a-dirty-glass-of-water analogies, they should be taught that "they have value no matter what."

Smart remains a devout Mormon to this day (married to a young man whom she met on a mission, no less) but her strength and courage in denouncing a key component of the religious right proves that she is a true advocate for more comprehensive sex education as well.

When asked for her thoughts on the Ohio kidnap rescue earlier this week, Smart said that she hopes the three victims will "find their own pathway back to some sense of well-being" and not blame themselves for the abuse that they were forced to endure:

“[Their abductor] has stolen so much from them already, they deserve to be happy," Smart told ABC's Good Morning America, "I would tell them I hope that they realize there is so much ahead of them, that they don’t need to hold on to the past … They don’t need to relive everything that’s happened, because it’s proof, their rescue is proof that there are good people out there."

"It's not their fault," Smart made sure to add, "It's never their fault."

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett or join the conversation on Facebook.

Chicago Global Artist: Zimbabwean filmmaker and novelist Tsitsi Dangarembga

Mon, 06 May 2013 16:41:00 -0500

Chicago’s rich and lively arts and culture scene is due no doubt to our deep bench of homegrown talents.

However, our city has also been marked in significant ways by artists from around the world.

Many of their contributions have been grandly public. The Picasso sculpture in Daley Plaza and Anish Kapoor’s Cloud Gate are notable for their trajectory from daunting sculptural objects to beloved playground-style icons.

More ephemeral projects include Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s 1969 project to wrap the Museum of Contemporary Art, a move which made art history and elevated the reputation of both the artists and the MCA.

But we can’t always see the ways global artists work in Chicago. Some come for very brief spells. And as artists in residence at small cultural organizations or universities, their opportunities to meet with a broader public can be limited, or fly under the radar.

In an effort to give more visibility to their work and to provide opportunities for you to interact with these artists, we’re launching a new global arts initiative on WBEZ’s international affairs show Worldview. Every few weeks I’ll profile an artist who has made her way to Chicago, for a brief or longer spell.

First up: Tsitsi Dangarembga.

Dangarembga came to Chicago about four years ago, to give a talk at Northwestern University. Based on that appearance, along with raves from some of his graduate students (who said her novels changed their lives), Reginald Gibbons invited her back, as the 2013 Spring Writer in Residence at the Center for the Writing Arts.

Dangarembga’s career can be measured by a number of firsts. Her debut novel Nervous Conditions, published when she was only 25, was also the first novel written in English by a black Zimbabwean woman.

When she moved on to filmmaking she also broke ground. Neria (1992), based on her screenplay, became the highest grossing feature in Zimbabwean history. And when Dangarembga made her own film, Everybody’s Child in 1996, she became the first black Zimbabwean woman to direct a full length feature.

None of this came easy. Nobody in Zimbabwe would publish Dangarembga’s novel, apparently because her coming of age tale, about the treatment of women in a newly independent Zimbabwe, wasn’t deemed representative of African women.

And Dangarembga’s style is challenging. Take a look at the trailer for her film Kare Kare Zvako (Mother’s Day). The ‘folk tale musical’ is a fantastical tale with a lively soundtrack of an abusive man who attempts to satisfy his greedy soul by consuming his wife.

Still, Dangarembga continued to make art. Nervous Conditions, which is widely considered one of the greatest African novels, proved to be the opening salvo in what is now a trilogy. The second volume The Book of Not was published in 2006 and Dangarembga’s looking for a publisher for the final volume Chronicle of an Indomitable Daughter.

She’s also continued to develop an international presence. Dangarembga gave a Tedx talk in Harare, in which she used her cat’s behavior as an opportunity for an amusing take on the rather depressing state of Zimbabwe - and human nature more generally. And Kare Kare Zvako screened at Sundance in 2005.

But most importantly, she’s done a little institution building in Harare. After forming her own film company Nyerai, she merged it with Women Filmmaker of Zimbabwe to create a platform for women filmmakers. Since 2002, they’ve hosted the International Images Film Festival for Women.

That Dangarembga has been able to do that with the very limited means and opportunities available in Zimbabwe, is instructive as we ponder the role of artists in Chicago, and wonder if we’re creating the conditions which allow art to flourish.

By the way I’d love to hear your suggestions if you know of any global artists who are new to Chicago and working here on a temporary or permanent basis. Email me acuddy@wbez.org

Alison Cuddy is WBEZ’s Arts and Culture reporter. Follow her @wbezacuddy, on Facebook and on Instagram.

