Kissing On The Mouth, Mach II

A couple of years ago, I saw a film called Kissing On The Mouth. And I hated it. I won’t go into all the reasons why, but you can read my review here.

Well, imagine my surprise when the director of said film, Joe Swanberg, sent me an e-mail after reading my review.

D’OH!!

Well, we had an exchange of words and ideas and he gave me permission to put those words and ideas up on my website. Joe seems like a good guy and I thank him for his permission. I wish I had put this up earlier, but, hey. Better late than never, right?

Anyway, this is the kind of open discussion that film should bring on. So, no matter what I thought about his film, Joe and I had a good, short discussion about his film, where film is going and nudity in America. It was a good thing to happen and, hopefully, it taught me to be a little more clear in my reviews. Only my readers can tell me that, though.

(By the way, I didn’t edit either of these e-mails. All typos and punctuation errors were there before I copied and pasted.)

JOE (4/3/05)

Hey Mark,

i read your review of my film KISSING ON THE MOUTH, and just wanted you to know that you got the characters mixed up. It’s Ellen (Kate Winterich) that’s the main focus of the film, and Laura (Kris Williams) is the one who plays her friend.

It’s a shame that you didn’t like the film more. You have some interesting points, and of course your own take on the film is valid, but you seem to assume the worst in us. That we are only using the sex and nudity as a gimmic, that the film looks cheap because we can’t afford anything better (your example of credits using paint on glass rather than some effects program stands out especially). Of course I could have used Video Toaster, or LiveType, or any other title program including Final Cut Pro, which I cut the film on. We chose to use the painted titles on purpose.

Also, it’s interesting that in the same breath you commend what we are trying to do, but dismiss the film for that exact same reason. How can you say, ” I’m not a prude by any means and I think that these weird-ass barriers we have with showing bodies on screen need to be knocked down. I know we need to get past that to get to where it doesn’t seem so gimmicky, but it sucks that there’s going to be so much crap until that happens.” But a few sentences earlier you say, “You know. All the stuff you basically feel really uncomfortable about seeing someone else do.”

You opinion that the film is “crap” is your own. But if we are ever going to knock down the barriers that you claim to want knocked down, you need to get over your feeling of discomfort. One can’t happen without the other. You’ll never find a film that’s going to hold your hand and slowly walk you through the things you have issues with. Either films charge forward and show life as it is, or they continue to put up false barriers. It seems like you are promoting a halfway point where a film can be realistic about sex, and also allow you to sit comfortably in your seat, but that’s never going to happen if you are the same person to call a film out for being “gimmicky” when it does show sex realistically. You just seem confused on what you want as a viewer. You want to break down barriers, but you feel uncomfortable when it happens. You realize the barriers are bullshit, but you think films are gimmicky when they cross them. How could any film satisfy what you want as a viewer, when you as a film critic are condemning every film that tries? You seem to realize that if enough films start taking this approach, it won’t seem so gimmicky, but you are failing to put yourself as a critic outside of the particular bubble of time and film that we live in.

I appreciate you coming to see our film, and taking the time to write about it. I know there was a lot of great stuff to choose from at SXSW, and I’m happy that you gave our film a shot. If you have the time, i would love to hear your thoughts on my comments, and it would also be helpful if you could switch the character names and actresses around to avoid confusion in your readers.

Best,

Joe

ME (4/3/05)

Hey Joe,

Now THIS makes me uncomfortable. I always hate it when a filmmaker reads a bad review that I wrote. But I put it out there, so I obviously wanted SOMEONE to read it.

Anyway, sorry about the name confusion. I think I was going from the SXSW website and they had Kris listed first. It was a bad assumption.

And it’s fixed now.

As for the movie itself, well, while you make some good arguments, I haven’t changed my opinion. I did add a bit to my review explaining what I think good movies are that are trying to break down this barrier. The Dreamers, Kinsey, some of Almadovar’s films. And I don’t think that the big names get off easy. I thought Young Adam with Ewan McGregor was a terrible movie. I read some good reviews of it (ok, glowing reviews) and I just didn’t understand. Maybe they saw a different movie. The entire audience that I saw it with in Telluride thought it was the most boring movie of the festival.

