During a Screenwriters Lab at the Sun Valley Film Festival, Mark Duplass was introduced to the stage by a moderator as (what Variety calls) a hyphenated individual: Writer-Director-Actor-Producer. Mark’s story begins as many filmmaker’s do—grabbing his parent’s video camera and “fooling” around with his brother, Jay. Eventually, they shot what Mark calls a “Five Dollar Short,” called This is John, and submitted to festivals. The film was well received, so the two brothers went on to make their first feature, The Puffy Chair, which premiered at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival, and the rest is history.

Or is it…

Mark Duplass exists—no, thrives—in a realm many indie filmmakers dream to be: making the movies he wants to do (often with his inner-circle of friends). People respect him for it. More importantly (though some in the indie world may disagree) he makes good money doing it. What is the secret? How does he succeed where so many fail? While luck and abilities certainly play in, the real answer is economics and Mark’s ability to make films frequently and on the cheap.

Many filmmakers who grew to fame in the 90’s have been forced to adapt to the model Mark was brought up under. There is a strong parallel between Mark and Edward Burns (The Brothers McMullen, Saving Private Ryan). Ed Burns rose as an indie writer-director-writer-producer. He had huge hits in McMullen and She’s The One. He went on to act in studio films—however, production woes forced Ed to make a jump from $3 million films to the world of $125,000 nano-budgets; the world Mark grew up in. Both—after mastering this low budget field—now produce and star in their own network TV shows.

Ed was able to adapt—realizing that if a film can be made on the cheap, but maintain its quality in story and character, there is a stronger likelihood of walking away with a few dollars in the bank and a body of work to be proud of. Afterall, if a film only earns $600,000 on iTunes, but only cost $150,000 to make, that’s about as close to a home run as you can get (as opposed to a $3 million earning $600,000 and suddenly careers are on the line).

This is by no means a new approach. It’s the Roger Corman model, and has allowed Roger to produce over 300 films in his career—with nearly every single one turning a profit. A track record that is almost unheard of in the studio/low budget realm ($1.5-$10 million), but thrives in the micro-budget world.

But in the world of nickel and dime filmmaking, the million dollar question remains: “How do I do it?”

Here are some excerpts (paraphrased and reworded) from Mark’s talk at Sun Valley. You can hear the entirety of his 50-minute talk at the bottom or listen to it here.

#1 Write. Write Anything. Just Write.

We all have that idea in our minds that is sure to be the next big thing. It’s big though, and bound to be expensive. If you are a first time filmmaker (or even a veteran), how can one possibly attain the funding and crew to bring the idea to life? After all, a wartime drama on the new frontier of Mars can’t be made for money in the piggy bank without looking like a poorly executed homage to Ed Wood.

Mark’s solution is to JUST WRITE. Just write it! Get it out and on paper. Give it life—understand what it looks like—and then put it away and write the version of the story that can be shot in your friend’s mom’s kitchen. The root of any story is character, followed closely by conflict. If you understand these two elements within your writing then the story can be produced anywhere. Make it real—make it YOU. Setting is a luxury you can work towards later, but there is a reason Shakespeare can exist anywhere: from the moors of England, to the African safari, to the halls of an American high school; it’s because the characters and conflicts are strong and timeless (and he wrote it instead of thinking about it).

#2 Practice is Cheap

It’s scary to think the words you write can only be tested when executed. Words on a page are very different from words on a screen. Mark’s advice for getting started is to find a scene from your life—something personal that you respond to—and write it. Real moments play out, and provide a means to invest yourself into the words. Write a 3 or 4-minute scene and shoot it on your phone. Show the scene to people you trust for feedback. If it sucks, it’s fine because it cost nothing to do and you are not out anything. Take your notes from the scene, rewrite for the notes, and shoot it again. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Practice will never make perfect (there’s no such thing as a perfect film), but it will always may you better. Eventually, understanding how to write for the screen (sometimes known as screenwriting) will come as second nature once you have the chance to see the words performed as often as possible.

#3 Short film or Feature?

Again, this is a matter of economics. Do you have $5 or $10,000? These were the numbers most often referenced by Mark. We live in a world of incredible technology, which truly puts the tools back into the hands of the artists. You can make a film on your phone (or a very good camera for a couple hundred bucks). The road to longevity in this field is through finding a way to stay profitable (which making money is strangely similar to not losing money). If you are going to do a short, don’t spend a lot of money on it. Use the short as an opportunity to hone your storytelling skills.

