Daily Interesting News: Daily Interesting News

Daily Interesting News Daily news about generic category, long form, long lenght articles, for all read fan. Miscellanous news, general news, amazing news, story, stories, long articles story, internet story.

ADS

Hot

Post Top Ad

Visualizzazione post con etichetta Daily Interesting News. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta Daily Interesting News. Mostra tutti i post

martedì 28 marzo 2017

Gotta Dance!

03:55 0

Gotta Dance!

Back during the Harlem Renaissance, he swept the lindy hop of its feet and transformed big-band dance. More than sixty years later, Frankie Manning got a renaissance of his own.

Gotta Dance!
Frank Manning had his name listed in the telephone directory, just like anybody else. Just like any regular person. So, in the spring of 1984, when a young woman named Erin Stevens called the operator looking for him, the operator said yes, indeed, there was a Frank Manning living in the New York metropolitan area. To be exact, there was a Frank Manning residing in Corona, Queens. Erin dialed the number. A man answered the phone. He had a friendly voice, the voice of an elderly individual.
“Is this Frankie Manning?” Erin asked.
“Yes,” he said.
“Is this Frankie Manning, the famous dancer?”
There was a long pause. It was a pause that seemed to contain years. It was a pause that seemed to contain decades. Then the man on the phone replied, very politely, “I don’t dance anymore, baby. I just work at the post office.”
•••
Erin Stevens knew full well, though, that Frankie Manning used to dance.
Frankie Manning, in his time, danced his way across the United States, Europe, Australia and South America. He danced in Hollywood and even choreographed movies like A Day at the Races. He danced in traveling shows, opening for stars like Billie Holiday, Duke Ellington, Count Basie, Nat King Cole. He danced for Orson Welles and Greta Garbo. He danced on the ocean liners and in the newsreels. He danced at the World’s Fair. He danced at the Cotton Club, Radio City, the Royal Albert Hall, the Moulin Rouge, the Paradise Club, the Tropicana, the Palladium, the Apollo, the Strand and the Roxy. And he danced, as they say, for the great crowned heads of Europe.
All this was a long, long time ago. Back before the big war.
Frankie Manning was one of the greatest lindy hoppers who ever lived, but you’ve probably never heard of him. Maybe you’ve never even heard of the lindy hop. Maybe it doesn’t sound like much to you. Maybe “lindy hop” sounds simple and innocent because of that baby word, “hop.” But the lindy was not a simple dance, and it was not very innocent, either. The lindy was powerful, lusty, quicker than whiplash. It was a baby of the Charleston. The lindy was famously sexy. A man and a woman lindy hopping worked together like pistons, pulling near and pushing apart, swinging each other out of sight to the driving rhythm of a live big band.
The lindy was a Harlem dance, and Frankie Manning was a Harlem boy. He was a strong, handsome, dark-skinned kid with a big, shaved head. As a young man, he had a nickname that was known throughout his neighborhood. Everyone called him Musclehead. His head was a beautiful thing—a Michael Jordan head, decades before Michael Jordan. But when Frankie Manning danced, he danced hard, and all the muscles in his skull would bust out from the exertion of it. Up at the Savoy Ballroom, the people would crowd in a circle around Frankie Manning as he danced, and they’d all be stomping their feet and sweating and shouting, “Go, Musclehead, go!”
This was the Harlem of the 1930s—a swinging, dancing, glittering Harlem. And this was the Savoy Ballroom, the jewel of Harlem, “the Home of Happy Feet.” The Savoy was Frankie’s domain. He danced there every night. He’d hear that swing music driving before he even hit the dance floor, the jazz already pounding as he came up that gorgeous set of marble stairs, with the chandeliers shimmering above. By the time he hit that lush ballroom—blue and gold, long as a city block, equipped with two bandstands, packed with 1,000 swinging people—Frankie Manning would already be dancing.
He’d be in his best suit, looking, in his own words, “sharp as a cat.” He’d find some beautiful girl, give her a whirl. She might be black, might be white. Didn’t matter. The Savoy was the only integrated ballroom in New York City, and everybody got it on with everybody else. White debutantes, black maids, white college boys, black soldiers—they all pressed together at the Savoy. They came to dance, and to watch the dancing, too. Specifically, they came to watch that privileged area of the ballroom called Cats’ Corner, where hot guys like Frankie Manning performed and competed.
Go, Musclehead, go!
The dancers in Cats’ Corner were the best dancers in Harlem, which in the 1930s pretty much meant they were the best dancers anywhere. When Frankie Manning traveled the world with the dance troupe Whitey’s Lindy Hoppers, they had only to advertise “direct from the Savoy Ballroom” to sell out the house. People knew exactly what that meant back then. People knew exactly what the black Savoy dancers were. “Unquestionably the finest,” reported The New York Times. “Remarkable.”
Manning at the Savoy.
A natural choreographer, Frankie invented “air steps” for the lindy hop, remarkable acrobatic moves where he’d throw his partner over his back and head. Nobody had ever done this before, and it blew people’s minds. Sixty years later, his moves still dazzle. I’ve seen old footage of Frankie Manning snapping his partners in the air the way you would snap sand from a beach towel. I’ve seen photographs of Frankie throwing a girl so high her feet were on the same level as his head, and he was a tall man.
Whitey’s Lindy Hoppers stole every show they ever performed in. The great tap dancer Bill “Bojangles” Robinson referred to them as “that raggedy bunch of crazy kids.” But the crowds loved their showboating. When the Lindy Hoppers cut loose at Radio City, for instance, they were called back for five encores by a standing, cheering all-white audience. Frankie was a pretty big star. He hung out with Joe Louis, clowned with Groucho Marx, loved Louis Armstrong like a brother. He counted Sarah Vaughan among his best friends and knew Dizzy Gillespie “back when he was called John.” Frankie stayed in fine hotels, loved the most beautiful chorus girls of the day. He was at the top of his game. He was the best.
And then the war came.
Frankie Manning was drafted. He served in the South Pacific for five years, and when he came back to America, swing music was finished. The big-band era was over. Bebop jazz had arrived, and there was nothing for Frankie to dance to anymore. He performed one night with his old friend Dizzy, struggling to find the rhythm in Dizzy’s improvisational stylings. After the show, he confronted the trumpeter: “What the fuck was that?” Dizzy gave a big grin. It was the future of jazz.
Frankie tried for a few years to keep his career alive, but there was no work. By this time, he had a family to support, and so, in 1955, he quit dancing altogether. He joined the post office. People have to make hard choices. This was Frankie’s.
Did he ever look back with longing on his glory days? He says he did not. “There’s no use crying over what could have been,” Frankie Manning told me. It was over. He’d once been a dancer; now he was a postman. He never told his new friends about his old career. He even had a friend who used to say, “Frankie, I’m going to take you out one of these nights and teach you how to dance.” Frankie would just smile, never mentioning that he’d once danced a command performance for the king of England.
For thirty years, he worked in the post office. And he never in his wildest dreams imagined the day would come when he would be a dancer again.
“And I have some wild dreams,” said Frankie Manning.
•••
So it happened that three decades passed. Then there was that fateful telephone call, placed by Erin Stevens, in the spring of 1984.
Is this Frankie Manning, the famous dancer?
I don’t dance anymore, baby. I just work at the post office.
Erin had come all the way from California to find Frankie Manning. She’d come with her dance partner, a young guy named Steven Mitchell. Erin and Steven were among a growing group of young dancers who had recently rediscovered the dance music of the 1930s—music that sounded incredibly fresh to ears jaded from a lifetime of rock-and-roll monotony. Following the big-band sound, Erin and Steven had become obsessed with the lindy hop. The dance was largely extinct, though, and there were few clues left about its origins. They researched for years before stumbling over Frankie’s name.
The truth is, he didn’t want to see them at first. “I’m retired from dancing,” he kept saying. But he finally agreed to teach them what he could remember. Over the next week, Erin and Steven went out to Frankie Manning’s house in Queens every day. They danced with him on his living-room carpet. They would dance all morning, and then Frankie would rush off to work at the post office. It had been decades, of course, since Frankie had been a Lindy Hopper. He had no vocabulary for lindy anymore, no way of explaining it. The lessons moved slowly. But one afternoon they had a major breakthrough. Steven finally said, “Frankie, do me a favor. Just dance one dance with Erin. Just dance with her.”
They put on a record—Count Bassie’s recording of “Shiny Stockings.” Frankie took Erin into his arms and began to move. All his smoothness returned. He fell right into his lovely, natural eight-count swinging’ Savoy-style lindy step. He laughed and laughed. He swung that girl right out, and Steven watched with revelation.
”That one dance changed my life,” Steven recalled. “That was the heart and soul of lindy hop. That’s what we’d been searching for the whole time.”
Of course, dancing to “Shiny Stockings” with young Erin Stevens changed Frankie Manning’s life, too. It brought the dance back into his bones. And it led him to the status he is enjoying so much today: Beloved National Treasure.
After being rediscovered by Erin and Steven, Frankie Manning became a name all over again. Such a renaissance you have never seen. Within a year of dancing with Erin in his Queens living room, Frankie was in constant demand as a teacher, performer and choreographer. For many people in the dance world, it was like finding out Fred Astaire was still alive and willing to give workshops.
He started teaching lindy all over the world. Then the media caught his story and loved it. Frankie was profiled on 20/20 and Good Morning America and in the pages of The New York Times. He was interviewed by the Smithsonian. There was a documentary made of his life, called Swinging’ at the Savoy. He was awarded National Endowment for the Arts grants for choreography. He danced at Lincoln Center. He was hired as a consultant for an Alvin Ailey ballet. He was an adviser on Spike Lee’s Malcolm X. He did such a good job choreographing the Broadway musical Black and Blue that he won a Tony Award for his efforts.
Thirty years away from dance, and the guy was winning freakin’ Tonys!
He’s 84 years old now, and you should see him. He is such an attractive person. He still has that big, handsome bald head—a Yul Brynner head, years after Yul Brynner. He looks a good twenty-five years younger than his age. Long divorced, he’s dating a nice lady name Judy, who is a good thirty years younger than his age. He has a great, strong chest, and when I danced with him, I could feel the muscles across his back, which I liked very much.
He dances every day now, just as he did when he was a young man. Please remember that Frankie Manning is 84 years old when I tell you that he virtually lives on the road. This year alone, Frankie has taught swing seminars in Denver, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Houston and Phoenix and made appearances in England, Singapore, Sweden, Norway, Germany and Japan.
“Had you ever been to Japan before?” I asked him.
“No, I had not.” Frankie said. There was a small pause, and then he added, “Well, not as a dance instructor.”
