Name: Jon Simmons
Age: 24
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Education: Bachelor's of Science in Film/Cinema/Video (SUNY Fredonia)
How and when did you become interested in film?
I've always loved films and when I was younger we went to the movies a lot as a family. And from a really young age my parents kind of allowed me to watch all kinds of movies, a lot of which I probably shouldn't have been watching at the time. I think this mainly had to do with the fact that I had an older brother and when they would rent a movie to watch they didn't really want to exclude me just because it had some violence or swearing in it. So yeah I think that had a huge impact on me and then as I got older I just continued to love watching movies and would watch certain ones over and over again.
The first film I saw that made me want to become a filmmaker was Kevin Smith's Clerks. Kevin Smith always described Richard Linklater's film Slacker as being the film that kind of made making films seem possible and I think that's what Clerks did for me. Finally I was like, 'There's this guy making films and putting his friends in them and they're being released on DVD for everyone to see.' This idea of making films and casting my friends in them seemed perfect to me at the time. Clerks also really sparked my interest in following filmmakers and watching all of their films, researching and studying not only their films but their lives as well. I became fascinated by their personal stories because I knew that what they were doing was what I wanted to do one day.
What projects are you currently working on?
Right now I'm working on a short film with Jesse Kerns and Heather Personett that takes place in the 1930's. Since it's still very early in the writing stages a lot could change, but as of now I guess you could say it's about a criminal that finds himself in a lot of trouble. The film is made up of vignettes that deal with various people and the kinds of relationships they had with this criminal in the moments leading up to and after his death. It's a fairly ambitious project, especially since we're trying to make the film take place eighty years ago but I know we can pull it off. I'm fascinated by that time period and am even more fascinated by the kinds of films that came out at that time and the stories that are set during that time. I'm a huge fan of film noir and gangster films and I'm really curious to see what happens when you exclude certain narrative elements that are expected in a film like that and primarily focus on and explore the kinds of people that commit these crimes.
Name one of your pieces that you like and tell us why?
The last complete film that I made was Blocks Of White Light. It was a short experimental film that came after Tuesday and expanded on some of the same themes but more so continued to explore some of the same techniques and aesthetics. The film was loosely based on a fable called The Goods And The Ills and to me is about our perception and how our memories are often idealized, a subject that I find myself coming back to quite a bit. When we initially think back on a person or a moment, our memory tends to be romanticized. However, if we were able to go back to that time and experience it objectively, it may not have been so positive. Looking back at Blocks of White Light now I don't think it's my strongest film. But I do think it most clearly conveys certain ideas and feelings that I've continuously been exploring and plan on exploring in the future.
I noticed that you act or make appearances in most of your projects. Why is that?
The number one thing that will always draw me to making films is that they're so much fun. I just love making movies. And part of it has to do with being around friends, making a project together and then finally seeing it when it's finished and having something that you can experience with everyone years later. And when I first started making films I was so attracted to being in front of the camera. I don't know why. I think it had to do with the fact that I was shy around ninety-nine percent of people but around my friends I could cut loose and be loud and have fun and I wasn't shy in front of the camera because I was around my friends. And that was really appealing to me. And it became even more appealing when people seemed to like what I was doing in front of the camera. But while I still really enjoy acting and I like being in front of the camera, I think that whole thing mainly had to do with me wanting to joke around and get out of my shell a little bit, and right now it really isn't as much of an interest to me. I've become so fascinated with 'making' the film (writing the story, designing the sets, and setting up the shots for the scenes), that I'm kind of like, 'Let someone whose a little bit better than me act in the scene.' Basically I don't want to take something that I've been working on for so long and fuck it up just because I like having people look at me on screen. That being said, a lot of my experimental films have me in them as well. But that mainly has to do with the fact that I was too lazy to look for actors or when I did try, I struggled a lot with finding them. So maybe I will just keep showing up in my movies. We'll see…
Most of your work has some comedic element to it. Do you prefer working in this genre or are there other genres you like or want to explore?
