10.21.03 - Eric Byler's award winning film "Charlotte Sometimes" was released recently on DVD after a successful limited theatrical run. AsianAmericanFilm.com discusses the DVD and what's new with Eric.
AAF Congrats on the DVD release! Tell us a bit about what special goodies the
DVD contains.
EB The first thing that comes to mind is bloopers. I would have done the Jackie Chan thing and put bloopers during the end credits, but it didn't seem to fit with the tone of the film. There's also some behind-the-scenes stuff like Jacqueline Kim and I fighting about a salt shaker right before we shot the famous lunch scene. Like most DVD's, it has director's commentary, but we had to create two commentary tracks because all four of the lead actors were nice enough to join me. Our recollections cover everything from when to use a high angle shot to how an off-camera romance affected on-camera chemistry. Also
there's a Q/A session shot at Roger Ebert's film festival with me, Ebert, Michael Idemoto and Jacqueline. We spend a lot of time talking about the state of Asian American film because "Better Luck Tomorrow" had just come out the week
before and "charlotte" was coming out the next month.
AAF How did the theatrical release of "Charlotte Sometimes" treat you? Any especially memorable cities or experiences?
EB The best thing about it was the opening night parties. Most films open the major cities at the same time to get the best bang for their marketing buck. But since we didn't have to worry about marketing bucks, the actors and I got to attend numerous premiere parties. We did Chicago, San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles, Honolulu, San Diego, New York, and Washington D.C. That's a lot of parties. I got to meet a lot of great people, make some lasting
friendships, and renew some old ones.
AAF I've heard you're on the verge of shooting your next feature film. Can you tell us about it? And any word yet on casting and shooting dates?
EB With "American Knees" there was a big rush last month because this company with French ties wanted to hurry up and make the film in time for Cannes in May. But the business side of things is taking so long, I think it's really too late to start the mad rush. Rushing means cutting the budget down because we haven't raised all the money. I don't mean to complain, but it's not fun to
make a film for 20 thousand and then be compared with films made for 20 million.
Honestly, I don't want to have to "rise from the ghetto" again. I'd really
like to have the same tools and the same advantages that non-Asian filmmakers
have this time. I'm willing to wait, and I'm beginning to think it's better to
wai, but if they say we have to do it now, I'll do it of course.
AAF So now you've gone through all the stages of domestic distribution of an
independent feature film -- festivals, television, theatrical, and DVD. Any
nuggets of wisdom, bits of advice, mistakes or triumphs you'd like to share?
EB As far as festivals and theatrical, I think it went about as well as I could
have hoped. The biggest triumphs at the festival level were the awards and
[Independent Spirit Award] nominations-- and of course getting distribution. The
biggest triumph during theatrical was the critical response. In hindsight,
though, this also points out a big mistake. If the distributors had known in
advance how strong the reviews were going to be, they would have come up with a
better strategy to market the film— professionally designed newspaper ads,
maybe even radio or TV spots. We'd get amazing reviews opening weekend, and the
people who tend to read reviews would come see the film. The thing is, not
everyone is going to pick up the New York Times or L.A. Times and read a
review. If we had had advertisements as well, we could have re-used the reviews in
little blurbs and also told people where the film was playing. Of course,
this would have increased the risk for the distributors, because ads are very
expensive. They stuck with a more conservative strategy that basically depended
on two things: strong reviews to draw the art house audience (which isn't very
big), and support from the Asian American community (which isn't very big
either), both of which they could get for free. It worked because they made
money, but it also makes me wonder how it would have been if they'd tried to go
for it all. For instance, "Lost in Translation" got similar reviews, and the
distributor responded with gigantic ads and commercials on the major networks.
Of course, having Bill Murray in the film makes a big difference. But it does
prove that artistic films can make money if they're marketed the right way.
AAF Speaking of which, any opinions about "Lost in Translation"?
EB I was okay with it. One of the themes of the film is cultural isolation, so
the director went out of her way to show how two lonely Americans feel even
more isolated in a very different place like Tokyo. Some of the Japanese
characters were comedic, and even over the top. But so were two of the non-Japanese
supporting players. My only discomfort was with the reaction of the audience.
They sort of expected to laugh whenever they saw a Japanese person. I don't
think this was the director's intention. It's more a reflection of how
American films and television tend to depict Asians and Asian Americans, and how
this has conditioned audiences to equate the Asian face (and the Asian accent)
with dramatic extremes like violence, tragedy, and silly humor, as if there
was nothing in between. That's why we're working so hard to change all that.