Frankie Manning is always precise with the facts, so I asked him in exactly what capacity he had been to Japan before.
“As a member of the United States occupying forces,” he clarified.
One of the smaller dance seminars Frankie taught at this year was held in Baltimore, where 400 people came for a weekend of lindy-hop lessons and big-band dancing. I sat in on a few classes. It was a real joy to watch Frankie Manning teach. Denzel Washington, who studied under Frankie for the lindy-hop scenes in Malcolm X, said, “He’s young, he’s fun, he’s smooth, and he’s got total positive energy. When we were learning the lindy hop with Frankie, we tried to have as much fun as he was having. We were just trying to keep up with him.”
After any class Frankie teaches, his students line up to have their picture taken with him and to get his autograph. They’re crazy about him. They wear T-shirts emblazoned with his face. The girls can’t seem to stop themselves from kissing him.
”He’s the lindy God,” one young man told me. “He’s the cat who does everything cool.”
He’s also the cat who has infinite patience and good humor. This gifted man, who once soared as a dancer, will stand there all day long, slowly counting, “And-one-and-two-and-three…,” keeping time for a group of earnest clodhoppers who haven’t the first molecule of rhythm. Watching Frankie Manning teach lindy hop to beginners would be like watching Duke Ellington teach “Chopsticks” to a second grader.
Even if they don’t get it,” Frankie said, “they’re having fun, and that’s fun for me to watch.”
But he teaches more than the steps, anyway. He has a bigger lesson plan. Frankie teaches intimacy. He teaches men and women how to be with each other. It is Frankie Manning’s belief that the men and women of America lost a great deal of intimacy when they stopped dancing together as partners. It is Frankie Manning’s belief that most of the communication problems between modern men and women can be worked out on the dance floor. The couple that sways together, after all, stays together.
“Men and women,” Frankie said, “used to come together to dance. Back in the ’30s, if I was dancing with you, I would talk to you. How was your day? How’s your family? How are you feeling? We could spend time together and have a conversation. That’s how you got to know a person. When men and women stopped dancing socially, they lost the connection, the closeness.”
Frankie thinks that modern men, in particular, do not know how to behave properly anymore. And so he teaches them. In the course of his dance classes, Frankie teaches his male students manners, kindness and, not least in importance, grooming. “You have to look good,” he tells the men. “When you ask a girl to dance, the first thing she does is take a step back and look you over. You gotta give her something good to look at, fellas.”
For Frankie, style, dignity, dance and romance are connected. For his students, it is the possibility of resurrecting exactly those things that is so appealing. One of Frankie’s best students, a young professional modern dancer named Mickey Davidson, explained her attraction to lindy hop this way: “Here I am, this head-of-the-household single black mother, carrying the world on my shoulders. But when I dance with a man, I have to relax and surrender. I have to trust that, for just two minutes, this man is going to take care of me. As a woman, you don’t lose anything with that surrender. You need it sometimes.”
“Look at each other!” Frankie Manning always insists when he’s teaching a class. “Stop looking at your feet! Look at each other!” He tells his male students again and again, “Hold her close. Hold her closer. You have to dance with every woman like you’re in love with her.”
Love? Well, love is a tall order. A lot of people these days don’t love their sexual partners, much less their dance partners. But love is exactly what Frankie demands. Even if it’s just for two minutes. He interrupted a class once with this statement: “Fellas, the lady you are dancing with is a queen.”
We all laughed—men and women alike. Frankie waited for the laughter to ebb, and he said it again: “She is a queen.”
He was serious. “She is a queen.” He was going to keep saying that until we all heard him, until we all understood exactly how serious he was. The room got very quiet.
“And what do you do to a queen?” he asked. “You bow to her. When you’re dancing with a woman, you should be bowing to her, all the time. That’s the feeling you should have. She is letting you dance with her. You should be grateful, fellas.”
He turned the music back on. At that moment, I happened to be dancing with an awfully handsome off-duty fireman, who took me into his arms—very close—looked me in the eyes and smiled lovingly. I started to feel a little woozy.
“That’s better,” said Frankie Manning.
Of course, Frankie teaches dance, too, during those dance classes. He teaches technical, formal style points, too. It’s not all etiquette. He does want you to learn how to move your ass.
“Get down!” he says. “Get low! Get sassy! Stay low to the ground! Don’t be afraid to bend your legs! Lower! This ain’t no Riverdance, people!”
•••
Frankie has no shortage of students to teach, because swing has returned to American culture in a big way. Dormant since before the war, swing is big again now. Swing is everywhere. The swing resurgence started in, of all places, the punk communities of California. While there were always a few dancers interested in swing for its rich historic value, it was the punks who made it back into an actual scene. In the late ‘80s, the hard-core kids started thinking punk had become too mainstream, too diluted, and they saw this retro movement as a way to turn things in the opposite direction. All over Los Angeles, thrash guitarists took to wearing gabardine suits and playing trombones. Skinhead girls grew their hair out and started styling it like Betty Grable’s. All those ex-punks formed a cool little subculture, which has since erupted into something much bigger. Swing is, in the words of one young dancer, “frighteningly huge now.”
The swing movement has become so mainstream that the Gap is using swing dancers to advertise its khakis on TV. Swing dancers have even been featured in rap videos. And it’s not just a hip, urban phenomenon anymore. Unless you live in the middle of absolute nowhere, swing has probably come to your town, too. I’ve met 14-year-olds from suburban Maryland who are into swing. They listen to Benny Goodman in study hall. They have swing bands at their proms. I asked one such girl if her parents could dance.
“No way,” she said, exquisitely disgusted.
“What kind of music do your parents like?” I asked.
“Led Zeppelin,” the girl said, and rolled her eyes.
As if.
The students Frankie Manning teaches these days are predominately white. There is no getting around this. The lindy may have begun life as a black dance in Harlem, but it is largely a white dance today. There are several explanations given for this. Some people say black dance continued to evolve after the ‘40s and lindy was absorbed into newer dances. For instance, a lot of Frankie’s steps used to show up on Soul Train, and they still show up in today’s hip-hop moves. In other words, the argument goes, black kids don’t need a swing revival, because they never stopped swinging.
Others argue that the swing revival will remain a predominately white, elitist experience as long as it remains so prohibitively expensive. Big bands are costly to hire, so swing dances can run $30 a ticket. The vintage clothing alone (not to mention its dry cleaning) will bust your bank wide open. Besides which, lindy is now taught in dance schools, and there is simply not a tradition in America of black people paying money for dance classes.
Whatever the cause, it annoys Frankie that there aren’t more black faces out there studying lindy, but he won’t dwell on it, because Frankie Manning will not dwell on any question of racial imbalance. Racism and its effects are not subjects Frankie likes to discuss. He won’t go there. Everybody knows that about him. His refusal to give questions of race anything more than a curt dismissal can be frustrating at first. If you let him get away with it, he’ll dismiss the entire history of American racism with this one diplomatic line: “There are good people and bad people of every color.”
True, but an awfully big simplification.
“Sure, I experienced segregation myself,” Frankie said when pushed. “When I was traveling through the South in the ‘30s, there were lots of places we couldn’t eat. We’d drive our bus up t some restaurant and they’d say, ‘No niggers allowed.’ We’d try to tell the folks, ‘Hey, man, we got Nat King Cole on this bus. We got Ella Fitzgerald on this bus.’ But they didn’t care who we were. They didn’t want any of us around.”
Was Frankie damaged by this? He sure doesn’t seem damaged. He shrugs it right off, even in recollection. “What are you going to do?” he asked. “Let anger eat you up?” Frankie never let racism degrade him, but, then again, he wasn’t raised in a culture of degradation. He was raised in Harlem, and Harlem was different. Harlem in the 1930s was something like a small black nation whose citizens had real political, economic and intellectual autonomy.
Frankie, as a gifted performer, was constantly surrounded by blacks who were not only rich, famous and talented but also greatly self-assured. To them the Jim Crow South was a freak show, often more ridiculous than intimidating. Norma Miller, one of Frankie’s old dance partners, told me she laughed her head off the first time she traveled in the South and saw separate water fountains for black people and white people.
“I was like, You have got to be kidding me!” Norma recalled. “That was the stupidest system I’d ever seen. And I said so, too. Oh, they hated me in the South, but I always spoke my mind. I didn’t give a shit. I’d been to Europe, honey. These people were goddamn rednecks.”
Unfortunately, the rednecks were often in charge. Back in the ‘30s, there were countless venues in America where black artists could perform but not sit in the audience. Frankie Manning and Whitey’s Lindy Hoppers opened a show once for Billie Holiday at a fancy hotel in Boston. It was a monthlong engagement. The first night, after their performance, Frankie and his dancers slipped into the audience to watch Billie sing. They were immediately thrown out. “No colored people allowed in the dining room,” said the manager. (“And this was Boston!” Frankie said, still amazed.) After the show, Billie found the Lindy Hoppers sitting glumly backstage and asked, “Don’t you like my singing? I saw you in the audience, and when I looked again, you were gone.” They explained what had happened. Billie called over the manager of the hotel. She told him, “My friends can sit in that audience or I don’t sing another note here.” After much negotiation, the Lindy Hoppers were finally given a table in the dining room. It was a table in the back, but it was a table nonetheless.
“And you can sure bet we sat there every night,” Frankie said, grinning.
That happens to be a story of victory, which is exactly why Frankie will tell it. There are other stories, I’m sure, that didn’t end so triumphantly, but we won’t be hearing about those. Tougher, more tragic stories may well be part of America’s history, but they aren’t part of Frankie’s. Not the way he chooses to tell it.
Others may tell it differently. When I asked Steven Mitchell—Frankie’s young, black dancing disciple—if he believed Frankie’s career had been limited by race, Steven looked at me as if I were some new breed of idiot. “Are you kidding?” he said. “Frankie Manning should be a household name. He should be revered. He was every bit as important to American dance as Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly. But he was black. He went as far as he could go, but it wasn’t far enough. Whatever small fame he has today, it’s not enough. It will never make up for what was lost.”
It’s true that when the swing era came to a close, Frankie couldn’t make a transition into some other branch of show business. He’d been pigeonholed as a black lindy hopper, a novelty act, and he could never be anything else. So why isn’t he pissed off about it? Because Frankie is bigger than that. Because Frankie was born a good-natured man, goddamn it, and he intends to remain one. Because Frankie has spent a lifetime refusing to make our racism his problem.