When I was younger I always loved Comedies. That was kind of my thing. And when I started collecting DVD's all I wanted were Comedies. I wasn't interested in Drama films or Horror films, even though I did love all kinds of movies. I guess I just always thought that Comedies were for me and I also thought I was so funny for some reason and I was like, 'Wait till everyone sees how funny I am!' Like, 'They don't know now but when they see this movie they won't believe that it was me who wrote it.' But when I went to college and sort of became exposed to all kinds of films (older films and foreign films), that sole fascination with the comedy genre went away. I started becoming obsessed with Stanley Kubrick and David Lynch and Federico Fellini and they don't exactly make Comedy films. Even though there are still, every once in a while, some comedic elements in them. This brings me to my point that I don't really want to focus on making genre films anymore. One of my favorite filmmakers is Wes Anderson, who, if you're going to pick a genre that he's working in mainly it would be Comedy. He said in a recent interview that when he writes he never has it in his mind that he wants to work in a particular genre or that he wants something to be particularly funny. He just writes as truthfully as he can and if those comedic elements come out then that's what fits the story. But, if you watch Wes Anderson's films you know that they're not just Comedies they're very much Dramas as well. So, as far as my own work goes (at least in the future), I would like to play with genre. I'd like to take elements from particular genres and work with them but also see what happens if you focus on aspects of that genre that aren't ever really addressed. I do prefer however to have a little bit of humor in my work and I think that will definitely continue. I guess no matter how bleak and hopeless things are, I still see the world as being humorous. Even if that humor primarily comes out of how frustrated or desperate we are.
Tell us about your creative process. How do you go about making a film or project?
And you know as far as actually filming projects, it's really been completely different whether I was making an experimental film or a narrative film. With narrative, everything was very much established in the script and followed almost exactly what was written down weeks or months earlier. But with experimental there's always been that element of spontaneity, of kind of like 'what will happen the day of' or 'what will my camera capture' or 'what will my mistakes create and will those lead me in directions that I never thought I would go in.' They've just been two completely different experiences which is why I'm very excited for the project I'm working on now because I feel like it's the first time I'm going to really try to bring those two experiences together. And I'm expecting it to be a more stressful experience than ever before but I also think it's going to be the
strongest piece yet.
Which filmmakers or directors have influenced you?
I would say the director that's influenced me the most and is probably the greatest filmmaker in the history of movies is Stanley Kubrick. Now, in the grand scheme of things I haven't seen a lot of films and there are some highly regarded filmmakers whose films I've never seen. But out of all of the filmmakers I've ever seen Kubrick is just so far above everyone else. He was just incredible. There will never be another filmmaker that will make films as powerful and as twisted and as beautiful as him. He was just a genius who made films that you can't help but watch. Whether you're purely watching for the cinematic experience or analyzing every aspect of the filmmaking process, Kubrick just forces you to be sucked into his films. Other than Kubrick I would say Quentin Tarantino, Wes Anderson, The Coen Brothers, Paul Thomas Anderson, Federico Fellini, Michelangelo Antonioni, Jim Jarmusch, David lynch, Terrence Malick, Christopher Nolan, Michel Gondry, Stan Brakhage, David Mamet… Those are some guys whose bodies
of work I find incredible and inspiring.
If you could work with any filmmaker, living or dead, who would it be and why?
Stanley Kubrick. Just so I could watch someone like him work and just experience his presence which I'm sure was incredible. I think what I admire most about Kubrick, beyond his dedication to making films, was his eye for composition, color, and light. He was just able to create some of the most beautiful and haunting images I've ever seen. Also, not that this would be something I would love to experience but I'm pretty sure he would make me cry by the end of the first day. Even if I was just the guy getting him coffee or holding a reflector, I'm quite certain he would find a way to tell me that I'm doing something horribly wrong and I would just start crying because of it.
Name two directors/filmmakers that you'd like to see collaborate and tell me what kind of movie they would make?
That's insane. Man… that's a good question. I'm really going to have to think about this. It's weird because some people that I admire so much, I think, would just not work if they were together. Like Terrence Malick and Quentin Tarantino. What the fuck would that be! Um…I might go with The Coen Brothers and Wes Anderson for now. I would love to see the subject matter of a Coen Brothers script set in the world of Wes Anderson's aesthetic. I think I would want a Coen Brothers script directed by Wes Anderson. The worlds that Wes Anderson creates are just so visually stunning,unique, and full of life. This powerful and original visual aesthetic would be matched and paired so well with the Coen Brothers original and authentic dialogue. I would love to see that film.
You just recently won first place at the Indie Gathering International Film Festival. Which piece was it and why do you think the judges choose your piece?
The fourth installment of the 'Spy Kids' franchise just came out last year. Do you feel the quality of movies is declining or is there still hope somewhere out there?