This is a very bold statement: $10,000 isn’t that hard to get. That can be covered by a credit card, or by borrowing/begging from people you know (or not buying a cup of coffee every day for 5.4 years). IF/WHEN you are able to get that 10 thousand, do a feature, because you can easily earn it back through transactional VOD outlets. A 10k feature will also showcase your abilities as a storyteller and filmmaker much more than a 10k short, plus it offers you the ability to earn it back.

#4 Get Good People

$10,000 for a feature? Really? Yes. The secret to anything—especially film—is to surround yourself with good people. Mark runs in a very tight group. He works with his brother, his wife, his friends. He works with people who believe and support him, and who also strive to do good. Having people like this onboard with you will make a $10,000 feature very do-able.

Another great solution is profit sharing. When the people you work with have a vested interest in the project, they are more willing to be working on the cheap. It is also the right thing to do. Many of Mark’s film have cost peanuts to produce and no one got rich making them; however, when the returns came in and the crew was able to share the profits they all made more than they would have had they been paid a standard wage. When this happens, they will also gladly return for the second round.

Beware of empty promises, though. There is no guarantee in this business, which is why a profit-share model can really only function within a collaborative group of friends—friends who are happy to work together even if the film never sees a dime.

#5 The Cost of Throw Pillows

Mark is a funny guy. So funny he’s a professional at it. He is also very sincere and knows drama. In his talk, Mark shares a story about working with studios. One blessing to making a film for no money is that you have more freedom. The more that is at risk, the more people will work to mitigate that risk, including requesting prettier throw pillows.

On the set of Cyrus, a studio film, costs of production were significantly higher than Mark’s earlier productions. As costs climb, producers understand their need to sell the film. Some producers believed the key to selling Cyrus would be to make it look “prettier” for the trailers. The discussion came around to the throw pillows in a scene, and producers pressured Mark to reshoot for the throw pillows. In a world (no pun intended) where a detail like throw pillows take precedence over performance and scene execution, an independent director and writer is bound to lose their cool. This is the cost of doing business with the studio and playing with other people’s money, which may be reason enough to happily put the “blockbuster in your mind” on the back-burner in favor of that $10,000 feature where throw pillows can live in the trash can.

The point, understand why you want to write and make films. Knowing this of yourself will make the journey much easier.

For filmmakers, Mark is the older brother some hope to be. He is killing it, and is very fortunate to be working under his own terms. He has come a long way and has even further left to go, but at the end of the day—and I take liberty speaking for Mark—if it meant having to bow down to throw pillows, he would still be just as happy stressing out over an answering machine greeting while his brother hits record on their parents video camera.

Mark Duplass Talks Indie Filmmaking

Charles Manson is probably the last person you’d expect a Duplass Brothers Production to feature a story around. While the title suggests that the famous cult leader (or his “family”) may be the main focal point, writer and director J. Davis simply uses him as the glue that holds together the misadventures of two out of touch brothers. And turns out this vacation is a lot more fun and less scary than it sounds.

This sibling story has a familiar setup, one that’s not far off from the Duplass brothers film Jeff, Who Lives At Home; Nick (Jay Duplass) is an uptight successful lawyer with a wife and kid, while his brother Conrad (Linas Phillips) is a long-haired, easygoing slacker. They haven’t spoken with each other since Nick’s wedding day and because Conrad has always been the black sheep of the family, he didn’t even attend their father’s funeral. Which makes it all the more surprising when Conrad decides to show up unexpectedly at Nick’s doorstep.

Nick and his wife don’t bat an eye when Conrad informs them he just quit his job and sold off of his possesses to start working for a non-profit environmental organization. It sounds exactly like what the free-spirited brother would do. Nick is more concerned that his brother has decided to give up on his dreams of becoming an artist, not that it’s much of a surprise, but it was the only thing Conrad ever stuck with until now.

While in town for just a few days, Conrad reveals his latest obsession, Charles Manson. This new craze baffles Nick, who didn’t notice his brother wearing a Manson t-shirt or carrying around a copy of “Helter Skelter.” Or that Conrad looks eerily similar to Manson with his long parted hair and full beard. Yet despite these realizations, Conrad still manages to convince his brother (with a disturbing amount of giddiness) to tour around to a bunch of Mason Family sites.

