
EXCLUSIVE: If a film festival not only rejects your film but publicly declares there is “an ugliness and a deadness to it,” and it’s not about zombies, well them’s fighting words. After all, filmmakers submit to festivals dreaming of raves, publicity and distribution deals. Paul Schrader‘s latest film The Canyons is not a zombie film, and he is more than a little pissed that an unnamed SXSW “insider” trashed the Lindsay Lohan-starrer to Hollywood Reporter, which attributed the rejection to “quality issues.”
So forgive the heralded Taxi Driver scribe if he goes a little Travis Bickle on SXSW and its director, Janet Pierson.
“This was outrageous,” Schrader tells me. “Confidentiality is sacrosanct in the festival submission process and this was amateur hour. I’ve been around it a long time and you cannot get responsible people to even say they saw the film, if it isn’t in the festival. We received a private apology, but I didn’t get a public one. The first excuse that came from Janet Pierson was really lame, basically saying, we didn’t do it. It was Nixonian in nature. In the second go-around, she said, well, it was done, but it will never happen again. The irony is, it came in an article about the SXSW schedule, and the headline is about the film that isn’t in the festival.”
I reached out to Pierson, who’s ramping up her festival, but took a moment to give Schrader the apology he was seeking. “This was a total mistake,” she said. “When films are submitted here, it’s a safe place and there’s a real cone of silence. This was a terrible mistake on our part, we feel terrible about it, we apologized to the filmmakers. It should never have happened, it never happened before, and we don’t expect it to ever happen again.” The insider who bashed the film has been disciplined for the breach, Pierson said.
For The Canyons, this is just the latest stop in a long tour of media madness. Schrader’s film stars Lohan and James Deen, the latter an actor whose resume includes such recent credits as Wet Tits, Gangbanged 5 and Anal Plungers. The tagline is youth, glamor, sex and Los Angeles, circa 2012 and the film was scripted by a controversial writer who for the purposes of Deadline, I’ll list under the nom de guerre Vol d’Emort. Then there were three phony trailers Schrader made and released on the web. “One is a 60s exploitation film, one a 50s black and white melodrama, and the third is a 30s comedy, and they are all bogus,” Schrader said. “That was my idea. People were trying to get images of the movie, I didn’t want to set the characterization of the movie in stone, so I figured, lets make some false trailers, and keep them guessing. The first one got a million hits.”
We brought a lot of this on ourselves,” Schrader acknowledges. “We are provocateurs, James is an adult star, and Lindsay is a media magnet. We didn’t go into this blindly.” He said the fest thrashing hasn’t hurt distributor appetite for the film, noting that three are bidding and another is expected to. With the names and the nudity that Steven Soderbergh promised in a recent internet boast, this seems like the kind of multi-platform title that makes those distributors lustful. “Some of them say, I wish you hadn’t done all this stuff, but on the other hand it has gotten us to the place where they can exploit this.”
It certainly is media catnip; I can’t recall writing this many words about a movie that cost less than $100,000 to make. Schrader said even he underestimated the media frenzy surrounding a leading lady, who, he acknowledges, was high maintenance, not unlike a lot of film actors. He adds that despite any drama, they finished on time and on schedule. But while Lohan a few years ago was a breakout young star commanding $7 million a picture, her oddball parents and appearance in more courtrooms than films lately has now made everything she touches a media maelstrom.
“It all has to do with the head-spinning effect of Lindsay on traditionally sober media,” Schrader says. “When confronted with the gale force winds of Lindsay Lohan, people just can’t resist the impulse.” He mentioned a recent New York Times article (which also was unkind to his movie). “It’s that Amy Winehouse, Whitney Houston, Chris Brown thing. They just can’t stop themselves from unloading and judging. It’s a terrible fishbowl existence for Lindsay, even if she is responsible for a good part of it,” Schrader says.