Internet couples, fess up to your friends

Wed, 01 May 2013 08:00:00 -0500

In a recent interview with the Today Show's Matt Lauer, home and garden guru Martha Stewart admitted to (gasp!) dipping her toe into online dating.

Stewart went on Match.com to find a potential date, but didn't get far in filling out her application.

"I started to laugh halfway down the page. It was, like, impossible." she said.

And then, lo and behold, Stewart made a live Today Show appearance Monday and agreed to formally join the online dating world.

"I'd like to have breakfast with somebody," Stewart admitted to the chief executive of Match, Sam Yagan, "I'd like to go to bed with somebody. Sleep with somebody."

These words may seem shocking coming from Stewart. But really, isn't that what everyone wants? Companionship is a basic human need, and the desire for intimacy without judgment is universal.

Perhaps that is why so many people have turned to the magical world of online dating in hopes of finding "the one." By searching through detailed lists of potential partners, online daters can screen out the "definitely nots" and contact the "definitely maybes" at their discretion.

This process is far superior to meeting someone at a bar, realizing they are a drunken mess and not being able to get rid of them for the rest of the night.

We do almost everything online now: from banking to shopping to intense social networking via Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. So why do we hesitate to admit (and sometimes, outright deny) our forays into online dating?

Catfish and Manti Te’o have not helped the continued stigma surrounding Internet romance; but thankfully, instances of extreme deception are few and far between. For the most part, the people whose profiles you see on OkCupid and EHarmony are just as "normal" as the random people that you encounter in your everyday life, if not more so.

Unfortunately, the appropriate answer to the question "How did you guys meet?" is often discussed ad nauseum by Internet-joined couples ("Should we tell them or not tell them?" "I guess we wouldn't be lying if we said that we met at a coffeeshop...") when a simple "We met on JDate" would suffice.

For the sake of future headaches and lots of unnecessary backtracking, it's best to be honest the first time around.

According to this helpful infographic from StatisticBrain, 40 million Americans have tried online dating. Even more encouraging:

20 percent of current committed relationships in the U.S. started online
17 percent of couples married last year met on an online dating site

Online dating is the norm for millenials in the digital age. If you've found happiness with someone that you met via the Internet, then by all means, "come out" and tell your story! Maybe your positive experience will reassure others as well, reminding them their perfect match could also be just a click away.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett.

You don't have to be smart to have your own show

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Olympic swimmer and apparent babe magnet Ryan Lochte has a new reality show called What Would Ryan Lochte Do? In the first episode, he reminisces about his glory days, makes a half-hearted attempt at dating and steals his brother's toothbrush. So, he basically does nothing.

"Seriously, how are they gonna get enough material?" asked anchor Mike Jerrick after an unintentionally hilarious interview with Lochte on Good Day Philly.

As a full first season of WWRLD looms ahead, I ask myself the same question.

Over the past twenty years, beginning with The Real World in 1992 and skyrocketing with the U.S. version of Survivor in 2000, reality TV has become a staple of American television. However, the clever concept of filming "real people in real situations" has lost much of its magic since then, with clearly scripted (and often mind-numbingly awful) reality shows like Jersey Shore and My Super Sweet Sixteen depleting brain cells for generations to follow.

Why do we enjoy watching ridiculously dumb people make complete fools of themselves? Do we relish tearing apart the Jessica Simpsons, Real Housewives and Honey Boo Boos because mocking them makes us feel better about our own lives?

In my opinion, the worst reality TV offenders are Teen Mom (because you have to make it on 16 and Pregnant first), Toddlers & Tiaras (in what universe is dressing your 5-year-old like a street prostitute considered cute and in good taste?), Keeping Up with the Kardashians (why are these people famous again?) and The Biggest Loser (because losing weight that quickly is horribly unsafe at any size, period).

Luckily, not all reality TV shows are hackneyed and irresponsible fodder for the masses. Competition series like Top Chef, Best Ink, Face Off and Project Runway feature contestents who excel in a certain field (for these shows: gourmet cooking, tattoo art, prosthetic makeup and fashion design, respectively) and rely on pure talent in order to succeed. As skilled professionals, they are fascinating to watch, not to mention wholly deserving of the platform they've been given.

