'F*ck' Opens Today in NY/LA: Interview with Director Steve Anderson
The title of Steve Anderson's entertaining and provocative documentary is Fuck, but you might not see it advertised that way.
Some theater marquees will show multiple asterisks -- or another desciption entirely -- instead of the four-letter title. Even for this article I decided to amend the title out of consideration for those who might otherwise skip it because of content.
The film is very good, as I described in my review last year, and, in its own modest way, vigorously invites debate on free speech. It opens its theatrical run in New York and Los Angeles today (playdate information | trailers).
I spoke by telephone with director Steve Anderson on Wednesday afternoon. We talked about festivals, audience reactions, politics, and expectations.
ScreenAnarchy: What's happened since the film's World Premiere at AFI Fest last year?
Steve Anderson: We had a fantastic run at festivals -- I think more than 30 -- and, in fact, I'm going to Sweden for one next week.
ThinkFilm approached us right after AFI. We had great number of suitors, but we decided to lay low for a time. We went to South by Southwest [in March 2006] and had a couple of great screenings there. Finally we decided to go with ThinkFilm. They'd done a great job with The Aristocrats, and there are good people there. We thought it was a really good fit.
We'll be released November 10 in New York and Los Angeles, and a few weeks after that it'll be rolled out in about 20 other cities, and then we'll see. Fuck is rolling out across America.
It might be expected that audiences in New York and Los Angeles would be receptive to the film, but what's the reaction been in smaller cities in the heartland, so to speak?
In the past few months, we've been at festivals in cities both large and small. For the most part, festivals have been receptive to us. It's a festival-friendly film, in that it's a little bit edgy -- at least the title is -- and festival audiences seem to really enjoy it.
However, it has been listed in program guides with asterisks, and on marquees with everything ranging from the full title to four asterisks.
I just found out today that Landmark -- it's not really their corporate decision, but because of some business decisions they had to make -- they're actually going to have to put "Four Letter Word Film" on all their marquees. [Ed. note: Landmark is the largest arthouse theater chain in the US.] We'll have to respond to that.
What this film is really about is how the popular culture responds to this particular word. And we're really experiencing that journey ourselves with the film, because the film is called Fuck.
Most cities across the country have been very receptive. But there's a slight difference between when we're playing Missouri versus playing in New York City, where people are shouting out the name of our movie on every street corner.
With the recent increased popular interest in documentaries, some critics have spoken out about documentaries becoming devalued because so many are not about social issues or shot in a cinema verite style. Do you think there should be limitations on documentaries? [Ed. note: A very poorly-worded question, even in it's cleaned-up version here. What was I thinking?]
I don't think there should be limitations. Ours falls squarely, in my mind, in the definition of a documentary, and there can be all sorts of documentaries, the same way that there's all kinds of feature films -- all kinds of genres, horror films, comedies, all sorts of things -- and there's no rule associated with that.
As long as a documentary doesn't play too loose and fast with the rules of truth and the story it's trying to tell, that's fine. As long as it's honest in the way it tells the story, that's fine. I think you could get into trouble if you started lying to people or perverting facts so that they just weren't true.
For the most part, we've had a pretty good response critically. There are some people that don't like it, but that's fine -- everyone has an opinion.
Has the film received much exposure outside the US and Canada so far?
It's played in several festivals, among them Brazil and, as I mentioned, it will play in Sweden next week. I think the film has deep appeal.
I always like to say that Coke and 'fuck' are the two main [US] exports -- everyone knows Coke, and everyone knows 'fuck'. People worldwide are very interested. We get a lot of hits on our web site from all over the world.
We talked about this last year, and I'd understand if you don't want to talk about it now, but in view of the US election results yesterday, it would seem strange not to ask you about the political side of things. [Ed. note: When I interviewed Steve for the printed AFI Fest Daily News last year, I had to leave out most of our discussion on political issues due to space limitations. And, as it happens, this portion of our conversation was somewhat garbled on my digital recorder. Technical problems or government interference? You be the judge.]
Your film gets into censorship and free speech issues related to this one word. Do you think those issues transcend politics as far as free speech is concerned?
During the past six years, since [President] Bush has been in office, there's certainly been in a tangible rise in efforts by the government to curb these things. We're talking about the FCC and "broadcast decency."
I think the elections were probably mostly about the war in Iraq. I also think it had something to do with the [garbled] thinking it can do whatever it wants. [garbled] [garbled]
On the other hand, I do think the word transcends politics in this way: you're not going to hear the next President saying 'fuck' in his inaguaral speech.
One of the main problems I have in that area is with the FCC. [garbled] [garbled] [sigh] [garbled]
Are you satisfied that the message about the type of movie you've made has gotten out?
We've had great reaction over the past year. And it's been very well reviewed.
When I first set out to make it, my first goal was not a political agenda, it was to talk about the history and controversy that has followed this word. Then we can use it as a catalyst to talk about issues of censorship and free speech.
Audiences really react to that. I think that they're not really sure what they're going to get when they come into the theater and sit down. I mean, how do you make a movie about a single word?
I chose this word because it's at the center of the debate on free speech. There are words that are more obscene, but once you say 'fuck,' everyone's got an opinion on it.
I think people are going to enjoy it. This is the true test, though, and we'll see if people come out for it. It's a very good film and I'm very proud of it, and I just hope people come out and see it.
LINKS