What starts as a sneaky journey into the former home of the LaBianca’s, ends in a wild goose chase from various “clues” uncovered along the way. The film works best when the two brothers are busy working on a mission. But when the action subsides between chases and the characters are forced to mingle, the dialog can feel a bit dry and unnatural.

Throughout Manson Family Vacation, Davis uses clips of old interview footage of Charles Manson for transitions between scenes. At first these seem to be shown to tie Manson into the story and to give quick background information for anyone unfamiliar with the cult leader. But as the film progresses you begin to realize just how relevant the clips are to what’s happening onscreen. For example, when Manson blames lack of parenting for how he acts, you can’t help but wonder if the same holds true for Conrad.

There are times when this feels like an early Duplass brothers film, especially considering the sibling dynamic story. After all, they are masters of the subject with films like The Puffy Chair (my personal favorite), The Do-Deca-Pentathlon, Jeff…, and more recently with their HBO show Togetherness. The film even has a Duplass look to it, filled with constant camera movements (though there are no quick zooms). However, a key missing quality is an improvised script. Manson Family Vacation may have benefited from having a loosened structure and organic dialog.

Up until the end, Manson Family Vacation plays out like a lot of other estranged brothers stories we’ve seen many times in other indie films. But Davis adds a slight twist (don’t think too hard, it’s not that difficult to predict) to make the whole thing feel fresh and entertaining. Phillips is the perfect choice for the role, especially with his unkempt look and easy to forgive personality, you find yourself rooting from him even during his sketchiest of moments. It’s nice to see the other Duplass brother spend more time in front of the camera, even if Jay doesn’t quite have the effortless quality of his brother Mark. There may be a few missteps along the way, but the fast pace of Manson Family Vacation keeps everything moving towards its satisfying conclusion.

Manson Family Vacation will be available on iTunes & Digital VOD on October 6th, 2015 and arriving to Netflix on October 27th, 2015.

In her previous film, A Teacher, writer-director Hannah Fidell examined the unconventional affair between a high-school teacher and her student. The filmmaker continues her focus on forbidden relationships in 6 Years when a long-term romance gets tested by betrayal and a new job opportunity. With an improvised script, small-name actors, and a naturalistic relationship, it’s no surprise that indie gods Mark and Jay Duplass were executive producers on the film.

It’s challenging to demonstrate years worth of chemistry, inside banter, and the subtle cadence between two people accurately on film; Fidell doesn’t seem to have that problem here. The two leads, Dan (Ben Rosenfield) and Mel (Taissa Farmiga), portray convincing soulmates who’ve grown up together since childhood and have been dating for six years. They have the kind of relationship that can sense something is wrong from just a tiny inflection in each others voice. And they can easily tell when the other has had too much to drink, regardless of how much the other tries to deny it.

As young college students tend to do, the couple takes full advantage of their freedom and lack of responsibility by spending most of their time drinking and partying with friends. One night a boozed up Mel visits Dan and tries to get frisky with him. But the mood is killed when an argument breaks out after Dan discovers she drove in this condition. A vocal argument turns physical and puts Dan in the hospital with some minor injuries (a gender role reversal in domestic disputes that’s rarely shown in films).

Dan isn’t portrayed as a saint either. Like many troubled relationships, both parties are guilty of making mistakes of their own. Over some beers one night, Dan leans over and kisses his female co-worker (Lindsay Burdge, in a somewhat reprised role from A Teacher). He realizes his mistake right away and stops before anything else happens. But the damage unfolds a few scenes later when Mel borrows his phone and finds a text message that exposes his incident.

There are a few scenes in 6 Years that feel a bit cliche. In two different parts in the film, the couple inadvertently walk in on each other in various sexual situations; Dan needs to borrow Mel’s laptop and finds she was watching porn (another refreshing gender role reversal) and Mel conveniently catches Dan sleeping with someone else. But these few melodramatic spots in the script are overshadowed by stunning performances from Rosenfield and Farmiga. Rosenfield channels his inner Mark Duplass, capturing his introverted and down-to-earth mannerisms, while Farmiga brings a lot of energy and passion to a less desirable role as the “manipulative one.”

6 Years captures what a long-term relationship feels like when it nears the breaking point. First love is a powerful beast, but its fate is often doomed from failing to accept that sometimes ending a relationship is better than trying to stick it out. Fidell illustrates this powerful realization in the final emotional scene of uncertainty. It’s heartbreaking. 6 Years distances itself from other flawed relationship narratives with its excellent acting and fresh take on gender roles.