The hope is that moviegoers will be as interested in Lohan as media vultures like me. Not that Schrader, producer Braxton Pope and their partners need a blockbuster to make money here.
“We have $90,000 in this film,” he says. “We have $170,000 from Kickstarter, which we don’t have to pay back, and about $200,000 in deferments. Lindsay, Braxton, Bret and I each own a quarter of this, and Lindsay was essentially an equity partner. We’re showing the film to distributors, we have multiple offers, and before too long we’ll have a distribution plan and we’ll be out of the DIY business.”
Schrader now thinks that snubs from SXSW and Sundance (which he said also rejected The Canyons) might well be the best thing to have happened for the movie. “I think if we had taken a more humble profile, we’d probably be in these festivals, but it turns out it was a good thing we weren’t at Sundance,” he tells me. “There would have been this huge blow back of publicity and we wouldn’t have been able to monetize it for four months. What we came to realize is that people go to Sundance to get a profile, and we already had a profile. What we want to do is capitalize on that, and not blow it by showing the film and then not be able to take advantage.
“Take this year’s Sundance, for example,” he says. “Over 10,000 films were submitted, and maybe you’ll hear of six or seven of them, and maybe three or four will make money. As soon as we make our distribution deal, we’ll already be in profit.”
Despite that, he’s still pissed at SXSW. “In this new media world, you have to feed the media monster,” Schrader acknowledges. “When you sow the wind, and you have to, you reap the whirlwind. If you don’t sow the wind, how do you get your head up above the 10,000 other films just like yours that are being made right now? The result is you risk a very lively whirlwind coming back at you. But when it comes from a festival like this, that is appalling, a real shocker.”
WME Global is selling the movie.


It is rude of the organizers to do that; this is the guy behind Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Affliction, and Bringing out the Dead; give the guy a break at least.
The issue is not whether the festival took the film or not, it’s not even that a filmmaker who has given us so much fine work over the past 40 years was so rudely dissed. The issue is exactly what Paul Schrader himself expressed: SXSW broke sacrosanct trust between filmmaker and festival. It is unheard of and unconscionable that a ‘festival insider’ should be bad-mouthing a filmmaker’s work, discounting the films merits and the reasons therefore for its rejection — ever — to anyone, even his own mother. But in this case, the ‘insider’ went to the PRESS, and even worse — before the festival’s slate had even been announced. Like Schrader, I have never seen that happen in all my years submitting work to festivals. Can you imagine if Sundance or Cannes insiders were flapping their lips to the press about films they don’t like, and eager to get the word out before the slate is even announced? Well of course you can’t — cause it has never, and would never, happen. And what was the point of it anyway — it wasn’t a review where the filmmaker or a buyer can get the benefit of reading a point of view, it was a flippant trashing of a film that hasn’t seen the light of day yet — why would you do that? At least the insider should have had the balls to give his or her name to the press. But that would have been too classy.
Agree 100%. I was in the Independent Film Division of William Morris for several years and I’ve never heard of this happening either. Whether you’re Paul Schrader, Allison Anders or Joe Schmo, getting an independent film made is VERY, VERY hard work and no one deserves to have their hard work trashed in this manner — especially by the very people who are expected to hold discretion and confidentiality in the highest regard.
Schrader is a living legend. The whole point of festivals like SXSW is to showcase new talent, or provide auteurs with a platform that they might be lacking in today’s industry.
The fact that SXSW doesn’t have the balls to show THE CANYONS speaks volumes to their integrity and provincialism. The Cannes Film Festival is known for showing films by directors like Wim Wenders, Abbas Kiarostami or Takeshi Miike who would otherwise be forgotten and languishing on their past glories.
Schrader is an American filmmaker. SXSW is an American festival. They should be honored to have him there.
REGARDLESS of the quality of the film. Which I bet is questionable. But so what?! Cannes has shown small, weird little movies by great directors for years. That’s the whole point. Let the audience be the judge.
Sad.
