Entering the 2009 awards season (which begins in late August/early September with the triumvirate of the Telluride, Venice and Toronto Film Festivals), I'm pretty sure no one had Oren Moverman's THE MESSENGER as even a dark horse candidate for Oscar consideration. But here we are in late February still talking about this small, sensitively written, and beautifully played drama about two U.S. Army officers (Ben Foster and Woody Harrelson) tasked with notifying parents and spouses that their loved ones have perished in combat. Harrelson's performance as Captain Tony Stone - an experienced death notification officer who does his job by the book, with as little emotional engagement as possible - has deservedly earned him a Best Supporting Actor nomination, but the real surprise is Moverman and co-writer Alessandro Camon scoring a Best Original Screenplay nod for a movie that, six months ago, no one was really anticipating.

Moverman has been around for a while as a screenwriter (in fact, he should've been nominated three years ago for I'M NOT THERE), while Camon has mostly made his name as a producer on films as diverse as THE COOLER, NEVER DIE ALONE and THE BAD LIEUTENANT: PORT OF CALL NEW ORLEANS. THE MESSENGER is their first screenwriting collaboration, and it sounds like they're eager to re-team on an as-yet-unnamed project somewhere down the line. Before that happens, Moverman will likely write and direct the Kurt Cobain biopic HEAVER THAN HEAVEN, while Camon's next picture as an executive producer will be Oliver Stone's WALL STREET: MONEY NEVER SLEEPS.

Though their careers are heating up as a result of THE MESSENGER, they're eager to remind moviegoers that their apolitical examination of the human toll of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is still in theaters, and is continuing to leave an indelible mark on soldiers and civilians alike. Moverman and Camon are understandably proud of their work. This is a movie that stays with you.

I conducted a phone interview with the duo Wednesday morning, and found them both incredibly eloquent with regards to the independent filmmaking process. Enjoy!



Mr. Beaks: How did you two come together as writing partners?

Alessandro Camon: I produced a film a few years ago called NEVER DIE ALONE. It starred DMX and was directed by Ernest Dickerson. The movie is based on a novel by Donald Goines, who is much beloved in the rap world. It was a good experience for me. I really liked working with DMX and Ernest, so at some point we started talking about doing something else. They brought up another Donald Goines called DADDY COOL - which I think is his best novel. We tried to get that going, and it turned out there was a script already based on DADDY COOL by Mr. Moverman. So I got a hold of the script, which I thought was fantastic, and we tried to make the movie. It didn't come together, but in the meantime, I got to work with Oren and read some more of his stuff. And it just felt like a good meeting of the minds.

So one day, a few years later, we were talking about the war in Iraq. It was a very general conversation, but I had this notion of death notification officers as a way to talk about the war, and maybe to make a movie about the war the could open up a whole new perspective. So we started riffing on that idea, and we both got inspired. It just felt to us that that the war was very well documented in certain ways. It was very well photographed. There were a lot of images of war that we had never seen before... from firefights to executions to beheadings - any number of things. We were seeing a lot of things, but at the same time there was this huge blind spot - which was the coffins and the funerals. This stuff was pretty much invisible. So we thought, "Okay, let's explore that. Let's look at the invisible story of the war."

Beaks: How did you research this particular subject?

Oren Moverman: In the screenwriting stage, we spoke with a couple of notification officers. But we were very careful not to over-research it. We did the research that was necessary for writing the script and imagining these situations. Obviously, there was a lot of stuff we could do online: we found the manual online, read soldiers' blogs and personal accounts. Those were the basic building blocks that came out of the research. As we got closer and closer to production, we started getting to know more of that world through the support of the U.S. Army - who had read the script and decided to give us their full support, including a technical advisor on set. They gave us access to military bases, to soldiers, to Walter Reed Medical Center - where we went to visit and talk to soldiers that were wounded. We went to Arlington Cemetery and the casualty center at Arlington, and that part of it helped us refine the technical aspects and some creative things in the script. It was really just understanding the world of the U.S. Army at the moment, and translating that to this particular story.

Beaks: Were you taken aback when you got full cooperation from the U.S. military? I honestly don't know if there have been many films about this war that have received that cooperation.

Moverman: I think there were a few, but I think we were surprised because we thought it would be a very difficult subject for the Army to deal with. Even bringing it down to an emotional level: the casualties, the cost of the war in human terms, is a tough thing to deal with. But we were very pleased that they saw the way we were trying to honor the soldiers and military families, and not do an agenda-driven movie but really explore the human side of the story. I think that they were quite proud to share the story of how men and women killed in action are honored in this tradition. Now you can argue whether it's the best way to do it, but as far as the Army is concerned, I know they keep refining the process; they keep trying to make it the best they can under these conditions. But the tradition started with Vietnam, and that's something they hold dear to the process of war.

Beaks: Films that are set on the homefront... that's a very particular way of telling a war story. I think the best examples of this genre are THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES or COMING HOME. Did you look to those film for inspiration in writing the screenplay and in the making of the film?

Camon: I don't think we actually sat down and watched those movies together. We had seen them in the past, so they were in the back of our mind as a general reference. We were not trying to model the film after any other film, but I guess that films of the '70s in particular were a general inspiration. Maybe that's one of the reasons why the film seems to resonate very well with Vietnam veterans. We've noticed that dynamic in screenings.

Beaks: With this being a smaller indie film, obviously the performances are going to carry this film, so the casting must be crucially important. Did you get pretty much who you wanted, or was it trickier than that?

