Quincy Rose – The Narcissists

By: Jamie Steinberg

Q) What are the recent projects that you are working on?

A) Recently I have a couple projects with my producing partner, Rana Joy Glickman. One is called Margot From Manhattan and another one is called Being Buster. We’re at various phases of development with them.

Q) Please tell us the premise for your film The Narcissists.

A) It’s about a filmmaker whose going through some problems in his own life with his relationship status, but he’s also stuck in a project that he’s working on. It’s kind of a film within a film within a film situation where the filmmaker is talking about his problem with his work with his best friend – we see that as the film we watch for the most part. Within that, he’s also dealing with the same thing the filmmaker is dealing with in real life. It’s kind of like a meta story that deals with overlapping stories – the same for the character telling the story as well as the character in the story. Not to get too confusing…In that story Oliver (who I play) has been with his girlfriend for about five years and they have been having some issues come up. Essentially, because rents are so steep, neither one of them can afford the apartment on their own. So, they’ve taken a couple weeks apart (when we first meet them) and then through a series of circumstances they wander New York and kind of talk about themselves, hence the title.

Q) They say “art often imitates life.” Is any part of this movie semi-autobiographical?

A) Interestingly enough, no. In the past I have done some semi-autobiographical stuff with my first feature called Miles to Go. There were elements that were strongly taken from my personal life and applied to the characters. Then, I completely made a fictionalized story of it. I’m actually in a healthy and happy relationship so there is no real connection with me and the character other than with some of the ways he thinks, talks or speaks. And definitely the way he looks. He looks just like me, as it is me. The only autobiographical nature is really just in the sense that I have friends who go through this kind of stuff and these are real situations that I had heard people talking and maybe I’ve gone through in the past. My best friend in the movie is an actor named Zack Tiegen, who happens to be one of my best friends in real life. And Augie Duke and Jessica DiGiovanni are also really great friends of mine. I do always take things out of real life because I find those to be the most relatable and interesting things to explore. Sometimes I’m taking from real life, but not necessarily from mine and certainly not my life today.

Q) Where did the concept for film come from?

A) Interestingly enough, I am from LA originally but used to spend a lot of time in New York helping an elderly family member. I was splitting my time between LA and New York. I was seeing a friend and we said goodbye to one another. We both took the six Train (she was going uptown and I was going downtown) and I just snapped a photo of her from across the tracks. It was a nothing photo. I just took a picture of a friend and she was kind of waving to me. As I looked at that picture it kind of stood out to me and evoked a sentiment and a whole story and emotionality to it that never left my head. I started thinking what the story was behind that photo. It didn’t strike me right away, but I just kind of found myself looking at that photo from time to time and thinking, “Huh. I guess two friends or a boyfriend and girlfriend who are, for some reason, on the opposite sides of the tracks. Are they happy or sad? What is this story?” It just seemed like an opening story and ending point. So, I just started writing down scenes that could create this story and that’s why when you see the movie the very first scene is that concept of people on opposite sides of the track who know each other. And you realize that.

Q) Did you always have yourself in mind to portray Oliver or even star in the film at all?

A) This is my third feature, but this is the second feature where I put myself in the lead. The first time was out of necessity, but also as I mentioned it was semi-autobiographical. It really made sense for me to portray the person because I knew the ins and outs of the character. For this one it’s out of necessity as part of the intention of making this film was to do a movie where I had a small enough budget where I had total creative freedom and total creative control and just get a really small group of people involved to do it – people who I know and people who I already love and love me and wouldn’t care that we’re not going to make a giant budget film and everyone is going to get paid big money. So, it was really designed to be me in that role because A) I thought I could play it best because I know him best and B) It was out of fun, to play with my friends who are actors, my cinematographer, my sound guy, my AD. It was also the necessity of if I’m the actor than that’s one actor who will not be complaining about maybe potentially longer hours or multiple things being slightly uncomfortable not shooting with trailers and locations on streets where you have to find a Starbucks if you need a restroom or if you need a break to go eat somewhere. It just eliminates one problematic piece of the puzzle. However, like I said, these are really great friends that I worked with so it was no concern to me that they would cause any problems. It was overall necessity meets intention meets direct ability to know this character.

Q) You mentioned some friends being a part of the film. How involved were you with their casting?

A) On this particular film I did very many of the jobs from budgeting the film to scheduling to casting actors in the film and hiring my DP, my sound person and whomever else would be helping. So, it was entirely my decision and my choices. Now, I did have to reach out to them and hope they’d do it because part of the pitch was, “Hey guys! We’re going to make it with total freedom. We’re going to roam around the streets of New York City without actual fixed locations. We’re not going to have any trailers or holding rooms. You’re going to have to memorize the scripts because I’m shooting the whole thing with one take. So, it’s going to be like a play. We’re going to have a fixed camera point. There is not going to be any cuts. So, I really had to get people who were up for that exploration of character and that experiment of filmmaking as it was a highly unorthodox approach, but a necessary one to maintain the budget and the ability to maneuver around the city and kind of hide within the world of New York City. We could put the camera on one place across the street and citizens of New York that anything was happening necessarily. The actors could become one with the city.

Q) This is the third film you’ve made on your own pretty much start to finish. Does anything still surprise you about the movie making process?

A) Well, yeah. First of all, the movie making business is crazy. Right? The three films that I have made so far are really about me getting my opportunity to cut my teeth, to learn how to make mistakes on these smaller films so that as I kind of step up to these more significant pieces of work with a highly professional crew and known actors who have been doing this their whole lives, etcetera, etcetera, with the help of my veteran producing partner and legitimate casting directors, the other producing partners, the cinematographer, etc. This has been the way to do all of these things and make all the mistakes. I would say the surprises are always just in the daily event. I can’t think of anything specific to relate to, but just to say that every day is a surprise. You are surprised when you are writing something because you’re like, “Wow! That sounds pretty good. I like that.” That’s a surprise because often times as a writer you don’t like what you’re writing. You are liking it enough to keep going, but in the end, you don’t think it’s worthy enough to keep pursuing. So, there are all types of surprises (pleasant surprises) when you finally cast somebody or you get to meet someone that you’re interested in talking to. You reach out to a cinematographer you’re a big fan of or a fellow filmmaker to get advice. It’s always very exciting and surprising in that sense. And the work itself is surprising because you don’t know what is going to come up on any given moment on any given day. Just constantly surprised or excited is what I would say.

Q) What do you think it is about The Narcissists that is going to make it such a standout movie?

A) I think I would say it’s a not an experimental film, but it is an unorthodox film. It’s unique in the sense that every take is a singular take. It’s kind of a time capsule of New York City in the year that we shot it, at the end of 2016. It shows you exactly not only what these characters look like, are dressed like and are talking like and sound like, but also what regular citizens that are walking across the street who live in the neighborhood were doing. I just think it’s a relatable film. If you listen to the dialogue I think most people of a certain age group (I won’t say which age group because I’m not marketing person)…I think there is a type of dialogue and a tone that people will relate. It is hopefully funny and entertaining as well as an interesting story. It’s a singular piece in the sense that it is bare and raw, but presented in a beautiful way with photography from my cinematographer Jason Krangel. I just think that he did an amazing job. Really, it’s a meditation on life in New York City. If you love a New York City walk-and-talk film or you like seeing films about New York and you like films about people, dialogue or character driven stories this will be for you.