It comes as a bit of a surprise that, with so many recent horror films aping off of different subgenres from the past, no one has really attempted to tackle the creature feature. Jacob Vaughan’s Bad Milo! sticks out from today’s oversaturated horror market simply because it harkens back to a group of films that haven’t been touched by anyone else in the last several years. Films like Ghoulies, Gremlins, and Critters show their influence throughout, but they’re only reminders of why these kinds of movies stopped getting made.

Bad Milo! has a plot that will immediately divide viewers. After opening with a flash forward to the film’s climax (a device that was already getting overused years ago), we cut back to Duncan (Ken Marino) and Sarah (Gillian Jacobs) at the doctor’s (Toby Huss, in a very funny bit part) discussing a large mass that has appeared in Duncan’s colon.

The doctor says it’s nothing to worry about, and is most likely a result of stress. It immediately becomes apparent just how stressed Duncan is once he leaves the doctor’s office. His mother (Mary Kay Place) pressures him to become a father to the point where she grills him on sexual issues over dinner; his boss (Patrick Warburton) merely uses and abuses him as much as possible, and Duncan’s strained relationship with his father (Stephen Root) dominates his life. It turns out that the lump in Duncan’s colon is the titular monster, a small creature that periodically crawls out of Duncan’s ass to devour anyone who makes his life more stressful than it already is.

Bad Milo! is backed by a surprisingly good cast given the scatological subject matter, but only a few people get enough material to shine. Peter Stormare, playing Duncan’s therapist, hits the right balance between a campy and straight-faced approach. Marino carries the film fine, even when he’s covered in feces and screaming in pain, but his talents are put to better use when he sticks to the rude, obnoxious characters he tends to play in other projects. The rest of the cast feels wasted, merely there as an obstacle for Duncan or a future victim for Milo. Jacobs, a great comedic actress, doesn’t do much other than being the doting wife.

Once Duncan realizes what’s living inside him, and starts confronting the problems in his life to avoid increasing the body count, Bad Milo! takes a sentimental turn that falls flat. There’s a playful quality to the subject matter that works sometimes (a scene where Duncan gets a colonoscopy is the film’s highlight), but asking viewers to emotionally invest in Duncan’s father issues when they’re watching an ass monster movie is asking for too much. Films with similarly gross stories, like James Gunn’s Slither, know how to hit the right notes of camp and seriousness. Bad Milo! relies too much on generating an emotional response, and fails at it.

It’s a wacky story, and it inspires a few laughs, but it’s also a one-joke premise that can barely sustain itself over such a short runtime. The casting elevates the material to the point where Bad Milo! makes for passable viewing, but don’t expect much outside of a few funny jokes and a surprisingly cute monster covered in shit.

Bad Milo! trailer:

The Duplass brothers have made quite an impact on indie cinema over the last seven years. As their budgets have increased, so have their fans. Their recent explosion in popularity with studios hindered them from taking this 4 year old project off the shelf. While they were in post-production for The Do-Deca-Pentathlon they got green-lit to make Cyrus. Then the same thing happened for Jeff, Who Lives At Home. Since these were studio opportunities The Do-Deca-Pentathlon took a back seat to these projects.

The Do-Deca-Pentathlon worked well with the things that the Duplass brothers normally get right, such as dialog and making it feel true to life alongside quirky characters that have heart. It had a more raw feeling to it which was more evident in their earlier work. Being that I am an extremely competitive person and have experienced brother rivalry firsthand, I could really relate to the film even though it shows you just how childish it can be.

Sitting in a bath tub, Mark (Steve Zissis) recalls an awful (but hilarious) prank that his older brother Jeremy (Mark Kelly) pulled on him as kids. Even though the two have not kept in touch for many years, he worries that his brother will show up at their mother’s house for his birthday party. Mark is clearly wounded from growing up with his brother, he has doctor visits to prove it. His wife Stephanie (Jennifer Lafleur) tells him not to fret as Jeremy is at a professional poker tournament.

Mark, now relieved, participates in a casual 5K fun-run with his family. But just shortly after the race begins a vehicle comes screeching towards the starting line. Sure enough, it is Jeremy. He sprints to catch up to Mark and his family and subsequently ruining Mark’s weekend. What started out as a casual run now turned into a sibling rivalry and you soon realize that Jeremy would have never passed up an opportunity to compete against is brother.