I will admit that the singing and dancing shows can be a bit cheesy at times, but at least the starry-eyed hopefuls on American Idol, The Voice and So You Think You Can Dance showcase talents that extend beyond the realm of petty arguments and party fouls.

Other inspiring and thought-provoking examples of reality TV-done right include Undercover Boss, The Amazing Race, Deadliest Catch and my newest favorite, Pit Bulls and Parolees on Animal Planet. I'll take adorable animal rescues over The Bachelor any day, thank you very much.

What are your favorite (and least favorite) reality shows? Leave a comment below, send me a tweet @leahkpickett or join the conversation on Facebook.

Five myths about feminism

Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Female superstars like Taylor Swift, Katy Perry and Beyoncé want to empower young girls and be champions for women everywhere. Just don't call them feminists.

When asked if they considered themselves feminists, they all balked at the term:

"I don't really think about things as guys versus girls." — Taylor Swift, The Daily Beast
"I guess I am a modern-day feminist. I do believe in equality. Why do you have to choose what type of woman you are? Why do you have label yourself as anything? I'm just a woman, and I love being a woman." — Beyoncé, Vogue UK
"I am not a feminist, but I do believe in the strength of women." — Katy Perry, Billboard's "Woman of the Year"

All of these statements are non-answers that completely miss the point. By definiton , feminism is "the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes." So if you "believe in equality" and "the strength of women," then you are, in fact, a feminist. Why hem and haw around the question? Honestly, I don't think that these women have any idea what feminism actually is.

Say what you will about the "adorkable" Zooey Deschanel, but at least she has the balls to openly declare her feminism, unlike most Hollywood starlets these days:

"There is not an ounce of me that believes any of that crap that they say. We can't be feminine and be feminists and be successful? I want to be a f-cking feminist and wear a f-cking Peter Pan collar. So f-cking what?"

A modern aversion to the word "feminism" may stem from old myths about the women's movement that still exist today ("I'm not a feminist because I'm not a bra-burning, man-hating megabitch, etc.") and, in my opinion, should be myth-busted immediately.

Here are a few common misconceptions about feminism that are simply not true:

Myth #1: Feminists hate men.

Feminism is about equality, not the superiority of one sex over another. Patriarchy can be just as damaging to men as it is to women (encouraging an "alpha-male" mentality, instructing boys never to cry or show emotions, etc.); so, by that rationale, men can be feminists too. Feminism isn't about shifting blame or shoehorning all of the world's problems onto men. It's about identifying areas of inequality and working together to fix them.

Myth #2: Feminists don't believe in marriage.

Contrary to popular belief, not all feminists are bitter old spinsters, mannish lesbians or ice-queen CEOs who only care about climbing the corporate ladder. Just because you want to get married one day (to a man or a woman) does not mean that you care any less about women's equality at home or in the workplace.

Myth #3: Feminists are pro-abortion, bra-burning, bleeding heart liberals.

Yes, feminists tend to be more liberal than conservative, and collectively pro-choice for the most part. However, you don't have to vote Democrat to support women's equality, and defending a woman's right to choose does not make you "pro-abortion." The key word here is choice, and that's the true beauty of feminism. Choosing to be a stay-at-home mom or dad doesn't make you any less of a feminist, just like choosing not to have children doesn't make you any less of a woman or man. Also, those "hairy-legged women libbers" of the sixties never burned their bras in protest. True story.

Myth #4: Feminists are offended by any gesture of gallantry.

I like when men open doors for me. It's a nice break from having them slammed in my face. Feminists may have introduced the idea of splitting the check (and treating our partners to dinner every now and then) but that doesn't mean we hate chivalry and romantic gestures as a whole. I appreciate when a guy offers to pay for dinner or insists on driving me home; however, I always make sure to return the favor at some point. As long as there's equality and balance in the relationship, then a feminist couple can take care of each other in whichever way feels right for them.

Myth #5: Feminists may have been necessary in the past, but we don't need them anymore.

We've come along way since the fight for women's suffrage and Roe v. Wade, but we still need feminism, both in the United States and around the world. Rape and victim-blaming, child brides, sex trafficking, genital mutiliation and disfigurement, honor killings, forced prostitution, infanticide of female babies in countries like China and India, domestic violence and other crimes against women are as rampant as ever. The struggle for equality continues on, and feminists will not rest until every woman has the inalienable rights and freedoms that she deserves.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett.

