SHORTS AND TO THE POINT: Kyle Taubken’s PATRICK is a nuanced two-hander set in an empty AA meeting that reveals a mature eye and approach behind the camera

Kyle Taubken’s short film, PATRICK, achieves one of the most difficult tasks for a short film: It delivers a nuanced story light on obvious moments to grab the viewer that can’t be sharply critiqued or considered with an “A to B equals C” type of assessment.

Kyle Taubken’s short film, PATRICK, achieves one of the most difficult tasks for a short film

A “two-hander” conversation/relationship scene between a young man in recovery seeking out an AA meeting and the man who may or may not actually be the guy in charge or that particular little oasis for the wayward, plays out both in an amusing, touching, and disarmingly affecting way.

Then, a little twist at the end provides just the right amount of wryness and warmth to wrap it all up with a final contextual bow. It’s a portrait of small victories – both in the film itself and the achievement of the filmmaker, and it reflects on the maturity of Taubken’s work behind the camera, in the best way possible.

 Talking with Kyle Taubken filmmaker of short film PATRICK

1 PATRICK doesn’t explicitly let the audience in on what is actually happening until the end, pretty much. What concern, if any, did you have about how much you needed to spoon feed the audience in order to keep them with you, so-to-speak?

Not much of a concern. Audiences are so much smarter than they are given credit for. In fact, they are usually smarter than the filmmaker(s) themselves because they are the only truly objective entity that sees a film from start to finish with fresh eyes and ears. They are often clued in on a different level than the director or other cast/crew members who are hyper focused on some minute aspect of the film and therefore unable to zoom out and see the film as a whole. All of the information someone would need to be able to follow the story and plot is there. It may be doled out slowly and in small pieces, but it’s there.

I trust the audience to find those pieces and put it together themselves. By the way, I believe that asking your audience to do just a little bit of work to meet you half way actually engages them more than handing them everything on a silver platter, and they will like your film more just by default of being intellectually engaged by it. That gives them some ownership of it because they have put effort into the experience too. As far as the end goes, that spin on what you’ve been watching the whole time, that was really just a way to give us more insight into Patrick’s character. It doesn’t necessarily change what happened between Patrick and Felix (it does make it more meaningful), but it gets the audience excited because it asks them to rethink the assumptions they made about those two characters and the situation they’ve just watched play out. That’s always a fun thing to be able to pull off as a filmmaker and see unfold as a viewer.

 

2 Let’s talk about your prep: Are you a shot list guy or a storyboard guy? And why?

I shot list pretty extensively. I’ve only done storyboards once or twice and don’t think I ever will again. I think the shot list gives me the foundation for what I know I’ve got to get on the day. That way I always have something to fall back on without getting trapped into doing things one exact way. It’s been my experience that storyboards get me too stuck on one way of shooting, and then when I need or want to improvise with the camera or blocking or production design I feel like I can’t get out from under the storyboards. I guess if I were to shoot something on a sound stage where I’m in control of literally every aspect of the physical space then storyboarding would work, but when I’m shooting in real environments and locations there’s just no way to plan that far ahead, even with scouting, stills, etc.

Also, it’s nice to know that if I get stuck and have to go back to my shot list then it’ll be there to guide me. Usually once I see a shot in my head, during writing or pre-pro, I don’t forget it so I have a general approach that gets refined when I’m there with the crew, gear, actors, PD, etc. Also, my shot list just helps me remember what has to get filmed, HAHA! On PATRICK, for instance, there was a whole bit of blocking that we didn’t film where Felix walks around the side of the church and then behind it. I realized I had shot the first part of his walk and the end of it but not the middle when I was reviewing my shot list during a break on set. So we had to go back and get that otherwise the sequence wouldn’t have made since. So in that way my shot list is very practical, like a little reminder of “Oh yeah, duh – I need that.” HAHA!

 

3 The film has some fine, nuanced work coming from the two leads in the film. Since they can oftentimes require different approaches to get them to the place you want them to be, can you describe your process working with your actors?

It starts with a ton of conversations with the actors during pre-pro. I really don’t like to rehearse, but I do give the actors the option to have rehearsals with me and the other cast if they would like. Some do some don’t. I just try to stay flexible and keep them comfortable throughout the whole process. For me, having a notes heavy rehearsal quickly becomes pointless because then you wait another month or whatever to actually go get on set and film it. At that point you basically start over. Seems pointless to me but again, if the actors feel they want or need it I’m happy to do it.

What I do love to do is sit around and talk about the characters. I send my actors photographs, film clips, paintings, music, whatever, that I think their character would like or represents their character in some way. I love hanging out with my cast. This does two things. First, it gives you a lot of time to have those character conversations. Second, it just starts forging the bond and the trust early in the process so when you are on set (which can be a sensitive space and high pressure) they know you have their best interests at heart and they feel confident that you’re making the same movie.

As far as production goes I just try to listen. I know when I have what I need, or think I do at least, but I always ask the actors if they want to do another one. Again, it’s about ownership. If you get everyone bought in, then you’re really collaborating and, while you are guiding the thing as the director, everyone is involved and the film becomes something else. Oh, and ask your actors how they like to be directed or what their process is. It demystifies the whole thing. It doesn’t have to be hard. Just talk about it and adjust how you direct based on what they tell you they need. Actors are incredibly self aware. They’ll let you know. And hire Curtis C. Jackson and Jacob Wingfield. That will help a TON.

 

4 How much did you know about AA prior to developing and making PATRICK? Were there any surprises that influenced the film in a way you wouldn’t have expected?

I had a pretty solid base knowledge. My previous short also dealt with addiction and sobriety so I had already done a good bit of work with those themes before making PATRICK. I felt that there was a lot more to explore there. I don’t think that there were any surprises that influenced the film itself in one way or another other than how supportive and encouraging folks in that program have been. I was a little afraid of representing what is traditionally a bit of a reserved community, but the response has been overwhelmingly positive. At the FILM PRIZE screenings, in particular, I talked to a lot of folks who had personal connections to recovery and I was, quite honestly, moved to tears multiple times by their reactions to the film. It was something I did not expect and am still processing. That’s just what it’s all about really, that audience engagement.

Kyle Taubken, director of short film, PATRICK, on watching with an audience

 

5 You watched your film with an audience or audiences (that wasn’t entirely composed of friends, family, cast and crew) that were charged with the task of voting for their favorites (and therefore passing judgment on each film). Did that make that experience tougher than just watching it with people looking to be entertained, touched, or affected?

I don’t think it made it tougher really but it definitely made the stakes feel a little higher. I guess if you think about it that way it was a higher risk higher reward situation. Maybe they came down harsher on the films than they would have otherwise because they knew they were playing a part. But what is really fun about that is when I heard laughter, gasps, whispers, it was doubly exciting because I knew it was really working. I knew that we had broken through that veneer of judgment you mentioned.

I saw PATRICK twice during the fest and both times were really exhilarating. Yeah, when you know it isn’t only your family, friends, cast, and crew and it is just for a “real” audience… Yeah, that’s a blast. Honestly the scarier experience is when you are showing just a few people in your living room and you are sitting right there with them. HAHA! I was way more stressed out doing that than watching with a full theater. I also didn’t go into FILM PRIZE thinking I was going to or had to win or anything, truly. So, I wasn’t squirming in my seat thinking “Oh, I hope people vote for me.” I just wanted to meet audience members and other filmmakers, so getting those immediate responses was very humbling and gratifying.

 

6 Popcorn or Candy?

Popcorn all day.

Kyle Taubken’s PATRICK is a nuanced two-hander set in an empty AA meeting that reveals a mature eye and approach behind the camera