See what you fuckers in the press have done? You’ve dispirited the shit out of Steven Soderbergh with all this “Moneyball” stuff.
His two-part epic “Che” is available on DVD and Blu-ray now in the U.K. so presumably this is the reason why he’s doing press across the pond.
But don’t look for answers about “Moneyball,” either the U.K. press is not asking or he’s simply not talking.
This conversation is strictly about “Che” and the man sounds defeated and rather depressed at the mixed response he got from the film and the adventurous way they presented the film with the road show of two parts. “Everybody got scarred by [Che] a little bit. I don’t know how to describe it. It took a long time to shake off. It was just such an intense four or five months that it really … You know, for a year after we finished shooting I would still wake up in the morning thinking, ‘Thank God I’m not shooting that film.’ “
Did “Che” take that much out of him? It appears so. Asked if he wished he never shot the film he responds bluntly, “Yeah.”
Times are tough in cinema these days as the bottom dollar means more and more and art takes a backslide (and critics who write about the art of movies become a dying breed). It all seems grim to Soderbergh and he might be seeing the light at the end of his tunnel.
“I’m looking at the landscape and I’m thinking, ‘Hmmm, I don’t know. A few more years maybe,'” Soderbergh said. “And then the stuff that I’m interested in is only going to be of interest to me.”
Update: We have a sneaking suspicion these quotes are old and from the end of the “Che” press cycle. Be advised this is very possible. We’re looking into it. Update 2 (7.16.09): We spoke to the writer. This interview actually is recent and conducted last week, so much for our theory and we guess therefore these quotes are within context.
This is the key quote to us. It sounds like he’s planning his escape route and it sounds like he knows the obstacles up ahead for all the film’s he’d like to make and perhaps sees them as impossible, but he’s also talked about early retirement before (and note, none of the publications or bloggers even raised an eyebrow about it last time, but $100 says you see a lot of ALL CAPS and exclamations marks this time around, figures…). “In terms of my career, I can see the end of it. I’ve had that sensation for a few years now. And so I’ve got a list of stuff that I want to do – that I hope I can do – and once that’s all finished I may just disappear.”
The filmmaker says he has, “three or four years worth of stuff,” presumably he means, “Cleo,” “Liberace” and the other Spalding Gray doc he has in the works, all of which will come after this falls, “The Informant” with Matt Damon.
The climate out there is bleak, to be certain, but we’re hoping in a few more years, around the time Soderbergh plans to bounce for good, things will change for the better. There’s always ebb and flow. We’re not counting him out yet and encourage you not to be too sensationalistic about it. Dude has had a rough few weeks with the whole Sony/”Moneyball” imbroglio so he’s allowed a bit of pessimism.
Steven: Move to France or become an AD on 101 year-old Manoel de Oliveira's next film.
Soderbergh is 46-year-old. He's been making movies his entire life. He's not going to retire now. Take a year off, maybe, but that's it.
I agree with Scott. The guy is one of the most prolific filmmakers ever, it was only a matter of time before he got burned out. He needs a break. Then he can start up again with some fresh energy.
This down period for him will probably just make a good story when "The Informant" does well and gets him some awards consideration, like a Golden Globe nomination for best comedy.
At the very least some awards would make it up to him for ignoring the 'Che' movies.
Or him and Michael Mann can make a movie together and let all the pain out.
With all this dispiriting talk about doing CHE I'm guess we shouldn't expect an audio commentary by him for the Criterion DVD? If so, man, it's gonna be the most depressing one ever recorded.
I agree that all he needs is some downtime to recharge the ol' batteries.
I definitely started to note a dispirited tone near the end of the Che interviews. i think he got sick of talking about it and the film did underperform overall which i think was depressing. Something like $30 million worldwide on a $60 million dollar budget?
10 years from now he'll be happy as shit he made it. It's a stone-cold classic in my mind.
There was also post-che interviews were he sounded frustrated by all the pirating and leaks. Apparently there were a lot of leaks internationally where he hoped the film would do better.
You're right about the dispiriting tone in Soderbergh's interviews towards the end of his media blitz. Even Benicio Del Toro snapped at a journalist. I think these guys just got burnt out endlessly flogging the film to any journo who would listen. Ya certainly can't fault 'em for that.
I loved the film too. My fave from last year.
I wish Criterion would already announce the release date and specs for CHE, dammit!
@J.D. "ven Benicio Del Toro snapped at a journalist."
Totally, right? By the end you could tell it was becoming a grind and they just wanted to get away from it. Having to answer all those contentious questions about the political (or apolitical) nature of the film probably started to grate. They went above and beyond to promote, the production itself was a slog and the outcome financially was disappointing and by the end of that press cycle, they knew it.
i'm almost certain these are old quotes now and should have figured enough considering how much i wrote about it, but lots to do and on the brain and I missed it.
but i wanna at least wait til there's some kind of confirmation about that.
what are your thoughts on why the awards shows (Oscars, Golden Globes) almost ignored Che? And even some critics.
They really embraced The Wrestler, The Reader, Milk, etc. I know those cost less and made at least a bit of profit, but there must be more to it? This movie was ignored, publicly. And given the themes, characters and actors/reputations in the movies I mentioned, could it have been that hard to support Del Toro or Soderbergh and Che? Please explain. It's like The Assassination of Jesse James in a sense.
It was ignored by U.S. critics. It came close to winning the Palme d'or, it was definitely in contention and benicio del toro won best actor at Cannes that year which was another way to validate it.
Assassination of Jesse James got some decent awards at Venice that year too (Brad Pitt best actor i think?) What are you gonna do, you can't hold a gun to ppl's heads and force them to love a movie. I don't feel angry at critics who didn't love either, I just feel like they're missing out, but not in that condescening, 'they're retarded!' way. I can understand why some "Che" might not work for some people.
Public Enemies was editorially neutral like Che, but I didn't care for it much and I'm sure many ppl feel like it is the Jesse James of 2009. It's bold and ambitious for sure, but it missed the mark for me.
I Spoke to the writer. He assures me, the interview was conducted last thursday and he says he did ask about Moneyball, as in working within the studio system, but he didn't really answer the question directly.
Well, CHE was reviewed by most of the major critics and it predictably divided them. I really like how J. Hoberman championed the film, reviewing it twice — the Cannes screening and the Roadshow version — which was nice to see. I recall that he was one of the few American critics to defend FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS when it came out and now its considered a cult classic.
It was depressing that CHE was snubbed at all the major awards shows but not surprising. I like how Sean Penn called attention to this fact at the SAGs. Good for him.
Well, this is a bloody shame, because there is a rather large group of Spalding Gray fans out here that have been waiting and waiting for the Spalding biopic (documentary, whatever!) to come out.