“I call Frankie ‘the Black Man’s Revenge,’” said his student Mickey Davidson, “because he’s always done just what he pleased, despite the prejudice. In an era when a black man could be killed for even looking at a white woman, he had all the white women he ever wanted. He had all the every-kind-of-woman he ever wanted! In a time when blacks couldn’t travel, he saw the world. In a time when blacks had no power, he was a star. Now he’s got his post-office pension, and he can relax and do whatever he wants. He’s always lived his life how he wanted to. And he did it without fighting or hollering or burning anything down.”
•••
Well, there was some fighting.
Remember that Frankie Manning spent five years in the United states Army during the Second World War. He was stationed in the South Pacific, which provided some of the ugliest fighting American soldiers saw during the war. Frankie will only sketch the broadest details of that time. Yes, he served in a black battalion, under white officers. Yes, he invaded New Guinea, with “the bombs and bullets falling on everyone.” Yes, he was awarded some medals, “you know, for bravery and all that stuff.”
He leaves his military history at that, but his girlfriend, Judy, adds the grim detail that Frankie also experienced hand-to-hand combat against Japanese soldiers. The tragedy is, he was probably quite good at it. What is hand-to-hand combat if not a gruesome parallel of dance? But what a waste of a dancer’s grace. And he will not talk about that.
When it comes to war stories, Frankie always leads the conversation back to the few happy memories of his service. There’s one story he particularly likes to tell. Frankie took a troop ship to the South Pacific, along with hundreds of other terrified young GIs. There was a female singer on that ship who entertained the boys. Every night she’d put on a show. It was a little something to keep the soldiers from thinking about exactly when and how they were going to face the possibility of death. And every night she used to sing this popular tune of the day called “Whatcha Know, Joe?” The lyrics went like this: Whatcha know, Joe? / I don’t know nothin’! / Whatcha know, Joe? / I don’t know nothin’!
And so on, and so on. It was a dorky song, but the boys liked it. One night, when the lady was performing, Frankie—himself a world-class performer—could no longer resist joining in. When she sang, “Whatcha know, Joe?” Frankie popped up from his set and shouted, “I don’t know nothin’!” It brought down the house. The soldiers thought it was hilarious. So every night after that, she would look for Frankie Manning whenever she sang that song.
“Whatcha know, Joe?” she’d sing, and he’d sing out in reply, “I don’t know nothin’!
The other soldiers would die laughing. It may not sound like much of a joke, but consider the circumstances. Now, one night, the lady was singing as usual. She got to that favorite tune and sang, “Whatcha know, Joe?” but as Frankie was about to respond, the lights went out.
“When the lights went out on our troop ship,” Frankie told me, “that meant an enemy submarine had been detected. That meant everybody had to sit there in dead silence. You couldn’t make a sound, or that submarine would hear you and blow you out of the water. You never knew if you were going to live or die. You never knew how long it would last.”
That particular night, the blackout lasted about twenty minutes. An eternity. The men sat in silent fear in the dark. Then the lights came back on. Frankie jumped out of his seat.
“I don’t know nothin’!” he shouted.
The troops roared with laughter and relief.
To me, that story is Frankie Manning. That story is exactly what happened to his career. He was performing happily and successfully one moment, and the next moment the lights went out. Only, for Frankie Manning, the lights went out for thirty years. Thirty long years at that post office, never knowing if he’d come out of it. But Frankie wasn’t afraid, and he didn’t despair. He just waited in the dark. And when the lights did come back on, in 1984—so suddenly—he was ready.
He’d never really been gone. He’d just been waiting for his cue.
•••
The regulars at Wells are mostly black men in their eighties and nineties. Some of them are old stars from the Savoy; some are just lifelong social dancers. They’re all vibrant individuals. In fact, the only harsh word Frankie Manning ever spoke to me was when I asked him about one famous Wells regular, an elderly man named Buster Brown.
I said, “Buster Brown used to be a great tap dancer, didn’t he?”
“Buster Brown is still a great tap dancer,” Frankie corrected me, sternly.
One Monday afternoon, before heading over to Wells, Frankie Manning took me on a tour of Harlem. We cruised the neighborhood in his Buick Regal. Frankie started the tour by pointing out a church on 132nd Street and saying, “The Lafayette Theatre used to be right there. I entered an amateur contest there one night. The crowd hated me. I got dragged offstage by a guy with a cane. That’s the first time I ever danced for an audience.”
But the Lafayette Theatre is gone now, and so is the bar that used to be a block away, called the Hoofers Club, where all the tap dancers used to hang out. The Dickie Wells nightclub on 133rd Street is also gone. The nightclub called Smalls’ Paradise is still there, but it’s boarded up and the windows are full of cement. Smalls’ Paradise was once owned by a tough character named Ed Smalls. I asked Frankie if he knew Ed Smalls, and he said, “I didn’t want to know Ed Smalls. See, he had this little chorus girl for a girlfriend. But she liked me, and I liked her, and we used to…” Frankie grabbed my hand, stilled my pen and said, “You ain’t writin’ this down, baby.”
Then he finished his story. I wish I could tell you what Frankie Manning said about that chorus girl. I really do.
Then we drove over to 135th Street, where Jesse Owens, in a publicity stunt, once raced against a horse. We passed the YMCA where Frankie used to play basketball with the guys from Cab Calloway’s band. Then over to the site of the former Lincoln Theatre. Frankie’s mother knew an usher at the Lincoln who would let Frankie in for free every day after school. He’d watch the movies, comedians and dance shows all afternoon, until his mother came home from work. The Lincoln Theatre, Frankie’s baby-sitter, is gone now. So is the apartment house on 138th Street where he once lived. So is the bar on St. Nicholas Avenue where Billie Holiday used to sing.
“Harlem used to be so great,” Frankie said. “It was all music and dance. That’s why the people came here from downtown, because it never stopped. I can still see it how it was, with the cars pulled up to the nightclubs and the people all dressed up. I don’t drive around Harlem very much anymore, because, to tell you the truth, it makes me too sad. It’s all gone.”
Nothing is more gone than the Savoy Ballroom. Not a brick of that fantastic building remains. There’s an ugly low-income housing complex on the site now.
“They just came one day and ripped the Savoy down,” Frankie said. “Can you believe that? They didn’t even put up a plaque to commemorate it. All that history, they just tore it down. The only thing left is me to tell you it was ever there.”
He shrugged, then smiled. “And that’s the end of your tour, baby.”
The Harlem tour was a rare afternoon of looking backward for Frankie Manning. He doesn’t usually do that. Not in a sad way, anyhow. It’s not his nature to dwell on unpleasantness. He would much prefer to remember the good stuff.
“Count Basie!” he shouted, for instance, when I asked him who had the best swing band of all time. He threw his head back and laughed, slamming his hand on the table with delight. “You don’t have to ask me twice! Count Basie! Count Basie! That cat could swing our pants off! Count Basie!”
On another occasion, I asked him where he would go if he were given one night to travel back in time.
“The Savoy!” he shouted, and he looked so happy picturing it. “I would go back to the Savoy for one of those nights when they had a battle of the bands, like when Chick Webb battled Benny Goodman. Man, we used to really swing then. And I’d bring back some of these young lindy hoppers from today, so they could really see how we danced. I’d love that. I’d love to hear all the old-time Savoy cats say, ‘You kids from the ’90s dance pretty good, but now stand back and watch us kids from the ‘30s go!’”
Frankie savored the fantasy for a moment, and then he let it go. No point in living in the past, after all. Nothing to be gained from that. “Got to keep looking ahead,” he said.
So he drives himself forward, always pushing on, always living like a man half his age. He accepts every opportunity he’s given to dance, teach or travel. And he books himself solid, months and years into the future. I picked up a flyer at one swing seminar, encouraging swingers to sign up for the Millennium Hop—the New Year’s Eve 2000 event with Frankie Manning, already scheduled at the glamorous Riviera Pacifico in Ensenada, Mexico. I love this. I love the casual assumption that Frankie Manning will not only still be with us at the end of the millennium but will be dancing up a storm somewhere in Mexico at midnight. But of course he’ll be there. Frankie Manning loves a good party. I was with him when he turned 84 this year, and it was a great day. The swing societies of different cities have taken to celebrating Frankie’s birthday each year. It’s a tradition. He’s been honored with blowout dances in New York, Washington and Munich, Germany, but this year Baltimore won. Swing Baltimore hosted a huge party for him in the ballroom of the Sheraton, with a full big band and hundreds of guests from around the world.
There is another tradition that has grown up around Frankie’s birthday. It started on his eightieth birthday, when he danced with eighty women in a row to celebrate the occasion. He enjoyed it so much, they arrange the same scenario for him every year now. They just keep adding women to the line, another woman for every year.
After the cake was cut, the band in Baltimore started to swing. Frankie, looking sharp as a cat in a black four-button suit and a bright red tie, stretched out his arms to welcome his first young lady. She was a cute brunette. He swung her out beautifully and dipped her. He twirled her away, and the next girl stepped up to dance, and then the next and the next and the next. A group of young men sitting on the floor counted off the women, keeping track for Frankie.
Thirty-one, thirty-two, thirty-three…
There was every kind of woman in that line. There were black ones and white ones and brown ones. There were lean ones and chubby ones. There were long, elegant ladies and also the kind that are short and easy to throw around. There was someone in that line to represent every kind of woman Frankie had ever danced with or loved. Which, for Frankie Manning, is the same thing.
Fifty-four, fifty-five, fifty-six…
The band played through song after song. Frankie danced with the married ladies and the wild ones and the girls who stumbled awkward and giggling into his arms. At one point, two sexy teenagers jumped out of the line together and Frankie danced with them both at the same time, without missing a beat.
Seventy-six, seventy-seven, seventy-eight…
When he got to eighty-four, there were still women left in the line, so he laughed and kept on dancing, right past his age. Frankie Manning ended up dancing with nearly a hundred women. He was tireless and suave. It was incredible to watch him move, and I’ll tell you the truth—I’ve never seen a sexier man. And here’s why: He managed to make each dance—each woman—distinct. In no more than a step or two, Frankie Manning sensed the individual style of his partner and he altered his dance slightly to make hers look more beautiful. In doing so, he seemed to be bowing to every woman he touched. As though he revered and adored every last one of them. As though every last one of them were a queen.
Read More

