"Me and Orson Welles"

[Glenn Anders]

Okay, now that the picture IS history, I think, just another word or two about ME AND ORSON WELLES: I have no real disagreement with the additional points either of you make, Roger and Alan.

I just reason what is obvious now. The approach which the makers of ME AND ORSON WELLES took was both bad business and bad art. The film's basic commercial problem was that audiences, on a whole, had no reason other than the presence of Zac Efron to see this exploration of "life on the wicked, wicked stage." The novel had decent sales, but it was not one of the most sought after youth novels of the last decade. Shakespeare is generally box office poison, and the 1937 Mercury Julius Caesar has faded into theatrical history for Americans today, if they were ever aware of it. And so, we are left with the "word of mouth" that Zac Efron did okay but wasn't allowed to sing or dance much, nor did he really dominate the picture. The new guy nobody ever heard of, Christian McKay, the actor playing this Orson Welles character, stole the picture, in both the hearts and minds of critics and ordinary theater goers alike. (I'm speaking now of the latter who actually saw ME AND ORSON WELLES.) But, in the picture, after a big build up, and a lot of power and charm from this McKay fellow, "Orson Welles" turned out to be not only a jerk but a cruel, vindictive, cowardly jerk, at that!

[If Welles' "kiss off" had been handled less archly, as you suggest, Alan, it would not have left such a bad taste. It appears to have been determined by the Director's whim to stage an homage to THE THIRD MAN, a precious touch which I noticed only on a second viewing, one which only a minority of viewers would get at all. And I agree with you, Roger, that both Cotten and Lloyd were misused historically and dramatically.]

And so, the young picture-going audience who turned out was left with several mixed messages. There was this guy, who later got fat and did wine commercials, who once put on a play in New York, and he was really a bum of the first order. A stereotype is reinforced. And then, if you are young: Don't trust older people (even those ancients five years older than yourself). And, oh yeah, don't take chances! Maybe you could get that girl in the music store without all the public humiliation of being dumped by these snooty Mercury Theater people. It's not what you can do, it's who you know. In the words of that nasty bit of wisdom from my own youth, thinking of Claire Danes' character, "It's not [even] who you know but who you . . . ." Much better to play it safe. If you really "try to do something" -- not sure what -- you still get old and fat, and have to do drunken wine commercials!

Put to one side the atrocious ending which left Welles without a curtain line, and Zac Efron's character without any clear or realistic future, the picture's artistic problem is that it had to make us feel the importance of the effort to stage Julius Caesar enough to enthrall the characters and ordinary joes like most of us. It did not. Such failures, of course, are not limited to little indie films with budgets of under a paltry fifteen million. Take the example of NINE, costing the Weinsteins upwards of $85,000,000. That fiilm, which I saw by accident Monday afternoon (and liked better than the critics), has the very same problem. Today's mass audiences have little knowledge of, or respect for, supreme Cinema Maestro Federico Fellini, who -- unlike Welles -- died pretty much at the top of his acclaim. Many filmgoers will not know who Fellini is. For all the razzmatazz and dazzling musical numbers (which do a fair job of illustrating Fellini's accomplishments, without laboriously identifying them), a person in Elkhart, Indiana, is still being asked to see a film set in the 1960's, in a foreign culture filled with excess, and identify with, indeed empathize with, a self-indulgent, neurotic, wife-cheating, woman-chasing, fabulist director named Guido Contini, who is trying to make some kind of Italian movie. Daniel Day-Lewis, thought to be among the handful of great movie actors of the World, assisted by six or seven of the great beauties and finest actresses of International Cinema, could not bring it off for critics or audiences in 1,900 theaters nationwide last weekend. [The venues are being cut immediately to 900.]

For the record, Christian McKay and his little band do a much better job with their fifteen million. So, the producers of ME AND ORSON WELLES will lose only five million. The Weinsteins, even if they engineer an Oscar Nomination, will probably lose 40 million. The problem is that, in both cases, backers will be less likely to take a chance on such an artistic project, in future. But the Weinsteins probably can come up with another 85 million, if they need it!

Clearly, to me, the director and writers of ME AND ORSON WELLES, following their own message, played it safe. My oft expressed point, repeated too much, I know, is that they might, within their modest budget, have created a Great Film, something that NINE, given its mixed elements, could never have been.. The creators of ME AND ORSON WELLES settled for a modest profit, which they may not get. They, too, will probably grow old and fat, and have to do god knows what.