C2E2 and the hierarchy of nerd culture

Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Bronies. Homestucks. Browncoats. Whovians. Do these words sound like gobbledigook to you? Welcome to the weird and wonderful world of nerds.

The Chicago Comic & Entertiainment Expo (C2E2) is headed to McCormick Place April 26-28, and fans have a lot to look forward to this year. In addition to costume contests and sci-fi speed dating, C2E2-ers will have access to three days worth of panels, screenings and other geek-tastic exhibitions. Spotlight guests include Patton Oswalt, Kevin Smith, Felicia Day, Adam West, Ron Perlman, R.L. Stine and many more.

In an earlier post, I referenced what I have coined "the hierarchy of nerdom." Now that "geek" and "nerd" have become positive terms (all but defining pop culture as we know it), the tables have turned. Instead of ignoring or bullying the nerds like they did in high school, grownup hipsters are practically falling over themselves in attempts to prove their ultimate nerdiness.

Unfortunately, admittance from mainstream geek chic into the "real" nerd subculture is now almost as impossible as a mathlete getting asked to sit with the popular kids at lunch.

The Fake Geek Girl meme has become an outlet for nerds to vent their frustrations at pretty girl poseurs, many of whom just pretend to be geeky so that they can attract their own version of Joseph Gordon Levitt in a sweater vest. Still, the idea that women can't be as nerdy as men (especially in the gaming community) is sexist as best, blatantly misogynistc at worst.

If I had a nickel for every time that someone has told me, "Pretty girls can't be 'real' nerds" or some other nerd-elitist putdown in relation to my gender, then I would have enough money to publish 10 ebooks of dystopian science fiction and build my own Hogwarts castle just to spite them.

Yes, women can be nerds too. And although not every self-proclaimed geek may share the same fandom, establishing hierachies of nerdery ("You're not a 'real' nerd unless you watch/read/play X, Y and Z") isn't much better than dividing up teams for kickball and picking the scrawny kids last.

Even if you feel like you're not "nerdy enough" to attend a convention like C2E2, you might be surprised. Maybe cosplay isn't your cup of tea, but gaming and graphic novels are right up your alley. Ultimately, we define our nerdom for ourselves, and how we choose to identify within a culture should not be decided by the prejudicial rules and marginalizations of others.

At C2E2, everyone is welcome; so whether you're a newbie to geek culture or a die-hard aficionado of all things nerd, there will be a place at the "cool" table with your name on it.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett or join the nerd conversation on Facebook.

Ebertfest lost its founder, but not its direction

Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:57:00 -0500

The 15th annual Roger Ebert Film Festival kicks off in Champaign, Illinois on Wednesday.

Roger Ebert won’t be there. The famed Chicago film critic died earlier this month, just after stepping down (he called it a “leave of presence”) as the Sun-Times film critic.

But Ebert’s ethos—his influence and taste and general good spirit—is all over the event.

Ebertfest doesn’t work like a typical film festival.

The movies aren’t submitted. They are hand selected by Ebert and his staff. They’re not “in contention,” or vying for prizes from select juries made up of celebrated members of the global film community. You also won’t see studio types hanging around Champaign, trying to make distribution deals.

But there will be some film stars on hand.

Actors Jack Black and Tilda Swinton will introduce and talk about their respective films Bernie and Julia. Haskell Wexler, the legendary Chicago cinematographer, who is an unbelievable 91 years old (a longevity he chalks up to being grouchy), will introduce the opening night film, Terrence Malick’s 1978 stunner Days of Heaven.

Interesting directors abound, from as far away as Australia (Paul Cox, Vincent: The Life and Death of Vincent Van Gogh) and as close as Lake Bluff, Illinois (Randy Moore, who will introduce his intriguing Disney noir Escape from Tomorrow).

That effort to include homegrown talent, some with ties to the University of Illinois, is one of the things that makes Ebertfest a special event.

But it also just sounds like fun to sit and watch movies, some old and some new, with people who both love films and love to make a living from them.

The schedule makes it possible to savor rather than gulp down the experience. Only 12 features and a couple of short subjects will screen over the five-day fest. Obviously watching them all is the thing to do.

But here are a few recommendations.

Two of my favorites are from last year, Richard Linklater’s Bernie and Joachim Trier’s Oslo, August 31st are very different movies that nonetheless have a surprising amount in common.

