LA-based writer/director Kyle Patrick Alvarez is no stranger to adapting short stories into successful feature films. His writing and directorial debut film, Easier with Practice was adapted from an article by Davy Rothbart, who is best known for his work with This American Life. Easier with Practice earned Alvarez the prestigious Someone to Watch Award at the Film Independent Spirit Awards in 2010. His latest film C.O.G., which is released tomorrow in select cities, premiered at the Sundance Film Festival this year and is the first narrative feature adaptation of a David Sedaris story.

What drew you to the short story C.O.G. initially? Did you identify with a particular aspect of the story or specific character? 
I first read it when I was 15 years old and I remember I was so struck by the way David Sedaris balanced the elements of sexuality and religion while still keeping it funny. Underneath it all was something very dark and challenging to me. I was living in a small, very religious community and dealing with my own sexuality so to come across a story that spoke to me so much at the time really meant a lot. I think that’s why it stuck with me over the years and ultimately led me to want to pursue making it as a film.

The tone of C.O.G. struck me as very unique. You take Sedaris’ beloved dry wit and add your own comedic spin to it. Could you tell us more about your vision for the tone of the film when you were writing the screenplay?
Tone was the single biggest creative challenge in making this film. I told Sedaris when I first reached out to him that I wanted it to be very divisive to people. I wanted some people to feel it was a deliberate comedy and others to think they’d seen a darker drama. Ultimately, I knew some people would find that an imbalance, but to me I think it says a lot if you find it funny or if it touches you. I wanted that conflict to be there in the viewer, cause it was in me as a reader. That discomfort as a viewer of whether you should be laughing or not at something happening on screen… I find that to be an uncomfortable but ultimately powerful reaction to have. So I was doing my best to tap into that.

The internal observations of Samuel are conveyed through disapproving eye rolls and deadpan glances. When adapting the short story, how did you decide what internal commentary could be communicated onscreen without narration and what couldn’t?
Obviously, it wasn’t a light choice to adapt David Sedaris’ work and then not have voice over in the film. When I really stepped back and tried to look at this film as its own thing, independent of his work, I couldn’t justify there being voice over. This wasn’t a character who would have that level of self-knowingness for there to be his thoughts portrayed over the screen, and I felt if it was more of a ‘looking back’ voice over, it would take away from the way he grows as a person throughout the story. Having said that, I didn’t want to lose David’s voice and sense of humor entirely, so when I first started adapting the story, I started to pull what I thought could work on film and what I thought I had to lose. It was painful to lose great or funny thoughts and moments, but it was a fundamental part of letting C.O.G. become a proper story on screen. What I found though, was that I was able to take some of his great insights and thoughts and actually put them into certain characters’ dialogue. If you read the story and then watch the film, I think you can see how I was able to hold on to as much as I could without ever breaking the narrative of the film.

How did you select the score? Did you try out different types of music before deciding on the memorable clapping sounds that punctuate various scenes in the film? Or was it decided upon before you went into production?
The music is partially from Steve Reich, a composer I’ve admired for years. The other portion of it was composed by an old high school friend named Joe Berry. I studied percussion in high school (with Joe), and still have my heart in that era of minimalist music that Reich personified. My first film relied heavily on soundtrack to set the tone and I know I wanted to go in the complete opposite direction and not have any proper songs in the film. So my aim was to never use the music to underscore a scene, as music is traditionally used in film, but instead to overscore it. I wanted it to propel the pacing as the lead character moved from setting to setting and help bridge the space between the different episodes of the story.

Do you have any advice for filmmakers who are looking to adapt a popular short story into a feature film?
I think short stories are ripe for filmmaking. The best short stories are rich with characters and themes but almost never overreach in scope or execution, which leaves a great open opportunity for a manageable independent film (budget-wise). I think the first thing is to see where the short story came from. My first film, it was a GQ article that wasn’t optioned and the writer was really open to working with me on it. I don’t think if I had approached David for my first film that it would’ve worked. He’s much more protective and having a film to show him of something I’d done already really helped and played a big part in getting him to ultimately agree. So I think you have to be realistic, but you need to also never let go of your ambition and what about the story speaks to you about it. Many times people have told me ‘just change some details and you don’t have to option,’ because both stories I’ve adapted are quite broad thematically, but I could never do that to the writer. The inspiration started with their work, their voice and point of view and honoring that financially and legally is really important to me. Just make sure you’re being smart and patient and understanding when approaching an author. Especially if it is memoir, you are taking something from their lives, something very personal and translating that. You have to be sympathetic about how much trust they are asking to put in you. If you can get in touch with the author, be prepared and clear about what you intend to do with their work. Also, don’t expect a free option. Everyone deserves to be paid for their creative work, and even being able to offer a relatively nominal amount of money upfront sets a great precedent. You’re asking everything of them, so being able to offer something back is crucial I think.

By Lee Jameson / Film Education Coordinator