Moverman: Everyone responded very strongly to the script. We met with a lot of actors, people who were interested in playing the leads of the movie. It ultimately came down to the people we thought were right for the part. It was one of those fortunate situations where the film was so... I guess the term is "actor-friendly", but it's really "performance-driven". It's not a film that has a lot of bells and whistles on it; it's not about aesthetics and camerawork - although those things are carefully calculated into the film. This is a film that's carried by performances, and I think actors recognized that. We really had quite a few choices, and were very lucky that way.

Beaks: Did you leave open much space on the set for discovery, or did you stick pretty closely to the script and your shot list?

Moverman: Everything was shot-listed; there was a lot of preparation. One of the things we learned very early in the production was that the script was very specific; it was so fine-tuned because we'd worked with three directors before I started working on it as a director. We really went through an extensive and in-depth process with the script. We felt so confident with [the script], it really gave everyone the feeling that the characters are so well-defined that there were certain things that could happen in the moment - not necessarily in dialogue, but just ideas of how scenes work or the choreography of them. There were certain things that were definitely left for invention on set, or just being very present in these situations that were so specific in the script.

Beaks: In terms of the dynamic between Woody and Ben, was that just there or did you have to rehearse that?

Moverman: There were actually no rehearsals for this movie. But I think the moment they laid eyes on each other, they fell in love. They really became very fast friends; the chemistry between them was immediate, and it only got stronger and stronger.

Beaks: Their performances are just phenomenal. Did they require much directing?

Moverman: No, I just took three weeks off during the shoot. (Pause) I'm just trying to be funny. Obviously, I'm not going to say they didn't need directing; that would make me obsolete.

Beaks: I'm not suggesting you didn't have a job to do. It's just that there is a risk of getting in the way sometimes, and that less is more.

Moverman: I definitely believe that less is more. Again, I keep saying this, but it's only because it's absolutely true: the joy of this process was that the script, and the way it was written, was really sending everyone very clear messages as to what this movie was about, and, mostly, how the movie was more important than any individual or any particular character. Everyone who was signing on to make the script into a movie was really doing it in the service of the film. From the very beginning, when Alessandro came up with the idea and we found the producers... even though it got bigger in terms of more and more people involved, it really was a collaboration in the truest form that I've ever experienced from beginning to end. The work on set with the actors was incredibly collaborative; it was very much in the service of the film. We spent a lot of time in preparation talking - mostly talking - a lot of preparation in how we are going to make this film, who these characters are, where they come from, and what they're after. I tried to keep it as minimal as possible in terms of interfering with that kind of collaboration. Nothing ever felt like it was dictated in a kind of way where people were not on board. It was really done as a group, which I'm very proud of.

Camon: I can add one thing, which can illuminate everything that is going on with improvisation and the relationship between the actors and the whole sort of sensibility in the direction of the film. I thought Oren made a really bold and brilliant choice, which was to not only not rehearse before the film, but also to not introduce Ben and Woody to the actors who were playing family members being notified. They never saw the sets or the houses they were walking into. Every time they knocked on the door and walked through the door, they didn't know what they were going to see or what the space was going to look like. That gives the scene a real and sort of unpredictable feeling. I think it also contributed to the relationship and the level of trust between the actors; you're really forced into this situation of brutal intimacy. I think it's the best example to understand how the whole movie worked.

Beaks: In not rehearsing and working in this manner, you have to trust that you cast the film correctly. But on a small film like this you can also find yourself worrying about making days. Were there any external pressures money-wise?

Moverman: There always are. We had twenty-eight days to shoot, which is not a lot. But we managed to get the whole film done in twenty-eight days, and that presents a whole set of pressures. You said the word that was really key to everything, which was "trust". The same trust that Alessandro and I had in each other in writing the script was transferred over the trust we had in the producers to the trust we had in the actors to the trust we had in the crew to what people contribute. It was not just running a well-oiled machine, but also trying to find something that is organic and alive and stimulating as a creative process. When you have all those things, these other [pressures] are present, but you are much stronger in handling them. It was really, shockingly, a pretty smooth process.

Beaks: Once you were finished with the film, and it was being screened at festivals, regardless of how it was received, were you proud of it?

Moverman: It really was a feeling that we did the best film we could make under the circumstances. We had hopes that it would resonate with people, and that they would connect with it, but we felt either way that it was a film we were really proud of.

Camon: I agree. it's the film we wanted to make. When we see it with an audience, which has been many times by now, it is rewarding. It does touch the audience. We've seen it with soldiers a number of times. The first time we screened it for soldiers [at the Sarasota Film Festival], there were 400 of them, many came in uniform, and many were Iraq or Afghanistan veterans. It was a big deal for us; we really wanted them to like the film. The reaction at the end was really just moving and rewarding.

Beaks: Are you two planning to collaborate in the future?

Moverman: Absolutely. I think we always hope to have at least one project going together.

Camon: There is one thing that we're talking about, but it's way too early to elaborate on it. It's been not only fruitful, but a very happy experience for us. It's been a peculiar one because I live in Los Angeles and Oren lives in New York, so we did most of our work long distance. That's not something that works for everybody, but it works for us. And I think we're going to do it again in the future.

Beaks: Oren, I know it's early days on the Kurt Cobain project, but could you speak to the weight of expectations of doing the first true Kurt Cobain biopic, and what your vision for the film might be.

Moverman: I'm not aware of any expectaitons. What are you talking about. (Beaks laughs) You know, it's way early. This thing is still in negotiations. I think it was leaked or publicized prematurely. Hopefully, it will happen. I'm only half-joking about the expectations part, but only half: I'm aware of it, but it's something that you can't let get in the way of trying to make a good human film about something. The expectations will vary from one person to another; it'll be like that on every movie. People had expectations about THE MESSENGER, that it was going to be a downer or that it wasn't going to get any attention because of the subject matter. Expectations are not going to dictate what you do. You just do your best.