venerdì 24 marzo 2017

THE MOVIE WITH A THOUSAND PLOTLINES

07:34 0
Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, young directors who go by the joint film credit Daniels, are known for reality-warped miniatures—short films, music videos, commercials—that are eerie yet playful in mood. In their work, people jump into other people’s bodies, Teddy bears dance to hard-core dubstep, rednecks shoot clothes from rifles onto fleeing nudists. Last year, their first feature-length project, “Swiss Army Man”—starring Daniel Radcliffe, who plays a flatulent talking corpse that befriends a castaway—premièred at Sundance, and left some viewers wondering if it was the strangest thing ever to be screened at the festival. The Times, deciding that the film was impossible to categorize, called it “weird and wonderful, disgusting and demented.”Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, young directors who go by the joint film credit Daniels, are known for reality-warped miniatures—short films, music videos, commercials—that are eerie yet playful in mood. In their work, people jump into other people’s bodies, Teddy bears dance to hard-core dubstep, rednecks shoot clothes from rifles onto fleeing nudists. Last year, their first feature-length project, “Swiss Army Man”—starring Daniel Radcliffe, who plays a flatulent talking corpse that befriends a castaway—premièred at Sundance, and left some viewers wondering if it was the strangest thing ever to be screened at the festival. The Times, deciding that the film was impossible to categorize, called it “weird and wonderful, disgusting and demented.”

Perhaps it is no surprise, then, that when the Daniels were notified by their production company, several years ago, that an Israeli indie pop star living in New York wanted to hire them to experiment with technology that could alter fundamental assumptions of moviemaking, they took the call.

