Aristocrats, The : DIRECTOR’S STATEMENT


This filthy old joke is the comedy equivalent of jazz. It’s raunchy; it’s free of constraints, yet has a simple “melody” to hold onto. It’s about where you take it, not where it’s going. If that is not a workable definition of art, I don’t know what is. For years, Penn and I talked about putting a few different versions on tape, just to see what it would look like. We sensed that it might illustrate something about art and comedy that no one can ever really communicate. If nothing else, we thought, it would be funny as hell. We soon realized that much more was going on than even we had anticipated.

We didn’t set up lighting. We shot on mid-range priced consumer cameras. We shot wherever was convenient or where people felt most comfortable. We weren’t really making a movie; we were just hanging out behind closed doors with some really gifted people, and wanted them to just have fun. We had no other plan. The process of making this movie was actually a lot like telling the joke. Let go, cut loose, and just see what happens.

With over 100 hours of non-linear segments in the can, I had no idea what the movie was, let alone its shape and structure. Many versions were remarkably different. Many were similar, but demonstrated something singular. More than just a series of brilliant performances and personalities, something bigger was definitely emerging. I spent months just watching, laughing, and feeling what this stunning variety of experiences we had on tape was telling us. Many performances brought us to a handful of intuitive ideas over and over, in unique ways. Seemingly divergent approaches suddenly felt like they were exploring the same compelling ideas, in both agreement and contrast. Through- lines regarding craft, technique, and style were evident, but richer arcs that had nothing to do with comedy per se also became manifest. Each artist was just telling a stupid old joke, but together they seemed to be speaking volumes about some very rich ideas. The movie was starting to tell us what it wanted to be.

As we began to edit, we wanted the ideas to emerge intuitively, just as we experienced them, but also move us constantly forward through a larger structure. We had to deal with overall rhythm and pacing, yet had to maintain the integrity of each performer’s individual rhythm and pacing. We had to choose from an embarrassment of comic riches, and decide which brilliantly funny moment contributed more on deeper levels than another at any point. If it weren’t for the mantra “DVD bonus tracks” we never could have made this movie.

In the end, everyone takes something different from the movie. The challenges, ideas and surprises that come up are different for everybody, just as the things people find funniest are always different. That, I think, is as it should be.

They say that the best way to kill a joke is to analyze it. We hope we have defied that adage, and given you the opportunity to see a richer life in it instead.

And we really hope you have a few good laughs.

Paul Provenza
December 2004