Maybe SXSW passed on The Canyons because they didn’t want the media circus that would’ve come with showing the film. It is a film festival and they are showing slightly mainstream studio films like The Evil Dead remake, but maybe the people of Austin didn’t want TMZ camera crews crowding their streets or turn their little festival into a Starfucker convention. SXSW is a music conference/A&R showcase first and formost and everything else comes second.
If they wanted to show the film at an Austin film festival, they should wait for Fantastic Fest.
“maybe the people of Austin didn’t want TMZ camera crews crowding their streets or turn their little festival into a Starfucker convention.”
Too late.
As a former Austinite, I give this comment a +10,000.
Reality check: More films are submitted to festivals than are or can be accepted.
Maybe the film really isn’t good. SXSW owes no director a showing. It’s their fest, their rules.
Start your own festival.
(The entitlement generation is destroying America.)
It’s not about that. They can turn it down, no problem. They shouldn’t go to the media giving an opinion on it though. It’s a sacred trust that when you submit a film, you’re not submitting it to be critiqued in public and the douche from SXSW who spoke out should be banned from the industry, because he’s just a big loser who has no respect for a legend like Paul Schrader.
Good or not, at least Schrader’s willing to take a chance and put his own money into his film. How dare the SXSW employee speak out about it. His name should be blacklisted all over.
“regardless of the quality of the film”
I didn’t realize festivals were in the habit of showing films they didn’t like.
They do all the time. As they should. Take even the greatest director. Not all of his/her films will be great, or even that good,
or to the programmer’s taste or whatever. They’ll often still
program those off-year films because the relationship between
the director and public is quite properly about the whole body of work.
I am sorry, but the whole film feels exploitative and the audience can see through it. By defying SXSW, the director and producers are just trying to stir publicity up for this. If you look at the resumes of the producers involved, e.g. Braxton Pope having previously done the horrendous Hirokin, what else would you expect. Lindsey needs to get her act together, but I wouldn’t spend a dime watching her.
Exploitive how exactly?
I love Lindsay and would definitely pay to see that film.
The jerk who “leaked” this was disciplined, not fired? Must be a real important jerk. He didn’t just screw over THE CANYONS, he made this festival suspect for anyone who may ever want to submit a film to it. Think twice, filmmakers. The armchair quarterbacks over there might be talking smack about you – widely privately if not publicly – if you don’t live up to their “standards.”
Disgraceful.
Just about everyone in the industry got in as someone’s favor. Perhaps the fuckup at SXSW was an important person’s favor?
So true, Roger. That person should definitely have been canned. This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the film (or lack thereof).
On the one hand I feel for Schrader because making a film is a very personal/committed process so to have it complete and be completely rejected is tough.
However, I don’t for one minute think he cast Lohan for her pure acting ability alone and did it, at least in some part, for the media fanfare that would soon follow. Caveat emptor. Be careful what you wish. etc etc etc
Had they offered a free shower to anyone after watching the film, it might have gotten into the festival.
James Deen? Is this guy by chance related to the actor James Dean from the 1950s or 1960s?
He’s absolutely not related to the James Dean of the 1950s. Not sure about the James Dean of the 1960s.
SXSW has the right the refuse any film they want to. It’s quite likely they passed on THE CANYONS simply because it wasn’t good enough (or any good at all).
That said, the fact that someone there went on record about their decision to pass on it (especially before they announced their 2013 slate) is astonishingly unprofessional, especially for a fest as good as SXSW. I’m guessing the person who did this will not last there very long.
A couple years ago my co-writer submitted six scripts to the SXSW screenwriting contest. Five of them didn’t go very far, one got to the “quarter-finals” and that was it.
My co-writer laughed, though, when he got the rejection letter(s) for the five that didn’t make it to the next round it was, basically: “We got SO MANY WONDERFUL scripts, please know that yours was very close to making it to the next round, but with such great quality…blah…blah…blah…”
But then he got the letter in regards to the script that went to the quarter finals and it was, basically: “There were SO MANY TERRIBLE scripts this year – know that your script was head and shoulders above so many bad screenplays…”
All-in-all it was a waste of money, time and energy.