The musician was Yoni Bloch, arguably the first Internet sensation on Israel’s music scene—a wispy, bespectacled songwriter from the Negev whose wry, angst-laden music went viral in the early aughts, leading to sold-out venues and a record deal. After breaking up with his girlfriend, in 2007, Bloch had hoped to win her back by thinking big. He made a melancholy concept album about their relationship, along with a companion film in the mode of “The Wall”—only to fall in love with the actress who played his ex. He had also thought up a more ambitious idea: an interactive song that listeners could shape as it played. But by the time he got around to writing it his hurt feelings had given way to more indeterminate sentiments, and the idea grew to become an interactive music video. The result, “I Can’t Be Sad Anymore,” which he and his band released online in 2010, opens with Bloch at a party in a Tel Aviv apartment. Standing on a balcony, he puts on headphones, then wanders among his friends, singing about his readiness to escape melancholy. He passes the headphones to others; whoever wears them sings, too. Viewers decide, by clicking on onscreen prompts, how the headphones are passed—altering, in real time, the song’s vocals, orchestration, and emotional tone, while also following different micro-dramas. If you choose the drunk, the camera follows her as she races into the bathroom, to Bloch’s words “I want to drink less / but be more drunk.” Choose her friend instead, and the video leads to sports fans downing shots, with the lyrics “I want to work less / but for a greater cause.”

Bloch came to believe that there was commercial potential in the song’s underlying technology—software that he and his friends had developed during a few intense coding marathons. (Bloch had learned to write programs at an early age, starting on a Commodore 64.) He put his music career on hold, raised millions of dollars in venture capital, and moved to New York. Bloch called his software Treehouse and his company Interlude—the name hinting at a cultural gap between video games and movies which he sought to bridge. What he was selling was “a new medium,” he took to saying. Yet barely anyone knew of it. Treehouse was technology in need of an auteur, which is why Bloch reached out to the Daniels—encouraging them to use the software as they liked. “It was like handing off a new type of camera and saying, ‘Now, use this and do something amazing,’ ” he recalled. “ ‘I don’t want to tell you what to do.’ ”

Bloch was offering for film an idea that has long existed in literature. In 1941, Jorge Luis Borges wrote a story about a learned Chinese governor who retreated from civilization to write an enormous, mysterious novel called “The Garden of Forking Paths.” In Borges’s telling, the novel remained a riddle—chaotic, fragmentary, impenetrable—for more than a century, until a British Sinologist deciphered it: the book, he discovered, sought to explore every possible decision that its characters could make, every narrative bifurcation, every parallel time line. By chronicling all possible worlds, the author was striving to create a complete model of the universe as he understood it. Borges apparently recognized that a philosophical meditation on bifurcating narratives could make for more rewarding reading than the actual thing. “The Garden of Forking Paths,” if it truly explored every possible story line, would have been a novel without any direction—a paradox, in that it would hardly say more than a blank page.

Cartoon
“Part of me is going to miss liberal democracy.”
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
Daniel Kwan told me that while he was in elementary school, in the nineteen-nineties, he often returned from the public library with stacks of Choose Your Own Adventure novels—slim volumes, written in the second person, that allow readers to decide at key moments how the story will proceed. (“If you jump down on the woolly mammoth, turn to page 29. If you continue on foot, turn to page 30.”) The books were the kind of thing you could find in a child’s backpack alongside Garbage Pail Kids cards and Matchbox cars. For a brief time, they could offer up a kind of Borgesian magic, but the writing was schlocky, the plot twists jarring, the endings inconsequential. As literature, the books never amounted to anything; the point was that they could be played. “Choose Your Own Adventure was great,” Kwan told me. “But even as a kid I was, like, there is something very unsatisfying about these stories.”

Early experiments in interactive film were likewise marred by shtick. In 1995, a company called Interfilm collaborated with Sony to produce “Mr. Payback,” based on a script by Bob Gale, who had worked on the “Back to the Future” trilogy. In the movie, a cyborg meted out punishment to baddies while the audience, voting with handheld controllers, chose the act of revenge. The film was released in forty-four theatres. Critics hated it. “The basic problem I had with the choices on the screen with ‘Mr. Payback’ is that they didn’t have one called ‘None of the above,’ ” Roger Ebert said, declaring the movie the worst of the year. “We don’t want to interact with a movie. We want it to act on us. That’s why we go, so we can lose ourselves in the experience.”

Gene Siskel cut in: “Do it out in the lobby—play the video game. Don’t try to mix the two of them together. It’s not going to work!”

Siskel and Ebert might have been willfully severe. But they had identified a cognitive clash that—as the Daniels also suspected—any experiment with the form would have to navigate. Immersion in a narrative, far from being passive, requires energetic participation; while watching movies, viewers must continually process new details—keeping track of all that has happened and forecasting what might plausibly happen. Good stories, whether dramas or action films, tend to evoke emotional responses, including empathy and other forms of social cognition. Conversely, making choices in a video game often produces emotional withdrawal: players are either acquiring skills or using them reflexively to achieve discrete rewards. While narratives help us to make sense of the world, skills help us to act within it.

As the Daniels discussed Bloch’s offer, they wondered if some of these problems were insurmountable, but the more they talked about them, the more they felt compelled to take on the project. “We tend to dive head first into things we initially want to reject,” Kwan said. “Interactive filmmaking—it’s like this weird thing where you are giving up control of a tight narrative, which is kind of the opposite of what most filmmakers want. Because the viewer can’t commit to one thing, it can be a frustrating experience. And yet we as human beings are fascinated by stories that we can shape, because that’s what life is like—life is a frustrating thing where we can’t commit to anything. So we were, like, O.K., what if we took a crack at it? No one was touching it. What would happen if we did?”

The Daniels live half a mile from each other, in northern Los Angeles, and they often brainstorm in informal settings: driveway basketball court, back-yard swing set, couch, office. After making an experimental demo for Bloch, they signed on for a dramatic short film. “Let us know any ideas you have,” Bloch told them. “We’ll find money for any weird thing.” By then, Interlude had developed a relationship with Xbox Entertainment Studios, a now defunct wing of Microsoft that was created to produce television content for the company’s game console. (The show “Humans,” among others, was first developed there.) Xbox signed on to co-produce.

While brainstorming, the Daniels mined their misgivings for artistic insight. “We’d be, like, This could suck if the audience was taken out of the story right when it was getting good—if they were asked to make a choice when they didn’t want to. And then we would laugh and be, like, What if we intentionally did that?” Scheinert told me. “We started playing with a movie that ruins itself, even starts acknowledging that.” Perhaps the clash between interactivity and narrative which Ebert had identified could be resolved by going meta—by making the discordance somehow essential to the story. The Daniels came up with an idea based on video-game-obsessed teen-agers who crash a high-school party. “We wanted to integrate video-game aesthetics and moments into the narrative—crazy flights of fancy that were almost abrasively interactive,” Scheinert said. “Because the characters were obsessed with gaming, we would have permission to have buttons come up in an intrusive and motivated way.”

Cartoon
“Your grass-fed beef—are the cows forced to eat the grass?”
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
For other ideas, the two directors looked to previous work by Bloch’s company. Interlude had designed several simple games, music videos, and online ads for Subaru and J. Crew, among others, but the scope for interaction was limited. “It was, like, pick what color the girl’s makeup is, or, like, pick the color of the car and watch the driver drive around,” Scheinert recalled. One project that interested them was a music video for Bob Dylan’s “Like a Rolling Stone.” While the song plays, viewers can flip among sixteen faux cable channels—sports, news, game shows, documentaries, dramas—but on each channel everyone onscreen is singing Dylan’s lyrics. The video attracted a million views within twenty-four hours, with the average viewer watching it three times in a row. The Daniels liked the restrained structure of the interactivity: instead of forking narratives, the story—in this case, the song—remained fixed; viewers were able to alter only the context of what they heard.

With this principle in mind, the Daniels came up with an idea for a horror film: five strangers trapped in a bar visited by a supernatural entity. “Each has a different take on what it is, and you as a viewer are switching between perspectives,” Kwan said. “One person thinks the whole thing is a prank, so he has a cynical view. One is religious and sees it as spiritual retribution. One sees it as her dead husband. The whole thing is a farcical misunderstanding of five characters who see five different things.”

Their third idea was about a romantic breakup: a couple wrestling with the end of their relationship as reality begins to fragment—outer and inner worlds falling apart in unison. “We got excited about it looking like an M. C. Escher painting,” Scheinert said. “We were playing with it getting frighteningly surreal. Maybe there’s, like, thousands of versions of your girlfriend, and one of them is on stilts, and one of them is a goth—”

“It was us making fun of the possible-worlds concept, almost—but that became overwhelming,” Kwan said.

“And so we started to zero in on our theme,” Scheinert said. “We realized, Oh, all the silliness is icing more than substance.” The premise was that the viewer would be able to explore different versions of the breakup but not alter the dialogue or the outcome. “We thought there was something funny about not being able to change the story—about making an interactive film that is thematically about your inability to change things.”