We are left with ME AND ORSON WELLES, a nice little picture, like scores of other nice little pictures released this year.

Happy Hogmanay!

Glenn

JUST DOING A BELATED EDIT. -- G.A.

[Alan Brody]

Happy Hogmanay to you too, Glenn. Are you Scottish?

But, in the picture, after a big build up, and a lot of power and charm from this McKay fellow, "Orson Welles" turned out to be not only a jerk but a cruel, vindictive, cowardly jerk, at that!

Zac's character is a bit cocky himself, and gets cockier and mouthier with Welles after spending the night with the Clare Danes character, so perhaps the Welles character recognized a younger version of himself. That's why his attitude toward the kid was ambivalent throughout the story, and although he liked the Efron character, he eventually and reluctantly decided to let him go after getting what he needed from him. By doing so, he may have actually given Richard a valueable lesson about the cutthroat nature of show business and the world in general. As the Joseph Cotton character says, it was Richard's demands on behalf of Sam Leve, the character who gets into it with Welles during rehearsals (and I think, the same guy who gave such memorably loony anti-Welles interviews in the 1996 docu The Battle Over Citizen Kane), that finally ruins Richard's chances for good.

[If Welles' "kiss off" had been handled less archly, as you suggest, Alan, it would not have left such a bad taste. It appears to have been determined by the Director's whim to stage an homage to THE THIRD MAN, a precious touch which I noticed only on a second viewing, one which only a minority of viewers would get at all.

I must have missed that. I'll watch for it next time I see the picture.

And so, the young picture-going audience who turned out was left with several mixed messages. There was this guy, who later got fat and did wine commercials, who once put on a play in New York, and he was really a bum of the first order. A stereotype is reinforced.

Possibly, but due to McKay's performance, I think viewers will also see what a tremendously talented and charismatic 'bum' Welles was. And I think (or at least hope) most people who see the film will know that that part of the film (the ending) is fiction.

Today's mass audiences have little knowledge of, or respect for, supreme Cinema Maestro Federico Fellini, who -- unlike Welles -- died pretty much at the top of his acclaim. Many filmgoers will not know who Fellini is.

True, although I'm not sure I agree that Fellini died at the top of his acclaim, unless you mean critics. His last film, Voices of the Moon, never really even got released in the U.S.. You're only as good as your last picture's box office performance, and I think even critics were starting to abandon him.

Put to one side the atrocious ending which left Welles without a curtain line, and Zac Efron's character without any clear or realistic future, the picture's artistic problem is that it had to make us feel the importance of the effort to stage Julius Caesar enough to enthrall the characters and ordinary joes like most of us. It did not.

I agree with you on that to some extent. But Zac said more scenes from the play itself were filmed, and perhaps they had to cut them in the process of guessing which version would play best in theatres. But is it possible we might see a different cut of the film sometime with more scenes of the Ceasar production?

[ToddBaesen]

Keats:

You make an excellent point, which certainly happened to me the first time I saw CITIZEN KANE around 1970. I wondered why everyone was so excited about KANE. Deep-Focus and showing ceilings? What was so new or radical about that?

Likewise, the many innovations Welles did on the stage in lighting alone, can now only be imagined, until the very accurate re-staging we get of JULIUS CAESAR in ME AND ORSON WELLES.

Norman Lloyd, Arthur Anderson and William Herz all agree that ME AND ORSON WELLES is a marvelous film, and is quite accurate to the production that Welles put on. They are the only three survivors of that production, and thus, we must defer to their memories.

Now, who is William Herz?

He is a 93-old gentleman, who was an extra in the crowd scenes for JULIUS CAESAR. He went on to work with Welles in small roles in plays and on radio, notably appearing as two different radio operators in Welles's famous WAR OF THE WORLDS radio broadcast.

Frank Rizzo, the theatre reporter for The Hartford Courant recently talked to William Herz about working with Orson Welles:


WILLIAM HERZ: Christian McKay's performance as Welles was extraordinary!

By FRANK RIZZO

My partner's cousin, William Herz, 93, can boast of his extraordinary life in the theater as a stage manager, general manager, producer, Broadway ticket agent and friend to a coterie of grand dames: actress Elaine Stritch, designer Pauline Trigère and Anne Kaufman Schneider, daughter of playwright George S. Kaufman.

He was also part of Orson Welles' Mercury Theatre, starting in 1937, when a 21-year-old Herz became an unpaid "extra" in Welles' landmark production of "Julius Caesar."

Herz eventually became a salaried member in Welles' theater company — he even lived in Welles' Manhattan home — as he assisted in other productions such as "The Shoemaker's Holiday," "Danton's Death" and "Heartbreak House." He also stage managed the legendary "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast in 1938, taking on Welles' part in the dress rehearsal. Welles also directed a show — "Too Much Johnson" — for a summer theater Herz managed in Connecticut in 1938.

Herz's presence in "Julius Caesar" mirrors, in part, the story of the movie playing at theaters around the country, "Me and Orson Welles," based on the novel by Robert Kaplow. In the film, Zac Efron ("High School Musical") plays Richard, a 17-year-old who talks his way into Welles' production.

What was Herz's reaction to the film?

Herz, who lives in Manhattan, thought Christian McKay's performance as Welles was "extraordinary." He also liked Efron, whose character ended up playing Lucius, the young servant to Brutus in the production. "This guy's going to have a career. He's very talented."

The film brought back memories for Herz. "There were moments when I felt like I was there again," he says.

But first some background:

The Detroit-raised Herz (whose father grew up in New Haven) met Welles while studying theater at Carnegie Institute of Technology in Pittsburgh. Katharine Cornell's touring theatrical troupe — which included 22-year-old Welles — came through town in the spring of 1937, shortly before Herz was to graduate.

Herz knew George Macready, a member of the troupe, and they had planned to go out for dinner after the show when Macready asked if Welles could join them.

"I said, 'Of course, I'd love to meet someone who was planning to have a theater in New York. The outcome of that evening — most of which I don't remember much of, although I do recall tripping into Cornell's arms in the theater's Green Room — was that Orson asked me come see him when I came to New York."

When Herz arrived in Manhattan, he met company manager John Houseman, who said, 'We have no jobs, but if you want to come and work for nothing, come.' So I did."

Herz had high praise for Welles' music director Marc Blitzstein ("a genius") and set designer Samuel Leve. But Houseman "was a pompous ass, just like he was in [the film] 'The Paper Chase' ," Herz says. "He was a sonofabitch. Problem was, he couldn't control Orson. But nobody could."

Especially accurate is the film's depiction of rehearsal chaos.

"One day we came into rehearsal and the whole back wall was painted red, with lights underneath." Herz says the scene about the fire sprinklers going off and showering the theater with water actually happened — not during dress rehearsal, but later in the show's run. Spot-on is Welles' disregard for schedules. "Orson had no conception of time," says Herz, who confirmed the film's scene of Welles hiring an ambulance in order to rush through Manhattan traffic.

There was, however, no red neon "Mercury Theatre" sign. And though the audience on opening night was enthusiastic and the show indeed got raves, there was no standing ovation as there was in the film.

The movie creates a fictional romantic rivalry over a woman between Welles and Efron's character, a loose version of the original Lucius, played by then-15-year-old Arthur Anderson. ("Orson was actually sort of nice to the boy," he says.) Herz, Anderson and Norman Lloyd are the only surviving cast members from that production, which included Joseph Cotten, Martin Gabel, George Coulouris and John Holland, who played Caesar. ("Orson actually stabbed him with a real dagger," Herz recalls, "but that was later in the show's run.")

"Orson had a great respect for actors and hated everybody else," Herz says, "especially the financial people. I met him when I was in college, so whenever he saw me I was 'that rich boy from Pittsburgh,' even though I didn't have a pot to pee in."

In 1938, Welles insisted that Herz, who lived in Brooklyn with his aunt, stay at his two-story home on East 57th Street, where he lived with his wife, Virginia, so he could be readily available for the director at any time of the day or night. "I wasn't asked to live there," Herz says. "I was told. Orson doesn't ask."

"Julius Caesar" was followed with "The Shoemaker's Holiday," "Heartbreak House" and "Danton's Death." Herz was also stage manager of Sunday performances of "The Cradle Will Rock." ("My two cues were 'Curtain up' and 'curtain down.'")

Welles' one Connecticut experience came when he directed "Too Much Johnson" for a summer theater Herz managed in the Stony Creek section of Branford in 1938. (Herz also managed summer theaters in Greenwich and Great Neck, N.Y.) "That is, if you could call it directing," Herz says.

Welles concept for the show was to shoot a 40-minute silent film, which would be used in the production. Welles shot about 25,000 feet of film in New York, according to Frank Brady's biography, "Citizen Welles." But Welles never finished editing it because of other demands on his overbooked time, so there was no film ready for the stage show — which shortened the show considerably.

Still, the two-week Connecticut run was a sellout. Katharine Hepburn, who had a home in Old Saybrook, twice saw the play, which featured Joseph Cotten, and she selected him as one of the leads for the upcoming Broadway production of "The Philadelphia Story." Because of that "he was already a star before 'Citizen Kane' came out," Herz says.

Throughout the late '30s there were many radio broadcasts by Welles, including "War of the Worlds" in October 1938.

"Orson never liked dress rehearsals [for the radio shows]. He would sweep in and say his lines, more or less, unless there was a big star like Helen Hayes. Then he had to follow the script because they would have otherwise said to him, 'Mr. Welles, I'm sorry. Goodbye.' He would improvise when he thought he could get away with it."

Herz became an Equity actor in Welles' ambitious 1939 production of "Five Kings," which closed out-of-town because of a lack of funds. At that time, Welles began working on a deal with RKO Studios to make movies. In 1940, Welles' first Hollywood project began — the filming of "Citizen Kane" — but Herz declined the opportunity to join many from the Mercury Players there.

"I regretted the fact that I didn't go because I might have been associated with the film," he says. "But then again, I wasn't really an actor, so I would have had to familiarize myself with a medium that I didn't know anything about, and it scared the hell out of me."

But looking back on his theater days with Welles, Herz says "they were exciting times. I didn't know what I was actually living through — but then you never do."



In my story on William Herz and Orson Welles' Mercury Theatre productions of the late '30s in Sunday's Arts Section of The Hartford Courant, a few things had to be edited out because of space.
But let's share the stories here.

Herz (full disclose: he's a cousin of my partner) is an 93-year-old gentleman living in New York. In his early 20s he worked for Welles and the Mercury Theatre in Manhattan. Herz was an extra in "Julius Caesar" in 1937, the production that is at the center of the current film, "Me and Orson Welles," starring Zac Efron ("High School Musical"), Claire Danes and the remarkable Christian McKay in an Oscar-worthy performance as the young Welles.He then went on to have a variety of jobs for the theater and Welles -- even living in Welles East Side home with Welles' wife Virginia to be close at hand for the director's many orders.

Herz -- a man of discriminating tastes with a low tolerance for corn -- liked the movie, praised Efron ("He is very talented and has a career ahead of him") and found McKay's performance "extraordinary. I don't know how he did it."

He confirmed or disputed incidents in the film. Yes indeed, he says, Welles did hired an ambulance to speed through Manhattan traffic. "But I'm surprised the movie didn't use the time when he used a hearse as well. Only Orson would do that."

Among Herz' duties was that of a casting director with fellow company member Hiram "Cubby" Sherman, a position Herz called "a joke because Orson did all the casting. But he wanted to show everyone that he was a great guy and that the company was seeing and interviewing actors all the time. But none of them got jobs."
Herz recalls one time when he had a notion for an Englishman to play the narrator in his production of "Five Kings."

"On New Year's Eve he decided he wanted Ralph Richardson who happened to be in Africa. Now, under any circumstances finding an actor in Africa would not have been easy but on New Year's Eve it was impossible. So he went out carousing, Virginia had gone to a party at Burgess Meredith's and I worked the telephone. I told Orson, 'The phone company is not cooperating.' I couldn't say I was inept. So he said, 'I know, Thornton Wilder will do.' I said, 'I don't think so' and in that tone of voice he said, 'Call him.' So I called Mr. Wilder in New Haven and said, 'Mr. Welles would like you to come and see him at his home at 8 o'clock on Monday morning.' "

And Wilder came.

"Orson was in bed with Virginia and he came out in a robe naked underneath and interviewed Mr. Wilder. They should have had that in the picture. Mr. Wilder said, 'But Mr. Welles, I'm not an actor. Orson said, 'Didn't you play the Stage Manager in 'Our Town?' He said, 'Not really. But I'm very flattered you thought of me and am delighted to see you.' See, this was after 'War of the Worlds' broadcast and Orson was a celebrity and everyone wanted to know him"

After "Citizen Kane" was finished filming, Welles returned to New York, to direct "Native Son" with Canada Lee, based on the novel by Richard Wright.

"Our paths rarely crossed again after that," says Herz, who was in the Air Force from 1942 to 1946.

After 1941's "Citizen Kane" Welles attention was primarily on film, thought he did return to direct a failed production of "Around the World in 80 Days."

[Roger Ryan]

Thanks for posting the William Herz story - some interesting extra tidbits we hadn't heard before. This, of course, is the hidden value of a film like ME AND ORSON WELLES; someone who knows someone who was a part of the original event does a story on them.

I'm not sure I understand the idea of how something like KANE loses its originality for modern viewers. I suppose if a film is innovative, but not particularly effective dramatically or as entertainment, it might seem less impressive to successive generations. KANE, however, is such a great film in so many ways that it hardly matters if the flashback structure has been used to death or the deep focus photography seems a little quaint. When I saw it for the first time in 1977, I thought it was jaw-droppingly brilliant and the things that still impress me about the film are unique to Welles and/or that particular moment in time; they've never been duplicated by someone else. Maybe it's because I view films with some historical context and others don't? I'm not sure. By the time I finally saw Buster Keaton's SHERLOCK JR. a little over ten years ago, I had been exposed to numerous films-within-the-film conceits, or characters entering the film world ala TWILIGHT ZONE or THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO. But none of the 80 years of cinema that followed it diminished the power of Keaton's ideas in that film; the sublime image of the hapless hero confounded by the editing of the film he is a part of has never been equalled. I would consider Welles' work in JULIUS CAESAR and KANE to be similarly unique.

[Magentarose67]

Thank you for sharing that wonderful story, Todd ! They were stories I have never heard before!

[ToddBaesen]

Here's an interview with Richard Linklater from the Criterion Forum, where Linklater addresses the snub Christian McKay got from the Golden Globes.



Me and Orson Welles is the latest film from director Richard Linklater (Slacker, Dazed and Confused). Set in late-1930s New York, it’s both a nuanced, entertaining look at Orson Welles’s early career as founder of the Mercury Theater and a charming coming-of-age comedy about a stagestruck teen (played by Zac Efron) who ends up cast in Welles’s groundbreaking production of Julius Caesar. We posed some questions to Linklater regarding this somewhat unexpected new film, about his take on the genius at its center and the amazing acting discovery who inhabited him. Me and Orson Welles is currently playing in limited release, and coming to more theaters across the United States.

—Michael Koresky

What led you to make a film about Orson Welles, and specifically about his early years with the Mercury Theater?

It’s become a fairly obscure moment in his career, given the ephemeral nature of the theater and the more notorious work in radio and film that was just around the corner for him. In that way, I always referred to this as a sort of Young Mr. Welles: everyone knows what’s coming in his future, but it’s interesting to see the seeds of all the greatness, as well as the traits that might cause him some trouble in the future—it’s all there to be reflected on. He’s only twenty-two years old here, and you can feel he is pushing his own boundaries, and maybe discovering he really doesn’t have any, both artistically and personally. More than anything else, though, I saw it as a wonderful story about youthful ambition and creating art in a collaborative environment. I don’t know if I’ll ever do a film about making a film, but making a film about a theatrical production is pretty close to home.

You have a very different filmmaking style from Welles. Your films often have a casual, almost real-time feel, whereas Welles is known for grandness, even ostentation. Yet I feel there are certain shots—during the staging of Caesar and the last shot—that go for a certain Wellesian flourish. Were you consciously trying to achieve this?

First off, you’d have to say that almost every filmmaker before or since has a very different style from Welles, not just me. Just watch Othello or Touch of Evil again, and you’ll always be reminded. One of the greatest joys and biggest challenges on this was the reimagining of the production itself. It was a lot of fun to attempt to re-create his very dramatic stage lighting. As I tend to bend toward the realistic, I doubt it will ever be appropriate for me to have such dramatic lighting in a movie of mine, but we were just taking our cues from what Welles had done in this production. There was the upward lighting from a series of holes in the stage, where he was trying to capture the feeling of a fascist rally, like something you might see in Triumph of the Will, or the way he flooded the audience with light from behind the conspirators as they each stabbed Caesar—very cinematic. We had some pictures and descriptions to go off of, but a big rule was to avoid any specific references to shots in any of his films—that was in his future, and wouldn’t have been appropriate. If you think about it, this movie is closer to a screwball comedy in its pacing and banter than a film Welles himself would have made or even appeared in as an actor. I don’t think he saw himself as comedic, but the largeness of his personality and the energy whirlwind around him actually lend themselves quite naturally to a more upbeat tone and tempo. On a historical side note, the story goes that Greg Toland saw this particular Mercury production of Caesar, and when he heard Welles was off to Hollywood to make a movie, he set up a meeting with him. He was so impressed with what Welles had done with his lighting that he said he wanted to work with him, so the greatest director-DP collaboration in film history really starts here.

The actors employed as Welles’s Mercury crew are each note perfect, but Christian McKay as Welles indeed towers over them. His embodiment of Welles is uncanny, even effortless. How did you find him?

It’s ironic that Christian was the actor with the least amount of film experience, and here he is lording over everyone else with such authority. Christian’s performance, when you think of what’s required and the degree of difficulty, is an utter wonder. You mention effortless, which in my book is the ultimate compliment to a performance, but Christian was pulling off a hell of a transformation. First off, if you saw him walking down the street just now, I assure you you wouldn’t say, “There goes Orson Welles.” When you’re looking for it, you see a resemblance, but every cast and crew member can tell you about the first time they witnessed this incredible transformation. Here’s this upbeat British gentleman at one moment; then the voice deepens and changes accent, the eyebrows narrow just a bit, the head turns at a slight angle to make a point, there’s a subtle, all-knowing, self-satisfied smirk. He really becomes this other person, and it goes so much further than mere technical imitation—it’s a full embodiment, which on paper seems nearly impossible when it’s Welles you’re trying to be. I mean, who the hell can believably be like that?

I think the key to Christian’s performance is that he brings himself to it, which any actor would try to do naturally, but what Christian possesses that so few have is the absolute self-confidence and elevated air of someone who has lived their entire life with an extraordinary gift. In Welles’s case, he was famously identified as a genius at a very young age and could never think of himself as anything else. Christian’s gift is musical—he’s a world-class pianist, traveling the globe, playing with various orchestras . . . He’s that good and always has been. He came to acting a little later professionally, and has been primarily a stage actor up until now. He’s an incredible talent, truly one of the most remarkable people you’ll ever meet, and I hope he gets his due for this performance.

Sorry for going on about him, but, unbelievably, as I answer this question via e-mail, I’ve been informed that he didn’t get a Golden Globe nomination for his portrayal of Welles. All I can say to that is I feel he has a better chance of this kind of recognition when he’s being judged by actual critics, or in the case of the Academy, by other actors, who’ll be the ones actually nominating. If your focus is putting on a star-studded TV show to get ratings and placate distributors who are throwing a lot of money at you, that’s one thing. If you’re an actor evaluating his performance, you’re more likely to come to the conclusion that neither you nor anyone you know of could have remotely pulled off what he has. They’ve given out lots of statues for so much less.

Is there a particular film in the Welles catalog you feel the strongest affinity for—and why?

No one particular film, though if I could watch one right this minute, it would have to be Chimes at Midnight. It’s a CRIME that it’s not more readily available. Welles’s daughter Chris talks about how his performance as Falstaff brings tears to her eyes. In Me and Orson Welles, he’s Prince Hal—one wonders if he knew he would age into Falstaff. Anyway, there should be a cinematic mandate that this film be fully restored and available to all.

One thing I particularly loved about the film is listening to 1930s teenagers, played by Efron and Zoe Kazan, chatting about the music and culture of the day (their love of Porter, Gershwin tunes) like it was a living and vital thing. Do you see these characters in a pop-culture continuum with characters from, say, Dazed and Confused and Before Sunrise?

Sure. Even though the film is set more than seventy years in the past, no one ever existed in any other time but their own present, which inevitably is made up of plenty of minor details and immediate enthusiasms. It bugs me in period films when it seems like the actors are conscious they’re acting in a period film and everything gets so damn serious and important. Zac and Zoe’s characters are doing what young people have always tried to do, and that’s seize their moment. It just reminds you that no matter how crappy the world around you is, in the world of art and personal expression, there’s always plenty to be excited about.