Both directors are independents who’ve also formed ties with commercial enterprises (Hollywood and advertising respectively). Both have a deep interest in films about ‘generational drift,’ or the ways young people struggle to find and maintain a sense of identity and place within a larger community and set of values.

And both of these films are driven by the performances of their incredible leads. Jack Black practically reinvented himself as an actor in Bernie, and absolutely should have been nominated for a best actor Oscar last year. But if you haven’t yet watched Anders Danielsen Lie, who has now made two films with Trier, I think you’ll be moved by his turn in Oslo. His character veers between possibility and pathos on his way to a tragic end. And as Ebert suggested in his review, you almost want to reach out and steer him out of the film and destiny he’s trapped in, into another life, or maybe a different movie.

And because the pleasures of filmgoing can rise and fall on the company you keep, I wouldn’t miss the opportunity to watch Days of Heaven with the Ebertfest crowd. Now that Malick (another Illinois native) is practically churning out the films, it is hard to remember the days when he hadn’t made a movie for twenty years, when we only had Badlands and Days by which to assess his talents. Back then his films seemed like far cries from a distant country—what genius went into the wilds of the American landscape and emerged with these earthy and feverish tales? These days I’m less enamored of his films. But what a great crowd with whom to rehash his career.

Finally, Tilda Swinton in person? Wow.

The 15th Annual Roger Ebert Film Festival kicks off Wednesday and runs through Sunday at the Virginia Theatre in Champaign, Illinois. The event is sold out.

Alison Cuddy is WBEZ’s Arts and Culture reporter. Follow her @wbezacuddy, Facebook and Instagram.

Biopics to watch in 2013, plus the 10 best (and worst) of all time

Wed, 17 Apr 2013 08:00:00 -0500

The biographical film, or biopic, is a long-celebrated bastion of cinema that began with Napoléon in 1927 and continues to dominate movie screens to this day.

Last weekend, 42 (a Jackie Robinson biopic starring Harrison Ford and one-time Chicago actor Chadwick Boseman in the title role) premiered to commerical and critical acclaim, as films about real-life heroes often do.

Other big biopics expected for 2013 include:

The Butler (with Forest Whitaker as White House butler Cecil Gaines, and a slew of other A-list stars playing presidents Eisenhower through Reagan)
Lovelace (Amanda Seyfried as Linda Lovelace)
Jobs (Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs)
Diana (Naomi Watts as Princess Diana)
Nina (Zoe Saldana as Nina Simone)
All Is By My Side (Andre 3000 as Jimi Hendrix)
Behind the Candelabra (Michael Douglas as Liberace)

Of course, movie buffs are already arguing about Saldana's darkened skin in Nina and whether Kutcher will totally bomb as Steve Jobs after mixed reviews from Sundance.

Studios depend on biopics to create a perfect storm of advance publicity, which may or may not translate to big wins at the box office and massive sweeps during awards season.

Actors often bank on these films not just to win Oscars, but to stretch their limits with challenging accents, method lifestyle changes and shocking physical transformations (remember when Robert DeNiro gained 60 pounds to play boxer Jake LaMotta in Raging Bull?) Some fail miserably, while others are forever remembered and admired for their uncanny portrayals of real people.

Many biopics had the potential to be great films but fell short. The Doors could have been incredible, if not for Val Kilmer's regrettably one-note portrayal of Jim Morrison. The 1982 epic Gandhi featured a fantastic performance by Ben Kingsley, but ran about two hours too long. More recent biopics like Ray, Capote, Ali and The Aviator also featured spot-on performances from their charismatic leads; but in retrospect, could have amounted to so much more.

In my opinion, these are the greats:

10. Hotel Rwanda (2004)

9. The Social Network (2010)

8. Bonnie and Clyde (1967)

7. Goodfellas (1990)

6. Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

5. The King's Speech (2010)

4. Monster (2003)

3. Good Night, and Good Luck (2005)

2. Schindler's List (1993)

1. I'm Not There (2007)

Also: Patton (1970), Milk (2008), The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996)

And now, the 10 worst (ranked from blandly underwhelming to downright atrocious):

10. The Iron Lady (2011)

9. Man on the Moon (1999)

8. Beyond the Sea (2004)

7. J. Edgar (2011)

6. Amelia (2009)

5. The Conqueror (1956)

4. Great Balls of Fire! (1989)

3. Patch Adams (1998)

2. Alexander (2004)

1. Liz & Dick (2012)

Which biopics do you love, and which ones do you wish had never seen the light of day? Leave a comment below, send me a tweet @leahkpickett or join the conversation on Facebook.