The Daniels submitted all three ideas—three radically different directions—for Bloch and his team to choose from. Then they waited.

Interlude operates from behind a metal security door on the sixth floor of a building off Union Square. The elevator opens into a tiny vestibule. On a yellow table is a wooden robot, alongside a stack of Which Way books—a copycat series in the style of Choose Your Own Adventure. A pane of glass reveals a bright office space inside: a lounge, rows of workstations, people who mostly postdate 1980.

Yoni Bloch occupies a corner office. Thin, smiling, and confident, he maintains a just-rolled-out-of-bed look. In summer, he dresses in flip-flops, shorts, and a T-shirt. Usually, he is at his desk, before a bank of flat-screen monitors. An acoustic guitar and a synthesizer sit beside a sofa, and above the sofa hangs a large neo-expressionist painting by his sister, depicting a pair of fantastical hominids.

Bloch’s world is built on intimate loyalties. He wrote his first hit song, in 1999, with his best friend in high school. He co-founded Interlude with two bandmates, Barak Feldman and Tal Zubalsky. Not long after I met him, he told me about the close bond that he had with his father, a physicist, who, starting at the age of nine, wrote in a diary every day: meticulous Hebrew script, filling page after page. After his father passed away, Bloch began reading the massive document and discovered a new perspective on conversations they had shared long before, experiences they had never spoken about. When he yearned to confer with his father about Interlude, he went looking for passages about the company; when his son was born, last year, he searched for what his father had written when his first child was born. Rather than read straight through, Bloch took to exploring the diary sporadically, out of time—as if probing a living memory.

Cartoon
“When he reached the end of the pier, the rhetoric turned nasty.”
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
Treehouse is an intuitive program for a nonintuitive, nonlinear form of storytelling, and Bloch is adept at demonstrating it. In his office, he called up a series of video clips featuring the model Dree Hemingway sitting at a table. Below the clips, in a digital workspace resembling graph paper, he built a flowchart to map the forking narrative—how her story might divide into strands that branch outward, or loop backward, or converge. At first, the flowchart looked like a “Y” turned on its side: a story with just one node. “When you start, it is always ‘To be, or not to be,’ ” he said. The choice here was whether Hemingway would serve herself coffee or tea. Bloch dragged and dropped video clips into the flowchart, then placed buttons for tea and coffee into the frame, and set the amount of time the system would allow viewers to decide. In less than a minute, he was previewing a tiny film: over a soundtrack of music fit for a Philippe Starck lobby, Hemingway smiled and poured the beverage Bloch had selected. He then returned to the graph paper and added a blizzard of hypothetical options: “You can decide that here it will branch again, here it goes into a loop until it knows what to do, and here it becomes a switching node where five things can happen at the same time—and so on.”

As Bloch was getting his company off the ground, a small race was under way among like-minded startups looking for financial backing. In Switzerland, a company called CtrlMovie had developed technology similar to Interlude’s, and was seeking money for a feature-length thriller. (The film, “Late Shift,” had its American première last year, in New York.) Closer to home, there was Nitzan Ben-Shaul, a professor at Tel Aviv University, who, in 2008, had made an interactive film, “Turbulence,” using software that he had designed with students. Ben-Shaul, like the Daniels, felt some ambivalence about the form, even as he sought to develop it. “What I asked myself while making ‘Turbulence’ was: Why am I doing this?” he told me. “What is the added value of this, if I want to enhance the dramatic effect of regular movies?” The questions were difficult to answer. Some of his favorite films—“Rashomon,” for instance—prodded viewers to consider a story’s divergent possibilities without requiring interactivity. As a result, they maintained their coherence as works of art and, uncomplicated by the problems of audience participation, could be both emotionally direct and thought-provoking. “Rashomon” ’s brilliance, Ben-Shaul understood, was not merely the result of its formal inventiveness. Its director, Akira Kurosawa, had imbued it with his ideas about human frailty, truth, deceit, and the corrupting effects of self-esteem.

Ben-Shaul feared that, as technology dissolved the boundaries of conventional narrative, it could also interfere with essential elements of good storytelling. What was suspense, for example, if not a deliberate attempt to withhold agency from audience members—people at the edge of their seats, screaming, “Don’t go in there!,” enjoying their role as helpless observers? At the same time, why did the mechanisms of filmmaking have to remain static? Cautiously, he embraced the idea that interactivity could enable a newly pliant idea of cinematic narrative—“one that is opposed to most popular movies, which are built on suspense, which make you want to get to the resolution, and focus you on one track, one ending.” Perhaps, he thought, such films could even have a liberating social effect: by compelling audiences to consider the multiplicity of options a character could explore, and by giving them a way to act upon those options, movies could foster a sense of open-mindedness and agency that might be carried into the real world. He began pitching his technology to investors.

Yoni Bloch and his bandmates, meanwhile, were lining up gigs in the Pacific Northwest to pay for a flight from Tel Aviv, to present Treehouse to Sequoia Capital, the investment firm. The trip had grown out of a chance meeting with Haim Sadger, an Israeli member of the firm, who had handed Bloch his business card after seeing a demo of “I Can’t Be Sad Anymore” at a technology convention in Tel Aviv. Bloch, who hadn’t heard of Sequoia and thought it sounded fly-by-night, filed the card away. But, once the significance of the interest was explained to him, he worked to get his band to the group’s headquarters, in Menlo Park, California.

Bloch speaks with a soft lisp, and in a tone that betrays no urgency to monetize, but he is a skilled pitchman. Once, he gave a presentation to a Hollywood director who was recovering from a back injury and had to stand. “Even if you’re standing and he’s sitting, it feels the other way round,” the director recalled. “He owns the room.” Sadger told me that three minutes into his presentation Bloch had everyone’s attention. Coming from the worlds of music videos and video games, rather than art films, Bloch and his band spoke earnestly, and with little hesitancy, about revolutionizing cinematic narratives. “They didn’t see at the time the tremendous business potential that their creative idea and evolving technology had,” Sadger said. The Sequoia investors recognized a business that could not only earn revenue by licensing the technology but also harvest data on viewer preferences and support new advertising models; they offered Bloch and his bandmates more than three million dollars. “They beat us in getting large investments,” Ben-Shaul recalled. “Our investment fell through—and they took off.”

Cartoon
“There are no seats left together, but maybe if you make pouty faces at me I can magically add more chairs to the airplane.”
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
By the time Bloch moved to New York, in 2011, and contacted the Daniels, Interlude had raised an additional fifteen million dollars in venture capital. Bloch told the directors that if there were creative options that Treehouse did not provide he could build them. The role of enabler comes naturally to him. (His best songs, a critic at Haaretz told me, were those he had written and produced for other people.) Bringing a music producer’s sense of discrimination to video, Bloch told the Daniels that they should make the breakup story. “Right away, it was, like, Let’s go with the hardest concept,” he told me. “Love stories have been written billions of times, especially love tragedies. It’s the oldest story in the book. Finding out how to make it different while using the audience is something you can’t do easily.”

“Possibilia” is a term of art in metaphysics, and it is also the title that the Daniels placed on the cover sheet of a six-page treatment for their breakup film—alongside mug shots of twenty-three uniformed schoolgirls, each with an orange on her shoulder. The schoolgirls don’t signify anything, except, perhaps, that the remaining pages are going to get weird, and that a serious idea will be toyed with.

In the treatment, the Daniels sketched out a cinematic poem: a brief investigation of indecision and emotional entropy in a dissolving romance. The story starts with a couple, Rick and Polly, seated at a kitchen table. They begin to argue, and, as they do, reality begins to unravel. Soon, their breakup is unfolding across parallel worlds that divide and multiply: first into two, then four, eight, sixteen. The Daniels envisioned viewers using thumbnails to flip among the alternate realities onscreen.

Translating the treatment into a script posed a unique challenge: because the dialogue needed to be identical across the sixteen different performances, so that viewers could shift from one to another seamlessly, Rick’s and Polly’s lines had to be highly general. “Early on, we came up with all sorts of specific lines, and they kept falling by the wayside, because we couldn’t come up with different ways to interpret them,” Scheinert said. “It got vaguer the harder we worked on it, which is the opposite of good screenwriting.” Kwan added, “Basically, we allowed the location, the performance, and the actions to give all the specificity.”
close dialog
To get more of the latest
stories from The New Yorker,
sign up for our newsletter.

Enter your e-mail address.
Get access.


