Indie Master John Sayles Discues Genre And His Latest, Go For Sisters

John Sayles is as much a godfather of contemporary American indie cinema as John Cassavetes. His latest film, Go For Sisters, cleverly blends a character study with genre elements.

One of the pioneers of American independent cinema, John Sayles is a fascinating figure to reflect upon - as well as to refer to, as the industry barrels forward with innovations coming at a breathtaking pace. Famously financing his own films (at times) with the proceeds from his for-hire Hollywood script doctoring gigs, Sayles has turned out some of the most seminal indies of the modern era (Lone Star, Passion Fish) without ever conceding to industry pressures or demands.

His latest film, Go For Sisters, is no exception. Working cleverly within the buddy road movie genre (with plenty of detective story thrown in, for good measure), Go For Sisters finds Sayles exploiting the commercial and entertaining aspects of established Hollywood genres toward his own ends, enabling him to capture the audiences attention so that he may take them deep into a much more nuanced and intimate story. Go For Sisters is ostensibly a mystery about two old friends, Bernice (LisaGay Hamilton) and Fontayne (Yolanda Ross), who enlist the help of an ex-cop (Edward James Olmos) to go down to Mexico with them so that he may help them find Bernices kidnapped son.

While the film works as a mystery, probing the criminal element of various Mexican locales with patient observation, its ultimately a character study about Bernice and Fontayne, two old friends who had lost touch over the years, only to be reunited by the fact that Fontayne, a recent parolee, has been given Bernice as her parole officer.

The films interplay between genre elements and elements more indicative of a quiet indie drama makes for fascinating viewing, and showcases Sayless mastery of quite varied forms of storytelling, disparate forms he carefully unites into a cohesive whole. I spoke with Sayles recently about the film.

Tribeca: I think titles get discussed all too infrequently, and I really enjoyed the title of this film. What do you think makes for a good title?

John Sayles: Every once in a while you get lucky and you get a great title, one thats kind of iconic. I think Sex, Lies and Videotape - I mean, people wanted to see that movie knowing nothing about it, its a great title. I think Lone Star is a great title. Go For Sisters is a phrase that, when I was a kid, people were so tight that you said they could go for sisters or go for brothers. Its actually not a great title in some ways, because when people hear it for the first time, sometimes they ask, "So are they sisters who are gofers?" Aurally, it doesnt always break down to make sense, but once you know the movie, it makes total sense.

Ive two or three times made movies where we didnt have a title while we were making the movie - Passion Fish, Brother From Another Planet - and I actually had a contest, in the case of Passion Fish, for what the title of the film should be among the crew and cast. Titles are tough. All through this film I was trying to think of a better title, but I never did. I like the title, but its not iconic.

You always have to be aware of what people are expecting, and then you can either subvert it or satisfy it, and move on to the next thing.

Tribeca: You mention that some people might be confused when they hear the title at first, and it makes me think about something peripherally related - your storytelling is one where theres a lot of respect for the audience, you dont beat the audience over the head with what everything means, directly. How do you approach dealing with the audience?

John Sayles: Well, some of it is using genre rather than totally surrendering to genre. If youre making a pure genre film you really have to surrender to all its rules and give the payoff when its expected, but if youre using genre you can play with the structure and explore something thats more experiential than plot-driven. There is a plot in Go For Sisters and its important, but its really about three people looking for redemption. Its a psychological and spiritual journey as much as a physical journey. But it is a road movie about getting someone out of a tough situation, so thats the genre aspect.

Certainly, Lone Star has some genre elements to it, some familiar Western elements. Matewan is structured very much like a Western, even though its a labor film. You just dont want it to be the kind of corporate genre experience where everyone knows where its leading, and its all about the special effects, or seeing an actor whos hot at the moment doing that weve seen many times before.

Tribeca: Here, you use genre as a way in to the audiences mind - its like genre is your way in to get us hooked, but its really just the frame upon which the real story is hung.

John Sayles: I think its important to have structure. Even the best of the Marx brothers movies had some kind of structure - it was important for them to have structure so they could be anarchic, so they could have something to be anarchic against. Some of it is about having a decent structure that moves you forward, so you know what happens next, either emotionally or in plot terms. Once that is in place, then you really think about, whats the character arc? How many characters can we handle? A certain amount of it is the way I use music.

Ive worked with Mason Dering on seventeen of my eighteen features, and one thing he does is, he makes suggestive music, but not music that tells you how to feel. Its there to bring the acting out, not cover over the acting. Thats something that people who only see mainstream movies are a little unsettled by - the lack of music, or the way music is used. Its experiential. So much of acting, of storytelling, is about decisions the characters make - is there a right thing to do?

Something that I think

LINK:	http://tribecafilm.com/features/indie-master-john-sayles-go-for-sister...
	See more stories from tribecafilm

Most recent headlines