FFWD (Fast Forward Weekly)
March 26 2010
Seducing the mainstream
After over 30 years of critical praise, Atom Egoyan wants to be more accessible
Published March 25, 2010 by Kyle Francis in Film Features
Over the course of his 33-year directing career, Atom Egoyan has
become an institution of Canadian filmmaking ‘ or at least he has for
a very specific sector of Canadian filmgoers. With a catalogue of
features and shorts that deal explicitly with topics of social
alienation, self-isolation and some of the darkest aspects of human
sexuality, Egoyan has always been a favourite of film professors and
the beret-wearing, unfiltered-cigarette-smoking movie buff
intelligentsia ‘ but never exactly a big player at the box office.
Though his career highlights include one of the first films to ever
deal explicitly with the Armenian genocide (Ararat), one of the
best-regarded Canadian independent films of all time (Exotica) and a
1997 best picture Oscar nomination (The Sweet Hereafter), Egoyan’s
authorial voice has always remained distinctly his own. While in the
past that meant he rarely found an audience outside of the art-house
crowd, his latest film, Chloe, has been designed from the ground up to
reach outside his usual area of influence. And a cast that includes
stars like Liam Neeson, Julianne Moore and Amanda Seyfried is only a
part of that.
`There’s a clarity to the emotional impulses of the characters,’ says
Egoyan. `If you look at my most recent work, what motivates characters
is very shrouded and difficult to identify. With these characters [in
Chloe], we always have access to what they’re feeling at that moment.
Even if the rug is about to be pulled out from under our feet, it’s
still much easier to follow at a basic level. I was working with a
producer who is a populist ‘ Ivan Reitman has made some of the most
popular films in existence. I felt this was an opportunity to harness
my sensibility with a vision that would reach more people.’
Among the changes Egoyan made to his style in order to make it more
accessible was his approach to narrative structure. Though much of
Chloe is thematically resonant with the rest of his repertoire, its
traditional linear structure sets it apart. In every film he made
before Chloe, Egoyan manipulated the ways in which time could be
represented on film, often to tremendous dramatic effect. In Exotica,
for example, the last scene of the film ‘ which takes place years
before any of the other events ‘ drastically alters the audience’s
perception of the film’s central relationship. Chloe’s story is just
as twisted as Egoyan’s past work: the film tells the story of a
suspicious wife who hires the titular prostitute in order to test her
husband’s fidelity, only to find herself increasingly infatuated by
the professional seductress. Their relationship is complex, but the
premise is uncomplicated, and Egoyan presents it with a painstakingly
deliberate absence of ambiguity.
`[It came from] a desire to address something that’s been bothering me
with my own work, which is that ‘ I felt in the last films that the
very structure that I use becomes its own formula,’ says Egoyan. `That
somehow this idea of using these disjointed narratives ‘ the idea that
it’s all going to come together’ at some point is as formulaic as any
genre film. And I wanted to kind of challenge that. I wanted to take
something that was using a more linear approach and see how that
felt.’
`The question is whether I’ve learned anything as a writer,’ he says.
`I’ve written two scripts since Chloe, and they’re as complex as
anything I’ve ever done. I’m trying to simplify my work as a writer,
because I’m always thinking about how film offers so many different
possibilities to work with chronology and time. And yet I realize that
most people don’t read it that way. So I have a very different sort of
agenda with stuff I write and direct, as opposed to something like
this that I’m just directing.’
Though Chloe is Egoyan’s first feature film that he didn’t write (or
personally adapt), it would be difficult to cull that knowledge from
only the film. Many of Egoyan’s pet themes feature prominently ‘
technology as an intervening force in personal relationships, sex, the
messiness of realistic love ‘ and save for the structure, much of the
first two acts seem to be a gentler reconfiguration of certain
familial dynamics explored in Adoration. If writer Erin Cressida
Wilson didn’t pen Chloe with Egoyan (or an Egoyan-like director) in
mind, his writing definitely had an influence on her.
`I get a lot of scripts offered to me, and this one seemed to register
on a number of levels,’ says Egoyan. `It deals with subject matter I’m
fascinated by in terms of how we delineate between fantasy and
reality, and also just how complex and mysterious the meeting between
any two people really is. The relationship between these two women ‘
Catherine and Chloe ‘ was just fascinating, and I felt that even
though it wasn’t something I wrote, it was certainly something I could
devote myself to and feel passionate about. That’s really important
when you’re making the decision. It’s easy to know if it’s a film
you’d like to see ‘ but is it a film you want to spend six months of
your life doing, then spend time talking about a year after it’s
made?’
Without a significant commercial hit since The Sweet Hereafter,
there’s no doubt that Egoyan could use a win. Even though he’s managed
to remain a mostly consistent critical darling throughout his career,
Egoyan’s perspective on the relative importance of artistic and
financial success in a medium like film is refreshingly down-to-earth.
`It is an expensive art form,’ he says. `You cannot keep making films
unless you find an audience that’s going to see them. It’s obvious to
say that, but it’s the reality.’
en/film-features/seducing-the-mainstream-5410/
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress