It’s no secret that we’re big fans of Barry Jenkins’ film Medicine for Melancholy, and we’re lucky enough to have Barry be big fans of Spout as well. His little film has had a long journey since it premiered in Austin at SXSW earlier this year, and it’s continuing to take him around the world.

We spoke with Barry in Toronto about the genesis of the movie, what has happened since that first screening in Austin, how he found the actors, and if this film represents a love letter from him to the city of San Francisco. Read on for the full interview.

Well, the first thing I was going to say was thank you for all the shout outs you always give Spout and Karina whenever you discuss the movie. That question about the de-saturation in the film always comes up. So your check’s in the mail for that.

[laughs] No, I always mention Karina, man. You guys were like one of the first people to publish about the film at South By, when nobody knew about it. So I was thankful and I pay it forward.

That’s good. The last time Karina spoke to you, you’d never been to Austin. You hadn’t been to SXSW before.

Exactly.

Then your film sort of became one of the most buzzed about and talked about breakout films at the festival. How did that change things for you and for the movie?

It was, making it with just me and my friends, this really small crew and not very expensive equipment. So we felt that once we did get in SXSW, we knew it was a good thing. But even still, we thought the movie would play there, and then maybe it would play another film festival. And then we’d sell DVDs off the website.

But I think having that buzz coming out of South By, I think it really made us all kind of take the project more seriously. We saw the potential that maybe it could catch on, and we could actually get it to audiences.
Having now been to Austin, what did you think of the city? Everyone’s always saying, oh Austin’s such a cool place, but no one can really say why that is.
The great thing about going to Austin is everybody who worked on the film, we all were students together at Florida State University, which is in Tallahassee, Florida, which is a college town with a great film school. I think we all dispersed and moved to all these different places.

Every now and then we’d all get together and have this nostalgia for this almost incubator kind of feeling that we all felt in Tallahassee. And I think premiering the film in Austin, we were all like, man this is just like Tallahassee, but much bigger.

There’s something that feels very possible in the air in that city. And I think that’s the reason why they can host a festival that large, despite the fact that the city feels so small. It was a really good experience.

So talking directly about the film, how did you find Wyatt and Tracey for this?

Well we tried to cast in San Francisco, but I guess it’s just the irony of ironies, when you’re dealing with a city that has a devolving or diminishing African American population, we just couldn’t find black actors just to come out and read for the parts.

So we went down to L.A. We used basically the actor’s equivalent of Craigslist, which is to post things on these things like NowCasting.com. And we didn’t have any money, so we got people who really didn’t have any credits. Tracey Heggins was the first woman that we saw, and of course, we then saw 50 other women. Because I’m an idiot, I couldn’t pull the trigger.

And then we actually saw about 50 guys, and we really weren’t satisfied or happy with any of the people we had seen. And a friend of ours just happened to know, she was like, “Oh, I know this guy Wyatt Cenac. You should audition him.” I was like yeah, sure, whatever. I’ll see anybody.

And so we called Wyatt up. He was doing a lot of stand up at that point in L.A., and so he wasn’t really committed to too many things. So he came out, read cold, and was just perfect.

In a way it was really great because I felt like Tracey and Wyatt themselves, they weren’t really the characters that I saw when I wrote the script. But they were so specific and unique in their auditions, that I realized these two people can make the movie go.

And so yeah, we went with the both of them.

Yeah and I think using actors that audiences haven’t really seen a lot of, I know Tracey’s done a fair amount of television, but, it kind of helps feel like they’re more real. They didn’t feel like this was a polished performance. It felt like these were real people.

Thanks, I appreciate that. You know, it’s funny, because now that Wyatt’s on “The Daily Show,” it’s like I was just screening the film for the staff of the Telluride Film Festival. Because I work at that festival, so we just had a little staff screening before the festival.

And the minute the first image comes up, they’re like hey that kind of looks like that guy on Comedy Central. I was like yeah, it is. But we made this movie before he was on Comedy Central, but I guess you can put it that way. It’s just fine. [laughter]

Yeah, I wanted to ask you about that. Is he being on “The Daily Show” sort of a result of what is happening with Medicine? Or did that happen separate of the movie?

You know, I think it definitely happened separate. Wyatt is a great standup. And I think he travels in a completely different circle that this film doesn’t travel in, which is the standup scene in L.A. with UCB, “Upright Citizen’s Brigade.”

And I think, really, he had kind of been building momentum there, and was almost just like, I think, really I kind of believe in Karma. I think there was some really good positive energy with the film. Because after SXSW, he kind of got the audition for Comedy Central and “The Daily Show,” and we flew him out there.

And he did it. And they had never seen the movie, or even heard of it. But it was like all these things, the timing was right. He just nailed it. And now he’s on the show.

The movie has some strong words about the current state of race in San Francisco and the housing situation, too. Would you consider it to be sort of your love letter to San Francisco? You clearly love the city, watching this. Would you consider that to be true? Or would you just say it happens to be set in San Francisco?

No, no, no. I think it’s definitely, without a doubt, a love letter to San Francisco. Sometimes, depending on my mood, I’ll say it’s a love hate letter to San Francisco.

But when I originally got the idea for the film years ago, after watching Claire Denis’ Vendredi Soir, I kind of wrote a brief little paragraph about it. And the last line of the paragraph says could be set in Chicago or New York City. And it was just about two characters after a one night stand spending the day together.

But looking back on it, there was no way in hell this movie could have been set in New York or Chicago, because it’s just such a San Francisco movie. I really felt like what made the movie worth making, because I sat on the idea for about five years, was the fact that I felt like there was a real importance to the city as almost a third character in the film.

It really kind of drives, particularly the paranoia that the character of Micah is feeling. It’s like the environment is what makes the movie plausible to me.

Then the housing rights discussion, or the meeting that they stumble across, I found that personally to be a little bit jarring. It shook me out of the moment for a second. Was that on purpose? And how did you come to put that in the film?

You know, it is jarring, because it’s a definite narrative break from the rest of the film. It was something that I felt was important to really round out the A) the depiction of the city that we were giving. And then B) that we were all these things that Micah was consumed with.

Originally, when I first wrote the script, I wrote it as a conversation between the two leads. It just felt completely false. In thinking about it, I was like, this is just really important to me. It’s really important to capture this aspect of the City of San Francisco. So I thought, you know what, it’s worth it to allow a moment for the actual city to speak for itself.

We literally, we knew we were going to have the characters walk by and look in. We felt like the fact that these two people could be walking down the street and they could have passed this meeting and stopped and listened. We thought that was enough of an entryway for the audience.

Even though it was jarring, they would get into that perspective, the point of view of Joe and Micah listening to that meeting that they would just go with it and really hear the city speak for itself. We didn’t write any of that. That’s was a real meeting. We just set the camera in the corner and we just let it roll. We had our actors walk by. It’s one of my favorite moments in the film.

I think of all the sequences that are somewhat jarring because there are a few other places where we take a few liberties, maybe too many liberties. But we’re young so [laughter] felt people would give us leeway. But that was the one that stands out to me. I thought it was important to have in the film.

Well, since you mentioned other moments that stand out or that kind of shake the viewer a little bit, because you said, at least when you talked to Karina earlier in the year, you said this film is like Do the Right Thing meets Before Sunrise with a little bit of French new wave thrown into it.
Yes.

Does that still stand up for you, that analogy?

I think it definitely still holds up for me. Although I feel like the more I watch the film, the more I see those new wave influences from when I first went to film school. I kind of binged on Godard and Breathless and those movies when I first started learning about cinema.

I didn’t grow up wanting to be a filmmaker. I happened to stumble into film school and new wave was the first thing I was introduced to.

I do think that analogy still holds up. It’s something that I wouldn’t make, unless asked me to make it. So it’s not something that I openly push upon the film. But I definitely think, in a way, the spirit that we made the movie in. We shot it in 15 days with a five man crew. We shot it in November and it debuted at South By on March 6, which is a small gestation window.

I think that energy, that new wave energy, is definitely there. Before Sunrise, Sunset it’s obvious. The whole two characters walking. I really would have mentioned Claire Denis’ Vendredi Soir, which was the actual inspiration for the film, but I am nowhere near the filmmaker that Clare Denis is. I like to leave her name out of my mouth as much as possible. [laughter]

Well, we spoke to Spike Lee a couple of times, speaking about Do the Right Thing. We talked to him a couple of times in Toronto and he was there promoting his film Miracle at St. Anna.

St. Anna, yeah.

And then he at both of the times that I was scheduled to talk to him, he ended up speaking about Sarah Palin and Obama. Sarah had just given that inflammatory speech, like last week. He clearly had some strong thoughts about that. He said, “Obama needs to go on the offensive.”

With Obama, this is an incredible year for politics. We have Obama, the first African American nominee, which is pretty amazing. Although oddly enough, a lot of people are saying, well, he’s black but is he black enough?

Right.

Which is a weird statement in itself but that applies to Medicine for Melancholy as well. When you get into the issues of race then who Tracey’s character may or may not be dating, I like the fact that we don’t ever see him, so we don’t really know who he is.

Thank you very much, sir.

That was a great choice because I think that would have grounded it too much to be like, oh, well, now he legitimately has a reason to be so upset.

I agree with you. It would have made it more of a mission statement for me, which I don’t think the film is, one way or the other.

Right. Well, what are your thoughts about the whole… you may not even want to talk about this, but Obama, the possibility that he may be our next president and the whole issues that are surrounding…

No, no, no. Actually I would love to talk about it, because it is something we talked about. We didn’t really speak about it until after the film was in post. When I wrote the film it wasn’t this whole Obama mania. That stuff didn’t exist. It was a foregone conclusion that Hillary was going to get the nomination.

After we shot the film and we were cutting the film and we were doing South by Southwest and the primaries were going on, I think it was when Obama gave that whole speech on race and how we need to find a common ground and have those discussions and relearn how to articulate this issues that we are all so consumed with as Americans.

I feel like for the character of Micah, I feel like that’s truly the arc and I think why all the issues of housing rights and gentrification…. I think that’s why it’s important for him to have those discussions and go through this journey with Joe.

I feel like when he wakes up on that couch the next morning, he’s going to learn to better articulate the things that he was experiencing, which is for him everything is black and white. It’s like the white people are moving into San Francisco and the black people are being forced out.

But really, San Francisco is a small space and everything is driven by economics. What’s happening is the people who make six figures are moving in and the people who make five figures are moving out, whether they be black, white, Chinese, Korean, Hispanic, whatever.

I really feel like that’s what Obama stood for when the primary was going on and he was completely to the left. Not completely to the left but when the change was actual real change… I think in that way the film and this year in the primary election and the race for the presidential nomination, I really feel like that’s where the two come together.

Relearning to articulate this kind of black and white issue that has always consumed Americans since the “dawn of time” or whatever date you want to affix to that.

The title, I know you said at the Q&A at the film that the title was you saw the Ray Bradbury short story collection and you thought that was applicable. Now, would you say, in the film that the characters both serve as a medicine for each other’s melancholy?

I definitely think so. I think that’s why it felt OK to take Bradbury’s title. Even though the film wasn’t an adaptation of that actual short story, there are some similarities. I definitely think so. I don’t think it’s a cure for melancholy. I think it’s a medicine.

I think they both feel a little bit better about what ails them. Or, at the very least, they’ll have a better understanding of what it is that’s causing the melancholy and they can learn to work on it. And that’s why the ending isn’t a happy ending. It’s kind of an open ending. I like to use the term productive. I think it’s a productive ending, and it’s been a productive journey for the both of them.
American audiences are used to having a moment, particularly in independent films, where you don’t really know what’s going to happen   a moment where it seems like it’s going to turn sinister.

That moment in this movie, for me, was when they’re at the taco truck and those two guys come up. You’re like are these guys going to roll them? Are they trying to sell them drugs? But, then it turns out they’re extremely the opposite end of the spectrum. They’re hydration guys. Do those guys really exist in San Francisco?