How 90s rap, Shel Silverstein, and Oak Park influenced a former Chicagoan director

Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:30:00 -0500

For Jonah Ansell, Chicago mattered. His experiences growing up in and near the city in the Western suburb of Oak Park directly nurtured his creative pursuits. His latest work, Cadaver, is a lushly-constructed and visually-mesmerizing graphic novel and animated short film starring Oak Park teen and fashion/media mogul Tavi Gevinson, Academy Award winner Kathy Bates, and Christopher Lloyd. It tells the story of a cadaver who wakes up to tell his wife a final goodbye only to discover a truth about death he did not know in life. A mix of child-like storytelling with more mature themes, Cadaver is a testament to the power of the grand narrative in creating works of fiction. The film plays April 23 at the Edlis Neeson Theater at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago. A discussion and book signing follows. Tickets are available online.

“I didn’t appreciate how nurturing of an environment I was in until I came back,” Ansell said about his experiences growing up in Oak Park. Ansell’s family moved to the suburb from the city when he was young. It was his experiences attending William Beye Elementary School, growing up on Humphrey Avenue, reading voraciously – that shaped his love of storytelling. Ansell counted one experience – painting murals on the walls of the elementary school – as particularly affecting.

“This concept that this communal space doesn’t just have to be a walk through and that you can empower kids to do what they want to do was powerful,” he said. “The idea that you could make stuff and comment on the human experience as performance stuck with me.”

Cadaver began as a poem Ansell wrote for his sister on her first day cutting open a dead body in medical school. The poem was a means of providing a touch of humor and humanity to the medical profession.

“We as humans are not islands,” Ansell said. “We’re not separated from what we do in life.”

Although he claims she rejected the work, the story stayed with him long after he wrote it.

“In this light-hearted whimsical ride, I realized there was a worldview about how people are, what life is, what love is," Ansell said. "It was all wrapped up in this little tiny poem.”

This story of the human experience soon sprang forth as a fully-formed narrative.

The work begged for a visual component that was as immediately captivating, but still embraced the small scale of the project. More than 400 artists working in a variety of mediums were interviewed for the project. The crew eventually chose Seattle-based 2D animator and artist Carina Simmons. Simmons’ illustrations are angular and visceral with a style more realistic and human than not. Emotions are vividly drawn and felt by audiences.

When creating Cadaver, which in its simplest form is a love story, the crew saw Simmons’ work as a complement to the emotional scope of the story.

“You have to be careful that it doesn’t come across saccharine or sugary sweet,” Ansell said. “We knew we had to add a little edge, so it would emotionally land where we were attempting for it to land. That’s where that artwork helped clarify the film we were trying to go for.”

The animation took about three months and the entire film production took six months, with the artist stationed in Seattle, the animator in San Francisco, and many of the crew based in Los Angeles.

Casting actors was surprisingly less complicated. Gevinson was the first hire. A longtime family friend, Gevinson was the first person Ansell approached and she immediately signed on. The two previously worked together on another film, First Bass, shot on location at Wrigley Field.

In terms of Lloyd and Bates, Ansell and his crew created a wish list of people they assumed would reject them and the two actors were at the top of their list. However, after emailing them and providing a few visual samples of what the work would look like, both signed on.

“It was a Hail Mary,” Ansell said.

Ansell cites influences ranging from George Carlin to 90s rap.

“For a kid growing up on Humphrey, this had a positive impact: what you can do with words, how you can bend words, how you would bring energy to what you’re saying,” he said.

Ansell also said he looked toward the storytelling structure of some of his favorite childhood authors: Roald Dahl and Shel Silverstein.

Ansell's summer mornings were spent outdoors playing with friends, but his afternoons were often spent reading. This love of reading informed the creation of a graphic novel in addition to the film.

“Whenever you have an idea for a story, you always wonder, what is the best medium to tell this story?” Ansell said. “[With books] you can linger, you can pause, you can flip the page back. You can’t do that with film.”

Britt Julious blogs about culture in and outside of Chicago. Follow Britt's essays for WBEZ's Tumblr or on Twitter @britticisms.