I don't think it's really an issue of whether the quality is better or worse, I think the issue lies more in what it is our judgment of quality is based on. I'm sure that the newest Spy Kids film is an incredible looking film and I'm sure it has great actors and it's probably in 3D and it'll probably make hundreds of millions of dollars by the time people buy it on DVD. However, is it the kind of film that I want to make or the kind of film that I think will be important? No. Probably not. And Robert Rodriquez is a fantastic director and a very intelligent man. So despite whatever reasons he had for making those films (his kids probably being the main one), I don't think the problem is that movies are declining in quality or importance because there are a lot of films being made in Hollywood and around the world that are stunning and that are constantly exploring new possibilities.
The problem for me has to do with studios, Hollywood producers, the people with the money and power to decide what is being put on screen for millions of people to see. It's becoming increasingly hard for original and daring films to be seen by people because producers want films that look and feel like other successful films. It's as simple as that. And there are certain characteristics that films 'should' have if they want to be 'picked up' by studios and made into films. ie: special effects, non-stop action, sexual content, big stars, three-act writing structure… and without these things, it's very difficult for films to even be made. To me this is a shame because some of the greatest filmmakers have made some of the greatest films by rejecting these very things that producers require in order to feel comfortable about making a film. With that being said, these films are still being made and it's up to audiences to recognize this and make an effort to watch and appreciate these types of films. It's not entirely on studio producers. It really is up to us to realize that there are more options, different kinds of films out there, than the ones being made to solely make money.
I do believe that there is greater talent than ever out there in every aspect of filmmaking and that there is still hope. I think that the only way that hope will be lost is if we (and by we, I mean younger filmmakers), give into the demands of studios and stop wanting to make films that are personal. Film is an incredible art form that can be both entertaining and thought-provoking. And as long as we don't forget about the latter I think we'll continue to see better and better films. My wish is that everyone out there picked up a camera and made there own film, not worrying about whether it should be narrative or experimental or what is 'required' or 'necessary' for it to be a 'good film' and just made 'their film'. If this happened I think more people would become exposed to something interesting.
With digital technology developing so rapidly, do you think film is a dying medium? Which one would you prefer to work with?
There are a lot of people that are supporters of both digital and traditional filmmaking. Filmmakers like Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson are strong advocates of using film because of it's process and the unique experience that it creates that will never be duplicated by digital technology. Cinematographers like Wally Pfister continue to stand by film as well, claiming that because of the development of new film stocks, it continues to be the higher quality format. And then you have a lot of filmmakers (more and
more actually), that are moving to digital because of it's ease and the flexibility that it offers that film does not allow. I personally side more with Tarantino and Anderson and strongly support the use of film over digital.
Sadly, I do think that film is a dying medium even though it really doesn't have to be. Seeing films like Samsara and The Master, two films that were shot on 65mm film, were two of the most wonderful experiences that I've ever had in a movie theatre. And Stanley Kubrick's 2001, even though it was made over forty years ago is still, in my opinion, one of the most stunning films ever made and rivals even the most ambitious digital projects being made today. I would love to work with film. I have never gotten the
chance to shoot and edit with film and I truly think it would be a wonderful experience. I'm a fairly nostalgic person too, so this idea that there is this traditional format that all of the films I saw as a kid were shot on, makes me want to shoot with it even more.
What are your plans for the future?
Right now I would really like to teach. Going to school for film was such a great experience and I just fell in love with not only making films but discussing film with other students. I enjoyed listening to other artists' opinions and theories and seeing how their perception and personality came through in the films that they made. I learned a lot and it was just that process of learning from other people that I loved so much. Ultimately I would love to be an independent filmmaker and, at least at the moment, becoming a professor seems like it could be a way that I would be able to continue to make films.
Would you rather: be eaten alive by a giant octopus or eaten alive by 10 Abraham Lincoln vampire hunters on bath salts?
Definitely Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunters. Dude compared to a giant octopus, Lincoln doesn't scare me at all. I don't care how many Abe Lincoln's there are or what they're hunting, I hate sea creatures. I hate them so much. And at least Abe Lincoln would be cool to see eating me 'cause I'd be like 'Holy Shit, where the hell did he come from!' And also I would go down in history as being the guy that Abe Lincoln ate alive. That's so much more impressive then going down as the guy that was eaten alive by an octopus. The guy that's eaten alive by an octopus sounds like a dumbass 'cause people are like, 'What was that jackass doing?' If I were eaten alive by Lincoln people would be like, 'That guy must've been pretty important.'
No comments:
Post a Comment