When I first wrote the screenplay, it actually was going to be a kid who comes up and tries to sell them some pot, because that would actually happen in San Francisco. You’re right. After I wrote it and I read it, I said to myself exactly what you just said. I thought, you know what, I’m not going to do that. Let’s go completely in the opposite direction, and let’s just make this so ridiculous.

In looking back on it, I think it’s a great moment, because the film needs a little bit of levity, and I think those guys really provide it. And there are no actors in the film aside from Tracey and Wyatt. Those two guys don’t go around selling vitamin water, but they’re friends of mine. They hang together all the time.

They’re just a couple of really fun guys. When I thought about how to reconceive the scene, I was like it’s got to be a cheating yard. These guys will do this, and they’ll be really funny. They showed up, and it was just perfect. It’s one of my favorite scenes in the movie. And you know what, those guys always get the biggest laughs on the screen. Here’s this guy on the “Daily Show.” who has all these great jokes in the movie, and these two guys, my buddies, get the biggest laugh in the movie. I love it.

I know you had a notice in the credits that you had a music supervisor or coordinator on the film. Did that mostly come from you? Did it come from the music person?

I can say about 80% of the music came from me. And then the other 20% was between the editor, Nat Sanders, and the actual music supervisor. What the music supervisor did   my buddy Greg   was just make it all legal.

He had produced another independent film, and he knew that I had a list of songs that I wanted. And he was said, you just can’t put those songs in. You have to figure a way to legally get them, and that was really what he did.

I like to write to music. In most of the scenes, I think the reason why they cut so well to music is because I wrote them with those cues in mind. And we made the movie so fast that I couldn’t really be there with Nat while he was editing the movie. At least, not at first, because he was editing while we were shooting it.

And so, it was great to have those definite songs for those definite set pieces that had a definite energy. I could just orally communicate to him, and then come in to do the editing. They just totally worked out.

Yeah, it had a great soundtrack.

Thanks, I appreciate it.

Well that’s all I have.

Actually I have one thing I’d like to say.

Sure. Go ahead.

Because you touched on the housing rights meeting and that being jarring, I made the comment that there are a few other places where I think it’s drawing to. I felt that because we knew that it was going to be extremely jarring in that scene, we tried to work our way up to that. I think there are two other places where we jar the audience, almost in preparation for that meeting. We tried to earn the right to do that.

I think when they’re riding the bikes and the song is clipping, it’s a very weird audio cue. I think that’s the first place where we sort of break the rules a little bit. I think with the carousel, especially with the way it ends, with the diaject sound coming back in, after the store fades out, we took another step further towards breaking that wall.

And then with the documentary scene, dropped into the narrative, that’s when we completely go beyond. But hopefully, when audiences watch the movie, I hope it prepares them for that moment.

What’s next with the film? Are you going to another festival?

Yeah. We’re going to IFP Week in New York next week. And then we’re going to go to London, Vienna and Stockholm before we are finally released by IFC with the day and date model, in February.

Wow. Well that sure beats selling DVDs on a website somewhere.

You know what, it’s funny. It’s been a hell of a journey from South by Southwest. I am sitting on the 19th floor of a hotel in Toronto talking to you right now. The last time I spoke Sprout, I was sitting in my buddy’s studio apartment in L.A. in my underwear trying to work.

And that wasn’t even that long ago. That’s pretty amazing.

No, it wasn’t that long ago. It’s a charmed little film. Thank you guys for plugging us initially.

No problem. I hope at least you have pants on now.

I do. I’m not alone. Charlie’s here too. So he made sure I put the pants on.

Nice. It was a requirement. Well cool, Barry. I wish you much continued success. And hopefully, we’ll be talking to you down the line with your next movie.

Thanks, man. I appreciate it. And if and when I do make another movie, damn right, I will definitely come to Sprout. You guys have been very good to me.

Great. That’s so nice of you to say. Thank you. We appreciate that.

Thanks, man.