Come to find out, the two have had a long epic history of competing against one another that dates back to when they were just teenagers. As kids they came up with a pentathlon of 25 events in which the winner became the ultimate champion and the better brother. But there was no clear winner because on the final event of seeing who could hold your breath the longest underwater was interrupted by their grandfather.

So Mark’s birthday weekend now turns into a redux of the Do-Deca-Pentathlon in hopes to bring closure to which brother is really the best. The only problem is that Stephanie does not want him competing in this fierce competition because his doctors told him he needs to take it easy. Mark knows this so he and Jeremy need to form a rare alliance to hold the 25 events without this wife knowing. It was probably one of the few times that the brothers ever worked together as a team.

What follows are 25 ridiculous yet comical events that make up the Do-Deca-Pentathlon which include; Ping-Pong, shooting pool, laser tag, basketball, skee-ball, air hockey, go karting, swimming, long jump, racquetball, tennis, holding their breath the longest, and leg wrestling. It does not take Stephanie very long to catch on their “smokescreen” they put up to disguise the fact they were doing another Do-Deca. Mark must make the decision between saving his marriage or being the best brother.

The Do-Deca-Pentathlon is probably the Duplass brother’s most comical film to date. A ton of laughs were had throughout. However, it did begin the scratch the surface on some deeper relationship qualms. Such as, a son who feels like he cannot talk to his father. And also a wife who feels like she is holding her husband back from doing things he wants to do. I loved the fact that these were brought up but would have liked to have had a little more emphasis put on them. His wife seemingly gives him an ultimatum but in the next scene she forgoes her effort.

I will be honest, for a Duplass brothers film, I was not necessarily as excited to see this film as much as I was with their previous work. Also, I felt like it was not a strong start for the film so I began to wonder if this will be the first Duplass brother film I did not care for. But thankfully, in true Duplass brother fashion, they came through taking ordinary situations and make them entertaining while using their trademark quick zoom camera work.

There were times where I saw a lot of Mark Duplass in Steve Zissis’ character. Which would make sense that the film may be a little autobiographical being that Zissis’ character is named Mark. Also aligning with that theory is the fact that Zissis is the younger brother, just like Mark is to Jay in real life. But they have gone on the record to say that this was based on people they knew growing up in New Orleans.

It is human nature to be competitive but if you grew up with a brother you understand the instinctual importance of sibling rivalry even greater. The Do-Deca-Pentathlon shows that competition can do more harm than good when it turns into an obsession. In this film, both of the characters envied each other’s life while ironically disliking their own. The runtime of 76 minutes may have been a little too concise and even though you can pretty much predict the outcome, it still remained entertaining.

Before Jay and Mark Duplass directed Cyrus or Jeff, Who Lives At Home the brothers shot The Do-Deca Pentathlon. Perhaps being put on the radar as of late with larger budget hits was what the indie duo needed in order to revive this project. The Do-Deca Pentathlon premiered at this year’s SXSW Film Festival and has been picked up by Red Flag Releasing and Fox Searchlight.

The film is about sibling rivalry and their own pentathlon of athletic events they created to solve the rivalry. It will star Mark Kelly and Steve Zissis as the brothers. The trailer screams Duplass made but I personally found it less compelling then some of their other films. The only way to find out though is to watch the film when it comes out June 6th.

Official trailer for The Do-Deca Pentathlon:

The first images from Quentin Tarantino’s latest film Django Unchained have been released. One image shows former slave Django (played by Jamie Foxx) alongside a bounty hunter (played by Christopher Waltz) that is helping him to get his wife back from an evil plantation owner. [Paste]

Speaking of Django Unchained, the movie poster has been unveiled for it. It looks pretty wicked if I must say so myself. [IFC]

Despite Hugo having a lackluster overall box office performance (even though critically it did well, winning five Oscars) Martin Scorsese stands firm on his love for 3D. He expects to use 3D in all of his future projects. [Movieline]

Jennifer Connelly and Saoirse Ronan have been confirmed to join Russell Crowe in the cast for Darren Aronofsky’s upcoming film Noah. Playlist reports that Liam Neeson may be playing the villain role. [Playlist]

As if Noah will not be keeping Darren Aronofsky busy, the rumor is he will be doing a biopic about George Washington called The General. [Twitch]