At one moment of tension, as the film splinters into eight parallel worlds, Polly declares, “I need to do something drastic!” The script notes that her line will be delivered, variously, in the kitchen, in a laundry room, on the stairs, in a doorway, on the porch, in the front and back yards, and on the street—and that in each setting she will make good on her outburst differently: “slaps him and starts a fight / starts making out with him / flips the table / breaks something / gets in a car and begins to drive away / etc.” Like a simple melody harmonized with varied chords, the story would change emotional texture in each world. To keep track of all the permutations, the Daniels used a color-coded spreadsheet.

The Daniels cast Alex Karpovsky (of “Girls”) and Zoe Jarman (of “The Mindy Project”) as Rick and Polly, and then recorded the two actors improvising off the script. “We kind of fell in love with their mumbly, accidental, awkward moments,” Scheinert said. But these “accidents,” like the written dialogue, would also have to be carefully synchronized across the many possible versions of the story. The Daniels edited the improvisations into an audio clip and gave it to the actors to memorize. Even so, to keep the timing precise, the actors had to wear earpieces during shooting—listening to their original improvisation, to match their exact rhythm, while interpreting the lines differently. “At first, it was very disorienting,” Karpovsky told me. “I had to keep the same pace, or the whole math at Interlude would fall apart: this section has to last 8.37 seconds, or whatever, so it seamlessly feeds into the next branch of our narrative.”

The result, empathetic and precise, could easily work as a gallery installation. The multiple worlds lend a sense of abstraction; the vagueness of the lines lends intimacy. As Scheinert told me, “It reminded me of bad relationships where you have a fight and you are, like, What am I saying? We are not fighting about anything.” While working on “Possibilia,” the Daniels decided to make the story end in the same place that it begins, dooming Rick and Polly to an eternal loop. Watching the film, toggling among the alternate worlds while the characters veer between argument and affection, one has the sense of being trapped in time with them. There is almost no narrative momentum, no drive to a definite conclusion, and yet the experience sustains interest because viewers are caught in the maelstrom of the couple’s present.

Cartoon
“No one designs for cat bodies.”
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
As a child, reading Choose Your Own Adventure books, I often kept my fingers jammed in the pages, not wanting to miss a pathway that might be better than the one I had chosen. In “Possibilia” there is no such concern, since all the pathways lead to the same outcome. The ability to wander among the alternate worlds serves more as a framing device, a set of instructions on how to consider the film, than as a tool for exhaustive use. “Possibilia” is only six minutes long, but when a member of Interlude roughly calculated the number of different possible viewings, he arrived at an unimaginably large figure: 3,618,502,788,666,131,106,986,593,281,521,497,120,414,687,020,801,267,626, 233,049,500,247,285,301,248—more than the number of seconds since the Big Bang. It is unfeasible to watch every iteration, of course; knowing this is part of the experience. By the time I spoke with Karpovsky, I had watched “Possibilia” a dozen times. He gleefully recalled a moment of particular intensity—“I got to light my hand on fire!”—that I hadn’t yet seen.

The film, in its structure, had no precedent, and one’s response to it seemed to be at least partly a function of age and technological fluency. When a screening of the project was arranged for Xbox, the studio’s head of programming, Nancy Tellem—a former director of network entertainment at CBS—was uncertain what to do. “I was sitting at a table with my team, and my natural response was to sit back and say, ‘O.K., I want to see the story,’ ” she told me. “But then, all of a sudden, my team, which is half the age that I am, starts screaming, ‘Click! Click! Click!’ ”

In 2014, a version of the film hit the festival circuit, but it quickly became impossible to see. Just after its début, Microsoft shuttered Xbox Entertainment Studios, to reassert a focus on video games—stranding all its dramatic projects without distribution. Last August, Interlude decided to make “Possibilia” viewable online, and I stopped by to watch its producers prepare it for release. Alon Benari, an Israeli director who has collaborated with Bloch for years, was tweaking the film’s primary tool: a row of buttons for switching among the parallel worlds. The system took a few seconds to respond to a viewer’s choice. “A lot of people were clicking, then clicking again, because they didn’t think anything happened,” he told me. “At the moment that viewers interact, it needs to be clear that their input has been registered.” He was working on a timer to inform a viewer that a decision to switch between worlds was about to be enacted. Two days before “Possibilia” went online, Benari reviewed the new system.

“Is it good?” Bloch asked him.

“Yeah,” Benari said. “I was actually on the phone with Daniel, and he was happy.” All that was left was the advertising. Interlude had secured a corporate partnership with Coke, and Benari was working on a “spark”—five seconds of footage of a woman sipping from a bottle, which would play before the film. Watching the ad, he said, “The visuals are a bit too clean, so with the audio we are going to do something a bit grungy.” After listening to a rough cut, he walked me to the door. He was juggling several new projects. He had recently shown me a pilot for an interactive TV show, its mood reminiscent of “Girls.” The interactivity was light; none of the forking pathways significantly affected the plot. Benari thought that there was value in the cosmetic choices—“You still feel a sense of agency”—but he was hoping for more. Wondering if the director was simply having trouble letting go, he said, “We like the storytelling, and the acting, but we feel he needs to amp up the use of interactivity.”

Trying to invent a new medium, it turns out, does not easily inspire focus. Early on, Interlude applied its technology to just about every form of visual communication: online education, ads, children’s programming, games, music videos. But in the past year Bloch has steered the company toward dramatic entertainment. After Microsoft shut down Xbox Entertainment Studios, he invited Nancy Tellem to serve as Interlude’s chief media officer and chairperson. Tellem, impressed by the way Interlude viewers tended to replay interactive content, accepted. “The fact that people go back and watch a video two other times—you never see it in linear television,” she told me. “In fact, in any series that you might produce, the hope is that the normal TV viewer will watch a quarter of it.” Interactive films might have seemed like a stunt in the nineties, but for an audience in the age of Netflix personalized content has become an expected norm; L.C.D. screens increasingly resemble mirrors, offering users opportunities to glimpse themselves in the content behind the tempered glass. Employees at Bloch’s company envision a future where viewers gather around the water cooler to discuss the differences in what they watched, rather than to parse a shared dramatic experience. It is hard not to see in this vision, on some level, the prospect of entertainment as selfie.

Cartoon
APRIL 2, 2007
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
Six months after Tellem was hired, Interlude secured a deal with M-G-M to reboot “WarGames,” the nineteen-eighties hacker film, as an interactive television series. (M-G-M also made an eighteen-million-dollar investment.) Last April, CBS hired Interlude to reimagine “The Twilight Zone” in a similar way, and in June Sony Pictures made a multimillion-dollar “strategic investment.” By August, Interlude was sitting on more than forty million dollars in capital—the money reflecting the growing industry-wide interest. (Steven Soderbergh recently completed filming for a secretive interactive project at HBO.) Business cards from other networks, left behind in Bloch’s office like bread crumbs, suggested additional deals in the making; a whiteboard listing new projects included a pilot for the N.B.A. To signify the corporate transformation, Bloch told me, his company had quietly changed its name, to Eko.

“As of when?” I asked.

“As of four days ago,” he said, smiling.

Even as the company was expanding, Bloch was striving to preserve a sense of scrappy authenticity. “We are a company run by a band,” he insisted. “Everything sums up to money—I have learned this—but we still believe that if you make the work about the story it will be powerful.” One of Eko’s creative directors was overseeing a grass-roots strategy to attract talent, giving seminars at universities and conferences, encouraging people to use the software, which is available for free online. Hundreds of amateurs have submitted films. The best of them have been invited to make actual shows.

Of the marquee projects, “WarGames” is the furthest along in development, with shooting scheduled to begin this winter. When Bloch’s team pitched M-G-M, they had in mind a project tied to the original film, which is about a teen-age hacker (Matthew Broderick) who breaks into a military server and runs a program called Global Thermonuclear War. He thinks the program is a game, but in fact it helps control the American nuclear arsenal, and soon he must reckon with the possibility that he has triggered a real nuclear war.

Sam Barlow, the Eko creative director overseeing the reboot, worked in video-game design before Bloch hired him. He told me, “The premise in the pitch was that there is a game, a literal game, that you are playing, and then—as with the original—it becomes apparent that there is a more nefarious purpose behind it. The idea was that you would be able to see the reaction to what you are doing as live-action video.”

