Job Hunt Update!

Hey all!

So after two weeks of job hunting, with no end in sight, I was beginning to get a bit worried. It's one thing not to achieve your dream of becoming a successful filmmaker someday (which may very well happen, but that's many years down the road). It's quite another to not achieve a simple living with the degree you got from school.

Luckily I had two interviews last week, and another one tomorrow, which was a nice boost to my overall confidence level.

One interview was absolutely awful. I was interviewing to be a receptionist at a talent agency (hey, if they call, you might as well come down). I got lost on my way there, so I was already very late and nervous. I walk in, and the interviewer never asks me about myself, or even really telling me about what the job entails. All she says is, "This job is hard. It's hard. It's really, REALLY hard."
I'm like, "No shit. Now what do I DO at this job?" (not those specific words, but you get the idea).
The job, it turns out, represented everything I can't stand about Hollywood. "We find talent. We know what it is. We shape it. We groom it." Seeing as the place generally tended to work with little kid actors, I assume this only means they spoil them silly.
This sort of stuff reminded me of a scene in a fun movie starring Bruce Willis, called "The Kid." In the movie, Bruce Willis' character is an image consultant. When Willis meets his former eight-year old self, the kid is confused about what Willis' job actually entails. Eventually the kid figures it out, saying, "You help people lie about who they really are."
I get the feeling that's what this so-called talent agency does too.
So, the interview went as well as it could have. But if I somehow fooled them into thinking I was right for the job, and they do ask me up for a follow-up interview, I'm not taking it. I am putting my foot down on certain things; I am willing to work for low pay. I am willing to work jobs below my skill level for a time. But I am NOT willing to work at a job that makes Hollywood a WORSE place than it already is (this is why I won't work in porn...you heard it here first!).
I just have a hard time understanding people who behave like this lady who interviewed me. She seemed to think she was empress on a mountain, but frankly, she was working at one of countless talent agencies, whose only client I recognized was Dakota Fanning. Despite what you think, you aren't Queen of the Universe, lady. And I'm not going to beg on my hands and knees for a worthless full-time job that won't even pay rent in Los Angeles, when I could do a similar job for higher pay, with people I enjoy spending time with, in Santa Barbara.
To some degree, I've noticed that people in Hollywood who actually ARE really powerful are often much more helpful and laid back than those who think they wield a lot of power, but actually don't. Sure, Hollywood is full of powerful douches--the Tom Cruise producer in "Tropic Thunder" isn't that far off in some cases--but often people who have staying power are those who know how to handle their authority with grace.
Or maybe that's just my wishful thinking...

Anyway, the second interview, at a movie trailer company, was AWESOME. I would love to work there for a period of time if I could. Everyone there was super-chill, friendly, and just COOL, and the work they were doing was exactly the kind of stuff I sometimes do in my free time. I was my natural, relaxed self, and the whole process went smoothly. I really hope they call me back!
I have another interview at a post-production company that does sound and editing for some pretty big movies, and they were very nice over the phone. So hopefully that will go well. Have no fear, folks...sooner or later I'm going to be back in LA. I can feel it.

Anyway, while in LA I saw "Burn After Reading" with a few buddies, so here's my review...

I thought "Burn After Reading" felt like Coen Brothers lite. All the Coen elements are there: A crime? Check. Convoluted plot? Check. Great dialogue? Mostly. Wacky characters? Uber-check!
But I felt this was one of the weaker entries in their repertoire. And not because they are fresh off of their "No Country" Oscar either. Frankly, while I thought "No Country" was good, it wasn't a "Coen brother" movie to me. For me the Coens are all about crazy madcap comedies such as "Raising Arizona" and "Oh Brother Where Art Thou?". When they get serious, I'm always a tad bored. I'll admit, I didn't even like "Fargo" that much.
"Burn After Reading" seemed to promise to be another ridiculous comedy, a la "The Big Lebowski," but alas, it is not. Much about it is funny, sure. But there's something else a little more pained and sinister going on. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it threw me for a loop when I was preparing to laugh my ass off.
As is typical with the Coens, there are plenty of brilliant performances. Frances McDormand is fantastic, and is in some ways the "glue" that holds the movie together. George Clooney is on one hell of a roll throughout the film, as is Brad Pitt, who is sadly underused. Without giving anything away, let's just say the movie loses steam about halfway through, following a scene between Pitt and Clooney. And my personal favorite stand-out performance is from Richard Jenkins, as the sad lovestruck manager of the gym where Brad Pitt and Frances McDormand work. Every time he looked at McDormand with his puppy dog eyes, I couldn't stop giggling. It's quite shocking and sad what happens to him, as he is the only selfless character in the entire film.
However, much about "Burn After Reading" does not seem to fit together. I thought the movie could have easily been longer and funnier, but it ends rather abruptly. And, nothing really seems to HAPPEN over the course of the movie. A joke about the film is that the "plot" is literally based around nothing happening.
This was actually a complaint I had about another Coen movie, "The Big Lebowski." When I first saw "Lebowski" I didn't quite get it. At the end of the film, nothing had really happened and none of the characters had really seemed to go anywhere (save Donny, who died...poor guy). Yet upon repeat viewings I have become endeared to "The Big Lebowski," and I would rank it among my favorite of their films.
However I'm pretty sure that one thing that makes "The Big Lebowski" work better than "Burn After Reading" was the impeccable dialogue. It's hard to find any movie written with as much hilarious precision regarding words uttered by the characters. But I just don't think "Burn After Reading" was up to the same task. In many ways it felt like a watered-down version of "Lebowski." The same ingredients were there, but they did not pack the same punch. It was Prestige vodka vs. Absolut (for your White Russian!).
On the other hand it's possible that down the road I'll feel the same way about "Burn After Reading" that I did about "Lebowski," and I'll come to love and recite lines from it, and have strange urges to watch it at 2 am. But as of right now, I don't think it has the same staying power.