My favorite indie duo, the Duplass brothers, have been hired to adapt a screenplay from Tony D’Souza’s novel Mule. Mark and Jay Duplass will not be directing it though, instead Todd Phillips of The Hangover will be. [Deadline]

Wes Anderson fans are in for a real treat, six clips from Moonrise Kingdom have arrived. The film is one of the most anticipated films of the year and as we reported, it will be opening Cannes film festival this year. [Twitch]

Speaking of clips, the opening scene of The Dictator has been made released by Paramount Pictures. The film stars Sacha Baron Cohen, John C. Reilly, Megan Fox, and Ben Kingsley. Watch the nearly 2 minute clip over on ComingSoon. [ComingSoon]

The indie short film The Southern Belle is now streaming on Snag Films in it’s entirety (10 minutes) for free. You can see the movie review we did on the short film here. [SnagFilms]

Jeff Who Lives at Home is the forth feature film by the Duplass brothers, who were part responsible for the “mumblecore” movement with their first film The Puffy Chair. Similar to The Puffy Chair, Jeff Who Lives at Home is about two brothers who have two completely different mind sets about life that bond over a road trip of sorts. Jay and Mark Duplass have now edged their way into the limelight now, but their style of quick zoom cinematography, loosely scripted dialog, and indie heart felt qualities have remained intact, thankfully.

As the title would suggest the film is about a man named Jeff (Jason Segel) who lives at home. Not only does he have no home of his own, but no job or significant other either. He firmly believes that if you look at coincidences hard enough that you will find they actually happen for a reason as part of your destiny.

His brother Pat (Ed Helms) is looking to fill a void in his life by buying a Porsche, despite his wife’s (Judy Greer) wishes and the fact that he really cannot afford it. Pat does not think very highly of Jeff as he has always had to do everything for him. The two brothers have never truly bonded.

Jeff desperately tries to put connections together for everything that enters his life. He receives a phone call from someone looking for Kevin. They had the wrong number but he considers that a sign. He studies the name to find the significance. Nothing comes to mind although he is able to scramble the letters around in the name to spell knife (adding the letter ‘f’).

It is not until he gets on a bus that he finds the connection. Someone is wearing a jersey with the name Kevin on the back of it. After following him around a little bit he ends up playing basketball with him. The path connects him to a restaurant where he runs into his brother Pat.

Pat is not particularly enthused to have run into Jeff as he received a phone call from their mother (Susan Sarandon) instructing him to straighten Jeff out a little bit. But as destiny would have it, the brothers are given an opportunity to finally bond to one another as they begin to investigate whether or not Pat’s wife is cheating on him.

Jeff knows that the greatest day in history is today and lives his life accordingly. Pat does not see life that way and is envious that Jeff does. It is the first and only time that Jeff has something that Pat does not, which marks a significant moment in each of their lives.

There are at least two situations in the film that were incredibly tense because of how real the relationships feel. The Duplass brothers do an amazing job with films that do not have complex storylines but instead have wonderfully real characters and situations. Some people may say I am biased towards their films but only because I seem to connect so well to them.

Just like how Jeff made connections in the film, I made some of my own to one of my favorite indie films, Me and You and Everyone We Know. The first connection between the films is the original music in both films was done by Michael Andrews. You can hear the resemblance in the score even if you did not catch his name in the opening credits. The second connection I made is that both films feature a character that mostly communicates through instant messenger with people they have no idea who is on the other end.

There is a repetitive theme of a bird flying in the sky throughout the film. The bird to Jeff is a metaphor to fly your own way and to compulsively live life in the now. There is a fantastic scene towards the end where he sees a helicopter that reminds him of the birds he saw in the beginning.

Most Duplass brother films have not always ended the in a way that pleases the audience, they instead end how they should in real life. Jeff Who Lives at Home may be an exception to that but it was done in a way that remained completely satisfactory. After all, who are we to argue with destiny?

The synopsis of Jeff Who Lives at Home is a rather powerful yet whimsical one, it is about believing that things in life happen for a reason. However, the film had just the right amount of laugh out loud moments combined with the right amount of emotional scenes. Achieving that level of balance along with making the film full of heart is something that is rarely done this well. The Duplass brothers make it worth being passionate about films.

The latest from the indie sensation duo of the Duplass brothers is Jeff Who Lives At Home, a film that stars Jason Segel, Ed Helms, and Judy Greer. The film opened on March 16th but for those of you who have still not watched the trailer yet, here it is.