Anyway, back to your movie:

I think that no matter how many movies show it, we will all be a little uncomfortable watching someone else jerk off. At this point it’s kind of human nature. It’s a very private thing that we certainly don’t see everyday. Maybe it’s silly. I don’t know. The barrier that really needs to be broken down is just seeing bodies on screen. If we can get past everyone in the audience saying, “ACK! A PENIS!!” then we’re getting somewhere. And if we can get past parents getting all pissed off because their kids saw a boob on national tv, then we’re REALLY getting somewhere. It’s a naked body. Everybody’s got one. This isn’t human nature. It’s our screwed up American mentality. I’ve gotten into arguments (mainly with my family…bad idea, by the way) about whether or not Janet’s tit was grounds for fining a network.

But I think even cavemen turned away when their friends were masturbating. Casual nudity, sex and masturbation are three completely different barriers to me. Baby steps. Baby steps.

How can it be put into a movie without it seeming totally exploited or uncomfortabe? That’s a tough one. I don’t know that I’m quite creative enough to figure it out. Did you want the audience to feel uncomfortable in this scene? Did you feel uncomfortable filming it? Or did you just think, “Aw, these are my buddies. I don’t care if they see me doing this. And I don’t know the audience, so who cares?” Personally, I probably would have chickened out on that scene. It takes some serious guts to do that and I commend your commitment.

As for the pube shaving, that’s not quite as uncomfortable. It’s not a sexual act, but it’s still something that’s very solitary and private. Maybe I shouldn’t have equated it with masturbation. I just kind of generalized some stuff that I shouldn’t have.

We absolutely need to break down the barriers. No doubt about that.

It’s hard, though, with people constantly saying, “What? You want us all to just walk around naked and screwing in the streets?!” To which we say, “Well, yeah! Would you fight a naked man? There’s the reason!”

Seriously, though, I’m an American. That means that I’m a big ol’ walking contradiction. I’m a pacifist who loves violent, gory movies. I like peanut butter, but not peanut butter flavored things. I like to think that I’m enlightened, but I’m not always as much so as I really want to be. I want people to get over their hatred of naked bodies and sex, but I would never put mine on screen. I want us to be able to put all kinds of things on the screen, but I don’t want to see all of them.

And I’m just a guy with a website that about three people read.

Thanks for your comments, Joe. And if you have any more, please, feel free to let them fly. It always catches me a little off-guard when a filmmaker actually finds my website, but I’m always into the exchange of ideas.

By the way, do you mind if I put your note on the site? I’d like to have your comments up there.

–Mark

JOE (4/4/05)

Hey Mark,

Thank you so much for the thoughtful response. Before I forget, please feel free to put my comments on your site. Anything that might create a discussion is good.

As for the film, I’m glad that my email has not made you change your mind about the film. That would mean that you didn’t believe what you wrote in the first place. As I hope I conveyed in my first email, it does not bother me at all that you didn’t like the film. I have developed pretty tough skin when it comes to things like that. I just felt that you were sending mixed messages about the things you wanted vs. the things you were actually ready to deal with. Your email clears that up. I love your examples of the contradictions in your life. I think we are all guilty of quite a few.

We did not want our film to make people uncomfortable. We are realistic enough to know that it WILL make some people uncomfortable, but the intention was never to shock or arouse. A guy jerking off in a shower is something that happens all over the world at all times of day, yet we hardly ever see it in films. It is very private, and I think I agree with you that cavemen probably turned away, but sometimes I think it’s good to take a nice long look at something we’re not used to seeing, if only to analyze how we individually feel about it. The masturbation scene in the film gives us a glimpse into Patrick’s head in a way that I didn’t think anything else could. He’s turned on by the haircut that Laura gave him, and the intimacy of it, but his sexual thoughts still return to Ellen, who he can’t get out of his head.

Uncomfortable? Perhaps. Realistic and telling of the character? Definitely. And in the end, the story won out over the concern for the viewer, for better or for worse in some cases.

But it’s not the masturbation scene that was make or break for you. Obviously you had other issues with the film, and there’s no point dwelling on that one scene as the whole focus of the film. Nothing that we showed exists outside of daily life. There is no superficial action, no random violence, no mistaken identities, and yet our film will naturally stand out as an outsider to our national cinema. I think there is something very wrong with the way we represent ourselves when this is the case. You seem to agree, so even though you didn’t like the film, I’m glad we are on the same page.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to see the film, to write a review, and to write me back. The whole reason that I make films, and I must assume that the reason you go see films like mine at a festival, is to try and explore the world in a way that it isn’t being explored, and to hopefully discover a lot along the way. I think a discussion should exist between the filmmaker and the viewer, and I’m glad that the internet facilitates that in a lot of ways. Hopefully my next film will do something for you that this one didn’t, but at the very least, I hope you will take another chance and come see it.

Best,

Joe