I am a filmmaker from Austin and find it shameful that SXSW rejected The Canyons on grounds of Quality Issues, especially knowing some of the movies that were accepted that truly do suffer from quality issues. But don’t despair Paul, The Canyons might not get your name on a SXSW award, but it is going to get your name on a big check, which is infinitely better! Congratulations on making a commercial movie that I look forward to paying to see. I wish you and your team all the success in the world!
Am I the only one shocked by his flip attitude towards the kickstarters who overfunded this project, and how is the SEC OK with this? People basically gift fairly well-to-do filmmakers creating a product for commercial exploitation for basically nothing in return but trinkets? Very bizarre and when one of these projects hits a gusher watch the lawsuits explode, guaranteed. Also, Paul is so fabulously disingenuous he clearly absolutely LOVES this SXSW fracas.
Schrader is a fantastic screenwriter but not so impressive director. Ellis had his moment as a writer but is a flop as a screenwriter. And then there is Lindsay Lohan, no further introduction needed….. It feels like a desperate project and they were clearly courting this kind of controversy when they hired an adult actor to work with lohan in an “erotic thriller”. No one can convince me that these were the best actors available. They were simply the two people designed to give the project most publicity. Its incredibly predictable and just feels like exploitative stunt casting. As much as i respect Schraders work I feel like he made his own bed with this one so its hard to feel bad for him. He needs to back off working with desperados like Ellis and Braxton and get back to working with real talent.
“Not so impressive director”. Huh? MISHIMA: A LIFE IN FOUR CHAPTERS is arguably the finest American-produced film of the 1980′s.
PS is indeed a legendary talent and deserving of respect even now but maybe this film just stinks on all levels. It happens. He hired a porn actor as the lead and he cast LL who has tremendous talent but has not exactly been nurturing it of late so, it tends to go away. Maybe these two had zero chemistry because LL was working with a porn actor who had no idea what he was doing in front of a camera as a “character”. Pros tend to get angry when they have to babysit non-pros on set in order to get a spontaneous, real response. Sounds like PS probably should have hired a real actor in the male role, ya know, someone who understood how important connecting with the actress really is.
“(Schrader) cast LL who has tremendous talent”. How long will this nutso opinion go on? She made a couple of good movies as a kid. Big deal! She’s terrible as an adult actress. As for the film, I’ve seen clips, it’s not horrible, but pretty lackluster what with Schrader’s background. Nevertheless, the festival should have simply passed on it and STFU. Very unprofessional to dump on any movie.
Janet Pierson kicks ass and (along with her husband) knows her shit when it comes to movies. I have no doubt they kept it out of SXSW because it isn’t any good. Whoever leaked the negative comments didn’t do SXSW any favors, but Schrader is loving it… with this movie any press of good press.
Janet Pierson suffers from extreme hubris. The emphasis on forcing filmmakers into making decision on participation by bullying them into premiers or no show is one example. She does not have the filmmakers interest at heart and like her husband John not so secretly despises them. She might know movies but she her blind ambition to take on Sundance as the preeminent showcase of US indie film goes against what Austin film-goers want.
Schrader has every right to be pissed. He submitted a film for festival inclusion, not review. If SXSW thought the film was garbage, it is their right not to show it, but it is not their right to offer that opinion publicly.
They should know by now our cone of silence never works you can ask the Chief he’ll tell you it’s always breaking down. Sorry about that Chief.
Cone of silence ?
Oh God. That poor delusional director. The only reason why he hired Lohan was because he thought that his little film will get lots of free press because obviously. Somebody needs to tell him that free press is the only thing he will get from this. That infamous SNL with Lohan got big ratings because people tuned in to see how bad Lohan will be. And it wasn’t funny-bad. It was boring-bad. If she will host SNL again then no one will care.