The Duplass brothers are one of my favorite indie directors whose previous work consists of, The Puffy Chair, Baghead and Cyrus, all of which are worth checking out. Some would say they have crossed into the mainstream a little with Cyrus but it still had an indie feel to it. According to IMDB the budget for Jeff Who Lives At Home is estimated at 10 million (3 million more than Cyrus), which would still make the film eligible for next years’ Film Independent Spirit Awards.

Based off their previous work and this trailer, Jeff Who Lives At Home looks like it would be well worth watching.

UPDATE: Read our movie review of Jeff Who Lives at Home.

Official trailer for Jeff Who Lives At Home:

The Jury and Audience Award winners of the 2011 SXSW Film Festival were announced. Winning big this year was the comedy Natural Selection with seven different awards including Grand Jury Winner for Narrative Feature. Below are the full details from the official press release:

Cyrus is not quite the comedy the trailers have you believe it is. This indie film is much more than your typical John C. Reilly and Jonah Hill slapstick you are accustom to seeing in Judd Apatow films, it adds a touch of dark creepiness. Written and directed by upcoming indie superstar duo Mark and Jay Duplass, Cyrus takes cues from their previous films such as, The Puffy Chair and Baghead. In other words, it is wonderful. I would be lying if I said I was not excited when it was announced they were doing this film.

John (John C. Reilly) is socially inept who openly admits is lonely, depressed and desperate after being separated from his wife for seven years now. Just days away from his ex-wife getting married, she feels bad for John and wants him to move on with his life. She knows he needs a relationship for this to happen, so she drags him to a party.

At a party that he not only was not thrilled on going to, let alone meet someone at, he finds a girl named Molly (Marisa Tomei). Even though John is completely drunk beyond reason, for which he can thank his ex-wife for, Molly looks past that. She is in a lot of ways like John, lonely and single for far too long.

He is overly excited when she comes over for the first date, someone that every male can probably empathize with. He purchases condoms, wine, makes dinner and even puts in a few last minute sit-ups. What John lacks in confidence, which is a lot, he more than compensates in honestly. As in this case, sometimes the two are not completely unrelated. The date goes well but ends mysteriously when she tries to sneak out but is caught by John.

John suspiciously follows her home and accidentally falls asleep in his car. The next morning he discovers that she has a son named Cyrus (Jonah Hill). The two oddly hit it off being completely and sometimes too open with each other. Cyrus being overly welcome, invites him to stay for dinner, which John eagerly agrees to.

Something strange happens the next morning as he is about to leave, his shoes are missing. He becomes a little paranoid that something is up. He consults his ex-wife whom which is also his co-worker it turns out. She tells him to forget about it and pretend it never happened. Partly, because she does not believe they took the shoes but mostly because she wants him to be in a relationship more than anyone.

John, as well as the viewer, begins to question whether or not Cyrus is trying to sabotage their relationship or if the bizarre and overly welcome encounters are legit. The film then shifts it’s focus around Cyrus. Hence, the title of the film. The romantic comedy takes a sharp turn and reveals a darker side.

We see John go through an amazing character development as he transforms into a new person. He goes from the timid and lonely, depressed person, to a smart and tactful one. In many ways, his character is a reprise from his character in Magnolia. I am not only talking about him being in a more serious role in general but specifically similar personalities. I missed that John C Reilly. Apparently, so did others as he was nominated for Best Male Lead at Independent Spirit Awards.

Cyrus does not rely solely on John C. Reilly to carry the film though, nearly equally as impressive are Marisa Tomei and Jonah Hill. Tomei is plays a lovable character that is hard not to like. Hill shows that he can play an unlikeable, dark and creepy character instead of the usual pure comedy role. I am not putting down his typical roles, because I find them, and subsequently him, to be hilarious. It is delightful to see this different side of him.

For better or worse, the film was shot in a typical Duplass style. Which feels very amateur, almost home movie style with random snap-zooms. Personally, I think it works here but others may not agree. The dialog between characters was very natural and believable. The film as a whole is completely realistic. Which is tends to be a recurring trademark of the Duplass brothers and what has become known as the mumblecore movement. They achieve this by less script and rehearsal and more improvisation on the set.

Cyrus is a straight forward and incredibly honest film, two simple qualities that big budget films should take note of. It proves that you do not need an overly complicated plot with unrealistic situations in order to make a film interesting. Throw in terrific acting performances by the cast and you have yourself one very superb indie film.