For Kristen Stewart, working with director Kelly Reichardt on “Certain Women” was a masterclass in stillness. Scrubbed free of any of the possible sticky residues of affectation, she was encouraged to mine more with less. The resulting performance of emotional complexity is part of but one chapter in Reichardt’s latest and perhaps most understated film to date, a triptych narrative grown from the lightly intersecting lives of three women. Based on a series of short stories by author Maile Meloy, and set in the lonely echo of Montana, “Certain Women” also culls its strength from the talents of Laura Dern, Michelle Williams (marking her third collaboration with Reichardt) and newcomer Lily Gladstone, whose performance is an absolute revelation. The film is a patient, wholly singular exploration of the female experience — the undaunted courage, the frustration, the longing. It finds quiet, authentic life in what Stewart describes as the “in-between moments” of what is typically depicted on screen. And it’s in that gulp of air between the remembered moments of the everyday, in the lulls of the seemingly mundane, that Reichardt truly finds creative oxygen.
READ MORE: 12 Films To See In October
We had the chance to sit down with Stewart just ahead of the screening of “Certain Women” at the New York Film Festival. Unguarded and amped to discuss working with Reichardt, she shared insight on how the film gets at a truth of life that is never changing, and the specificity of the director’s rebel storytelling.
Ben Kinglsey has described actors as hunters, searching for the necessity, the connection, the truth. Can you talk about the “hunt” on this film?
The biggest thing about this part was really just being — and not showing anything, not intentionally trying to make you feel anything. Kelly Reichardt creates such a full, whole environment. It was all really natural. I mean, you’re always trying to find your way into a world so you can live inside of it. When you try to “display” stuff, it’s really not honest. Usually, it’s when you are not trying to display things that you accidentally reveal stuff. And you can only do that if you found your way naturally in to any environment. For this, I also just really wanted to put myself in a car. The work that I put into this film was primarily this long drive to Montana from LA.
What I really love about Kelly’s movies is that they focus on these moments that occur in between the moments that we are used to highlighting in film. There’s nothing redundant and derivative about her movies. They’re all mediative. She commands that you stop thinking until it’s over. I get so absorbed by her work. Other people really like to package and deliver stories and make sure that you can consume them in this weird way that they want you to. Hers aren’t like that.
And it’s interesting that you bring up Kelly’s focus on the in-between moments of life and this want to place yourself in a car. Aside from your character literally driving for four hours each way to teach her class, each of the central characters in the film is shown in her car getting from place to place. And it’s not treated as transition. It’s treated as meat on the bone.
Totally. It’s trippy, right? All three women are up against something. They are each struggling, really grinding against something that is immovable. None of them are self-aggrandizing. Most “women’s stories” are like, “Oh, I have to overcome this case and it’s a big deal and it’s fucking moral and it’s the only right thing to do.” Honestly, it’s just too much. I think it is much more courageous to focus on small things that happen in life that aren’t necessarily what you’d make a movie about. That’s bold. These grinds that these women are on, sort of seemingly for naught, all wanting something they cannot have, are hard to watch and really relatable.
Absolutely.
The other thing, too, is also their not wanting to be part of an institution. There is the fight against the typical dynamic of a marriage. There’s the fight against the fact that women are not necessarily heard bureaucratically and that things don’t make sense and it’s illogical and fucking frustrating — and that you’re not going to change that. Then in Lily [Gladstone’s] character, she wants a friend and the attention of someone who has no idea that she even exists. And in my case, she wants to feel valid and that just isn’t going to happen. So, it’s these small, tiny little stories that I’m really blown away by how [Kelly] put them together.
And without a sense of urgency for resolution.
Yeah. Not at all. It’s a slow grind. It’s fucking exhausting.
I don’t think she expressed disdain, per se. I think she’s saying that the main goal shouldn’t necessarily be entertainment, which is counterintuitive. She wants to make films and if they happen to entertain, then that’s good, too. But, the filmmakers focus should be on the story, not necessarily if it appeals to the general audience. I think she trusts that a good film will find its audience.