With ‘The Holdovers,’ Alexander Payne Faces His Admirers

[ad_1]

The Holdovers is shaping into one of the most acclaimed movies in Alexander Payne’s filmography, and there are all sorts of reasons for that. There’s the crackling script by David Hemingson, which Payne commissioned after being sent a pilot by the screenwriter many years ago. The nuanced performances of its superlative stars Paul Giamatti, Da’Vine Joy Randolph, and Dominic Sessa, who respectively play a grumpy teacher, a grieving cafeteria manager, and a bratty student left only with each other at their stuffy boarding school over a snowy New England holiday. The nostalgic cinematography, closely evoking character-driven films of the ’70s (the decade in which the movie is set). The care with which Payne steers the tone from spiky comedy to emotional drama.

As to how an admiring viewer might describe the feeling The Holdovers leaves them with, then? As Payne settles in for this week’s Little Gold Men interview (listen or read below), I mention the word I see thrown around the most: “Cozy.” I’ve heard friends say it; I’ve read it used by critics and even the film’s own distributor, Focus Features. Payne has encountered the term plenty himself—and isn’t sure how to feel about it. So begins a winding, candid conversation about Payne facing his critics—more accurately, maybe, his admirers—and preparing for the opening of his first film since the critical and commercial bomb Downsizing, amid an anxious time for theatrical exhibition.

Vanity Fair: Everyone I know who’s seen this has commented on how light and cozy they felt coming out of the theater. To what extent was that a goal of yours with this movie?

Alexander Payne: I’ve got to tell you, I’m always a little surprised to hear this, “Oh, it’s like a cozy movie, or a warm hug, or putting on a sweater on a cold day and drinking hot cocoa.” Part of that nauseates me a little bit. I thought I was just making a decent movie about people. Well, you’re the first person I’m getting to ask: What is it that felt cozy to you or warm? Is it the texture of the film, or the quality of the human relations presented? What was it?

I think it’s the attention to the dynamics between the characters and the belief that there is something that they can bring to each other that is positive, and sort of affirming in some way. I found it partly cozy because I believed in the connection that you developed between those characters.

We can talk about two things. One is this quality that it has, perhaps, that we can pierce our natural assumptions about others, given new knowledge. That everybody’s got a story. You meet someone, you make certain assumptions fairly or unfairly, usually unfairly. But then the more you get to know the person, the more you see the humanity underneath. And then by extension, in this film, if there’s a feeling that seemingly very disparate people can, with time, discover some common humanity—that’s a nice thing. I wouldn’t necessarily use the word cozy though. Why do you use the word cozy?

Part of it just has to do with the milieu. You’re working in Christmastime, you’re in Massachusetts, you’re in boarding school—

And maybe some of the period flavor contributed to that.

[ad_2]

Source link