Chaz Ebert and Steve James Talk Ebert And Life Itself

Twenty years ago, Steve James released his second feature length documentary,Hoop Dreams.

Now, James is releasing his latest documentary, one about the life and times of Roger Ebert.

So, how is it to make his documentary 20 years later?

Steve James:Well, it was an amazing, fortuitous thing that it should happen.

Theyre huge documentary fans in general and they just thought this would make a great basis for a documentary.

As it turns out, they werent alone.

There were several people that came to a similar conclusion and approached Chaz and Roger about that.

Was that sort of Rogers intention with writing the book?

Because he wrote ostensibly about his situation with his cancer.

So, was that sort of therapy for him to be able to write about these things?

Otherwise, he said when he was in that space, he didnt feel like he was sick.

So, he didnt want to write about only illness.

When he was a young man, he said that he was going to be a newspaperman.

Check, he did that.

He wanted to be on the Op-ed page.

So, I think that creative sensibility informed his life and informed his writing in really profound ways.

Did Roger and yourself have any requests or reservations about making a documentary on his life?

How did you feel when you were approached about making this documentary?

CE:Yes of course, in the beginning, we had a few reservations about it.

I did think it was important to have a movie about Roger and what he contributed to the world.

His writing did shape some filmmakers.

I thought it was important to have that.

Plus, I thought his writing was so beautiful.

Its so clear, but its also so humanistic, and he wasnt afraid to let his emotions show.

He didnt pretend to be just completely objective.

He says, A man goes to the movie, and I am that man.

How did it affect me, and how did I feel when I was there?

So, I thought it was important to show this for generations and even for now.

Butwere not reality TV people.

So no, we did not cherish the idea of having cameras follow us around.

We had to think long and hard about it.

Did Roger see any of the footage or ask to see any of the footage?

CE:And it brightened his day.

Its always about the person, not about, you know.

SJ:It is as long as you understand what I mean by that.

Theyre not in the editing room with me.

Were not sitting down, and Im saying, Okay, Im thinking about cutting from here to here.

Its not that kind of collaboration.

CE:Do I get a co-directors credit on this film?

[Laughs]

SJ:Let me be clear!

So, I did all of that with both Roger and Chaz.

So yes, in that way, I do think of them as a collaborative undertaking.

But I did not ask them to make the film for me.

In the film, you had Roger reading excerpts from his book.

CE:…Actually that was a voice actor named Stephen Stanton who read in the movie.

If he can nail that, I think we can do it.

So, we arranged a session in the studio, and he said it.

When he said it, it was like everyone in the room said thats it!

Was it his natural voice?

CE:No, no, this is not his natural voice.

SJ:Hes a really good actor.

And he can do a lot of other voices too, and its not impersonating.

He really takes it seriously.

SJ:If you google him and go to his website, youll see he can do Morgan Freeman.

Its astounding what he can do.

But hes not an impersonator in the way of Rich Little.

Hes not a comedian impersonator; hes an actor.

And theres a big difference.

Chaz discovered him; we were looking for someone who could sound like Roger, but not mimic Roger.

And when they found him, we were like well, we might as well just go for it.

Because its Rogers words, and we wanted to channel Roger through it.

So, let it be Roger.

And just to understand, it can pass over you, but were not trying to hide it.

Early on in the movie, he says in Rogers voice, When I lost my ability to speak.

And I think thats a tribute to Steve as a filmmaker, and its a tribute to Stephen Stanton.

Also, let me tell you how important we thought the voice was.

I think the voice is so much a part of what makes us who we are.

It was devastating for Roger.

Would Roger get depressed after he saw a film from a filmmaker he really admired that disappointed him?

CE:Yeah, he does.

There some films that reallypunched him in the gut.

And so, when someone disappoints him, of course, he talks about that too.

Hes a professional film critic.

Hes just not a fan.

So, he wrote about it.

I mean, it was hailed almost instantly like a masterpiece, right?

And Roger was this very important dissenting voice and not because he didnt admire the filmmaking.

He had a moral problem that he perceived with the film.

It wasnt like he had to go wait, what was that aboutBlue Velvet?

CE:He also had a lot of respect for David Lynch as a filmmaker.

He does all these things with consciousness and yoga.

All these things you wouldnt know about from just watching the typical David Lynch film.

So, he took it seriously.

Youre talking about life, itself, and so, its going to mean something.

That what we put out there in the world actually means something.

SJ:We went to them.

And it was first and foremost from reading the memoir.

There were certain filmmakers that Roger devoted chapters to like Herzog and Scorsese.

Ramin Bahrani pops up in several places, and what Rogers relationship to him was is interesting.

And so, I was interested in exploring that.

I mean, you [Chaz] know better than I.

And Greg Navas name came up.

He just loved talking to them, because they loved talking about film.

Quentin Tarantino should be on that list, because they had many conversations over the years.

CE:Because we thought if we were going to do it, then why not?

If youre not going to be candid and transparent, and allow full access, its not worth doing.

What is the heart and soul.

Not the ones that are puff pieces or the ones that are just glossed over filmmaking.

So, he thought, If were going to do it, lets do it.

Lets make a film that I would want to see!

He said, I dont want Steve to make a film that I wouldnt want to see.

SJ:I think he had underlining his whole career was he was a serious journalist.

I think we sometimes tend to think of film critics as not really journalists.

And I think the best of them are, and Roger is a perfect example.

Like the promo of [Roger and Gene] bickering?

SJ:Well, the promo is actually something thats been on the internet for a while.

Somebody who worked on the show posted them years ago.

He not only looked at the tapes of the shows, he went beyond.

Im going to see if I can get him to confess [Laughs].

Because I bet he has a lot of great stuff that we havent seen.

SJ:Now, I dont want to see it.

[Laughs] No, no, I think I would want to see them.

Theres a lot going on there.

I was wondering if there was any sort of that bickering at home?

CE:The answer isyes[Laughs].

Im sorry that we bumped heads about this.

But he loved it.

He loved it when we disagreed on a movie.

And yeah, he did encourage our grandchildren.

He would say, You dont have to agree with what everybody says.

Just tell me what you felt about the movie.

How did it affectyou?

SJ:Theres one you famously disagreed on.

CE:A Clockwork Orange.

Because he did not like it.

This is Rogers girlfriend Im meeting.

What does she like?

Do you know that Roger didnt likeA Clockwork Orange.

[Laughs]

That was his first statement to me, and I didnt know!

I said, What?!

because Roger hadnt told me.

SJ:Score one for Gene.

We ended up having it in our film festival.

For years, he kept saying, I want to showJoe Versus the Volcano.

And I said, Uh, I dont think thats good enough for Ebertfest.

And finally, he said, Okay, lets sit down.

I said, Yeah, it does belong.

It belongs at Ebertfest.

I was wondering what response you got from Gene Siskels wife to the film and its portrayal of Gene?

SJ:Good question.

And the response was heartening.

She had never been in a movie; she had never been interviewed about any of this.

She always refused any inquiries to be interviewed about Gene, their life, any of this.

And for me thats one of the most important revelations, if you will, in the film.

CE:And Marlene and I are working on projects together.

We say that we are the new Siskel and Ebert.

For me, Roger was the more elegant of the two.

So, the audience erupts in laughter at that, because Chaz got her little [jab] in.

And then they just erupted again.

I just thought that was so perfect, because they both channeled their men at that moment.

Life Itselfis now playing in select cities and is available on VOD.

Like us onFacebookand follow us onTwitterfor all news updates related to the world of geek.

AndGoogle+, if thats your thing!