This proposal was soon set aside, however, out of fear that toggling between a game and filmed segments would be jarring. Instead, Barlow pulled together a new pitch. Hacking was still central, but it would be explored in the present-day context of groups like Anonymous, and in the murky post-Cold War geopolitical environment: terrorism, drone warfare, cyber attacks. The story centered on a young hacker and her friends and family. Viewers would be seated before a simulacrum of her computer, viewing the world as she does, through chat screens, Skype-like calls, live streams of cable news. On a laptop, Barlow loaded a prototype: three actors chatting in separate video windows on a neutral background. With quick swipes, he moved one window to the foreground. The show’s internal software, he said, would track the feeds that viewers watched, noting when they took an interest in personal relationships, for instance, or in political matters. The tracking system would also gauge their reactions to the protagonist, to see if they preferred that her actions have serious consequences (say, putting lives at risk) or prankish ones (defacing an official Web site).

“Suppose you have a significant story branch,” Barlow said. “If that’s linked to an explicit decision that the viewer must make, then it feels kind of mechanical and simple.” In contrast, the show’s system will be able to customize the story seamlessly, merely by observing what viewers decide to watch. This design acknowledged that key life choices are often not guided by explicit decisions but by how we direct our attention—as Iris Murdoch once noted, “At crucial moments of choice most of the business of choosing is already over.” Before an impending story branch, for instance, the system would know if a particular viewer was interested in the protagonist’s personal life, and her serious side, and could alter the story accordingly—perhaps by killing off a close relative and having her seek revenge.

Barlow was uncertain how much of the “WarGames” tracking mechanics he should reveal to the viewer. “The two-million-dollar question is: Do we need to show this?” he said. He believed that interactive films will increasingly resemble online ads: unobtrusively personalized media. “When ads first started tracking you, for the first few months you’d be, like, ‘How did they know?’ A couple of months later, you’d be, like, ‘Of course they knew. I was Googling baby formula.’ And now it’s, like, ‘I’m still getting spammed for vacation properties around Lake Placid, and I’m, like, Dude, we went. You should already know!’ ”

Cartoon
“Freshly ground pepper?”
APRIL 1, 2013
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
In many ways, the swiping system that Barlow had designed was a work-around for technological limitations that will soon fall away. Advances in machine learning are rapidly improving voice recognition, natural-language processing, and emotion detection, and it’s not hard to imagine that such technologies will one day be incorporated into movies. Brian Moriarty, a specialist in interactive media at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, told me, “Explicit interactivity is going to yield to implicit interactivity, where the movie is watching you, and viewing is customized to a degree that is hard to imagine. Suppose that the movie knows that you’re a man, and a male walks in and you show signs of attraction. The plot could change to make him gay. Or imagine the possibilities for a Hitchcock-type director. If his film sees you’re noticing a certain actor, instead of showing you more of him it shows you less, to increase tension.”

Moriarty believes that as computer graphics improve, the faces of actors, or even political figures, could be subtly altered to echo the viewer’s own features, to make them more sympathetic. Lifelike avatars could even replace actors entirely, at which point narratives could branch in nearly infinite directions. Directors would not so much build films around specific plots as conceive of generalized situations that computers would set into motion, depending on how viewers reacted. “What we are looking at here is a breakdown in what a story even means—in that a story is defined as a particular sequence of causally related events, and there is only one true story, one version of what happened,” Moriarty said. With the development of virtual reality and augmented reality—technology akin to Pokémon Go—there is no reason that a movie need be confined to a theatrical experience. “The line between what is a movie and what is real is going to be difficult to pinpoint,” he added. “The defining art form of the twenty-first century has not been named yet, but it is something like this.”

In mid-October, Bloch showed me a video that demonstrates the cinematic use of eye tracking—technology that is not yet commercially widespread but will likely soon be. The Daniels had directed the demo, and they had imbued it with their usual playfulness. It opens on a couple in a café. Behind them, a woman in a sexy dress and a muscleman walk in; whichever extra catches your gaze enters the story. Throughout, an announcer strives to describe the tracking system, but the story he uses as a showcase keeps breaking down as the characters, using a magical photo album, flee him by escaping into their past. Viewers, abetting the couple, send them into their memories by glancing at the photos in their album. At key moments, the story is told from the point of view of the actor you watch the most. “People start out looking at both, and then focus on one—and it is not necessarily the one who talks,” Bloch said. “When you look at her, she talks about him, then you care about him.”

The future that the demo portended—entertainment shaped by deeply implicit interactivity—was one that the Daniels later told me they found exhilarating and disconcerting. “In some ways, as artists, we are supposed to be creating collective experiences,” Kwan said. “This could get really messy if what we are actually doing is producing work that creates more isolated experiences.” Alternatively, it is possible to imagine the same technology pulling audiences into highly similar story patterns—narratives dominated by violence and sex—as it registers the basest of human responses.

“On the upside, interactivity has the potential to push you to reflect on your biases,” Scheinert said. Psychological experiments suggest that people who inhabit digital avatars of a race, gender, or age unlike their own can become more empathetic. “Done right, interactivity can shed light on what divides us,” he added. “We find ourselves talking a lot about video games lately. Video games have blossomed into an art form that’s become pretty cool. People are now making interactive stories that can move you, that can make you reflect on your own choices, because they make you make the kinds of choices that a hero really has to make. At the same time, it is really hard to make films with multiple endings, and I wonder what shortcuts will present themselves, what patterns. Right now, we don’t have many to fall back on.”

On the morning that Bloch showed me the eye-tracking demo, the Eko offices were humming with anticipation. Two weeks earlier, the company had been divided into ten teams that competed, in a two-day hackathon, to produce mockups for new shows or games. The competition was a search for effective ways to tell stories in a new medium. The solution that the Daniels had worked out for “Possibilia”—a fixed narrative playing out across multiple worlds—might have sufficed for a short film, where abstract dialogue could be tolerated, but it was not scalable to feature-length projects. That morning, an Eko creative director told me that he was wrestling with the magnitude of the creative shift. “What does character development even mean if a viewer is modifying the character?” he said. If a film has five potential endings, does it constitute a single work of art, or is it an amalgam of five different works?

All the teams had completed their mini films, and Bloch, in his office, was ready to announce the winner. An employee knocked on his door. “Should I yalla everyone?” he asked—using the Arabic term for “Let’s go.”

“Yalla everyone,” Bloch said.

Cartoon
“It’s made entirely out of rejected résumés.”
JANUARY 22, 2007
ShareTweetBuy a cartoon
In the office cafeteria, there was a long wooden table, beanbag chairs, a drum kit. People munched on popcorn. On a flat-screen monitor, the staff of Eko’s Israeli satellite office, which does the technical work, had video-conferenced in. Bloch held a stack of envelopes, as if he were at the Oscars, and began to run through the submissions. Two groups had used voice recognition, making it possible to talk to their films. Others had toyed with “multiplayer” ideas. Sam Barlow’s team had filmed a man in Hell trying to save his life in a game of poker. Viewers play the role of Luck, selecting the cards being dealt—not to win the game but to alter the drama among the players. Bloch said he had cited the film in a recent presentation as a possibility worth exploring. “The expected thing in that kind of story is that you would be the guy who comes to Hell,” he said. “Playing Luck—something that is more godlike—is much more exciting.”

The winner, Bloch announced, was “The Mole,” in which the viewer plays a corporate spy. The team had written software that made it possible to manipulate objects in the film—pick them up and move them. Bloch thought the software had immediate commercial potential. Walking back to his office, he expressed his excitement about what it would mean to permanently alter a scene: to tamper with evidence in a crime drama, say, and know that the set would stay that way. “It makes the world’s existence more coherent,” he said.

Even as a number of Bloch’s creative directors were working to make the interactivity more implicit, he did not think that explicit choices would fade away. Done well, he believed, they could deepen a viewer’s sense of responsibility for a story’s outcome; the problem with them today was the naïveté of the execution, but eventually the requisite artistic sophistication would emerge. “Every time there is a new medium, there’s an excessive use of it, and everyone wants to make it blunt,” he told me. “When stereo was introduced—with the Beatles, for example—you could hear drums on the left, singing on the right, and it didn’t make sense musically. But, as time went on, people started to use stereo in ways that enhanced the music.” Bloch had started assembling a creative board—filmmakers, game designers, writers—to think about such questions. “We have to break out of the gimmicky use of interactivity, and make sure it is used to enhance a story. We are in the days of ‘Put the drums on the left.’ But we’re moving to where we don’t have to do that. People, in general, are ready for this.”
Read More

Post Top Ad