That Liz and Dick stuff got so much attention but the ratings were ordinary. Nothing super big. And most people switched channel after 30 minutes because it was just boring. This Canyons movie looks so cheap and boring and bad that people will not watch it even if they will show it for free on Internet. They showed that clip for 3 minutes and it was impossible to watch. So slow and bad it was. How can he expect that people will want to see 1.5 hours of that?
But that silly director really believes that free press and hits on trailer on Youtube will mean that people will rush to see that movie in theatres or DVD. They won’t even rent it to see how bad Lohan will be. Because Lohan is not funny-bed. She is boringly-bad.
Too bad Schrader traded his industry cred for stunt casting and porn stars. Maybe he needs a tax write off?
Feb 6. Hello.
I love Lindsay Lohan
Lindsay is simply wonderful.
She has tremendious passion for life.
She is an amazing movie actress. A S T A R !
JOHN LONGENECKER, DGA
Director / Cinematographer
Academy Award Winner
see: Edward Lawson .com
The clip of Lohan not finding her phone in the morning is horrid. This movie looks boring and unwatchable. Obviously casting Lohan is working but lots of free press won’t make it a good movie. It’s hard to believe this is Paul Schrader.
It seems to me that the people involved in making this film…both in front and behind the camera… could not get any other work in the business. This entire enterprise smells of desperation and the delusion that they were doing something new, brave and relevant.
A sad pathetic effort they thought would revive careers that are over. However… JD will continue to have a successful career in porn…good for him.
Keeping it alive in the press will not change the fact that it is likely a very bad movie with no financial prospects.
Nice try Schrader…nobody cares.
If nobody cares, why are you commenting here?
MAYBE he should have said he was from Austin..the running joke this year about SXSW films is IF your from Austin your film get’s in..I have seen some of the films that got in a give me a film by Paul Schrader over some of the other local hacks anyday!
ha! Of course they are. Every festival does.
Creatives of a deliberately terrible movie made to bait press feign indigence at an unusually high amount of vitriol against the movie. Media, critics, and festival judges gleefully lambaste the movie, give the creatives what they wanted, and revel in the hits because everyone loves a train wreck. Circle of life, back scratching, lather, rinse, yadda, yadda.
Probably not enough mumbling in your movie Paul. I’m not saying he’s right, I wouldn’t be surprised if the film is awful, but honestly, if you’ve been to a festival lately and have any standards whatsoever, you know that festivals like this are marching toward irrelevancy with poor selection practices as it is. I can’t tell anymore if there’s just no great indie films out there being made or if it’s just an inward facing circle jerk of a selection process. Probably a little bit of both. But as someone else said, sometimes you see a friend (or even a celebrity’s!) film that didn’t get in and then you go and see what did get in… and you go, WTF?! And they piss and whine about the distribution drying up but it’s their own fault. EVERY TIME an indie is hyped nowadays, like something such as V/H/S was and you get a chance to see it, there’s ZERO craft, horrible acting, no script to speak of, and it’s bad for indie film as a whole. It drains a little more credibility from future indie films that are hyped. But I remember when it’d be something like Pi, Primer, Following, Clerks, or Swingers… movies that I can still watch and enjoy long after the sheen of the festival laurels has worn off.
Also, Janet and John Pierson are typical of festival ‘elites’ who no longer seem capable of telling a good film from a bad film. They’re trading on fame from 30+ years ago, when for about 15 years, Sundance mattered more than anything else in finding new talent. These people are WORSE than studio execs and slimy agents in that quality matters more to the execs and agents cause at least they’re looking for something that can turn a buck, which requires at least SOME level of skill and craft. Most people who’d actually like to make a living making movies have turned to short films and the internet to showcase their talent. I should add that I think this is endemic to U.S. festivals for some reason. Overseas, they’re still just looking for good movies from what I’ve seen.