Six Questions — November 5, 2013, 1:29 pm

The Disaster Artist

Greg Sestero and Tom Bissell on life inside “The Room,” the greatest bad movie ever made

Greg Sestero and Tom Bissell. © Michael Dar/Hendrik Dey

Greg Sestero and Tom Bissell. © Michael Dar/Hendrik Dey

From 2003 to 2008, the vampiric face of filmmaker Tommy Wiseau hung over L.A.’s Highland Avenue on a billboard advertising his box-office failure, The Room. The movie, dubbed “the Citizen Kane of bad movies” in Entertainment Weekly, eventually acquired a cult following akin to the one surrounding The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Watching The Room is a surreal experience in antifilm, all but ignoring the conventions and evolution of the medium. Its dialogue is marked by non sequitur, its camera angles are awkward, and its plot, bizarre — all of which combine to lend the audience little sense of character motivation or visual and narrative consistency. As a disaster, though, it’s hard to look away from, which is to say that it’s a bad enough movie to be good.

In 1998 Greg Sestero met Wiseau, the film’s director, writer, star, producer, distributor, and executive producer, in an acting class in San Francisco. As a nineteen-year-old apprentice, Sestero was taken with Wiseau’s fearless displays of bad acting, as well as his striking appearance and unidentifiable accent, which sounded like something between French and Austrian. The two became scene partners and developed a strange friendship, for a while sharing a one-bedroom apartment in Los Angeles as Sestero struggled with his fledgling acting career and Wiseau penned the screenplay for The Room. When production began, Sestero was cast as Mark, the best friend of the main character, Johnny (played by Wiseau); the pair are caught in a love triangle with Johnny’s fiancée.

Sestero met Harper’s Magazine contributing editor Tom Bissell while Bissell was conducting research for his article “Cinema Crudité: The mysterious appeal of the post-camp cult film,” which appeared in the August 2010 issue. The Disaster Artist, co-written by Sestero and Bissell, recounts Sestero’s experience acting in The Room and his complicated relationship with Wiseau. The book gives a humorous yet sincere peek into the creation and creator of The Room. I asked Sestero and Bissell six questions that were tearing me apart, and they kindly took their responses out of their pockets

1. The Disaster Artist, like The Room, lies somewhere between romantic drama and dark comedy. How did you go about capturing this mood?

Greg Sestero: The Disaster Artist is a character and “unlikely friendship” story first, and a chronicle about making a famously unsuccessful movie called The Room second. I wanted readers who’d never seen The Room to feel like they could still get lost in the story.

Tom Bissell: The Room is like a funhouse-mirror version of a conventional movie. By writing our story as a series of alternating, timeline-swapping chapters, I really hoped we could replicate that feeling of walking into a series of utterly mysterious hallways in which you’re never quite sure what’s going on. We tried to time the revelations in the book to play off each other, so that, just as Tommy seems the most bananas during the making-of sections, we clobber you with something really sad (and sympathy-generating) from his and Greg’s past. We wanted it to be funny and tragic, which is what The Room also is.

From The Disaster Artist:

“Maybe I’d learn some of [Tommy’s] fearlessness. What made him so confident? I was desperately curious to discover that. It wasn’t his acting, obviously, which was extraordinarily bad. He was simply magically uninhibited; the only person in our class — or any class I’d ever taken, for that matter — whom I actually looked forward to watching perform. The rest of us were toying with chemistry sets and he was lighting the lab on fire.”

2. Tommy Wiseau might be the most eccentric person in the world. In the book, you let Wiseau do all the work to show this, but you manage to redeem him through Greg’s strange admiration for Tommy and writing that encourages a sort of guilty laughter in the reader. How did you handle dealing with Wiseau as a character while writing the book?

GS: I wanted to do full justice to Tommy’s hilarity and wackiness. He is such a fascinating character, with so many signature lines and laugh-out loud moments. No one sees the world like he does. No one. Letting him speak for himself, as himself, as best as I could remember it all, was the best way to “write” Tommy.

TB: Greg’s right. With Tommy, you barely even have to write the guy. He just is who he is. That’s his charm and that’s his magic. Report merely what he says and what he does, and you’re already 85 percent of the way there. I agree with you, by the way: Tommy might indeed be the most eccentric — and fascinating — person in the world. Certainly he’s the most fascinating person I’ve ever written about. There is quite literally no one else like him. His singularity makes The Room what it is.

3. Greg’s voice is evident throughout the book, and Tom’s prose style also crops up here and there. How was the co-writing experience?

GS: Working with Tom was great. After reading “Cinema Crudité,” I knew he was the ideal co-writer for The Disaster Artist. My goal with the book was to delve more into the emotionally confounding and inspiring aspects of Tommy and The Room. “Write something first rate about something fifth rate” — that was our motto while we worked on the book.

TB: Greg had to lean on me pretty hard to write the book with him, because I was teaching and had another book I was writing and was working on video-game stuff — too much! I just had way too much to do. But the more I talked to Greg about the story and his experiences with Tommy, the more I realized he was sitting on something potentially great. Capital-G great. This was born out when we actually started recording tape and getting the stories down, after which I turned our transcripts into chapters. Greg then thoroughly rewrote those chapters and brought them more into line with his memories and impressions. Then I rewrote, and he rewrote, and so on. We rewrote each other so much that I barely even remember whose lines are whose anymore. What I love about the book is how Greg’s and my voices sort of blend into a kind of third consciousness. It’s not quite fully him and it’s not quite fully me. It’s both of us, unified by this crazy artifact of American culture.

4. Tom, did either your fiction or your nonfiction tend to inform this book one more than the other?

TB: I said to Greg when I was looking around for a co-writer for him, before I agreed to be that co-writer, “You’re going to need a fiction writer to do this story justice.” Tommy’s texture is that of a fictional character. He’s Jay Gatsby meets Orson Welles meets a Martian diplomat meets Norma Desmond meets Tom Ripley meets God-only-knows. A straight non-fictional representation of him would be interesting, because he’s so interesting, but I feel like Greg’s memories of Tommy could not be properly inhabited without approaching those memories as a fiction writer. Norman Mailer and Truman Capote both wrote true-life novels, and Mailer said just because something’s true doesn’t mean it’s not a novel. I really like that. The Disaster Artist, which is a true story, is probably the closest thing to a full-blown novel I’m ever going to write, or co-write. And I feel like I can say this because it’s more Greg’s book than mine: I’m pretty sure I’m incapable of writing a novel that’s better, or crazier, than The Disaster Artist.

5. Greg, you tell us what you know about Wiseau in the book, but we’re left feeling that no one is exactly certain where he came from or how he found $6 million to fund the movie. Between your own coming-of-age story and Wiseau’s biography, which slowly unfolds across the book, much of The Disaster Artist is about identity. You write that the behind-the-scenes footage was even stranger than the movie. Among the highlights was an impromptu meeting on the first anniversary of 9/11, during which Wiseau demanded five minutes of silence before launching into a tirade about America being the best country in the world then leading his crew in a chant of “U-S-A! U-S-A!” There was also a stage fight between you and Wiseau that turned real and was subsequently used in the film and a scene in which Wiseau loomed over you creepily while you shaved your beard, saying, “Slow down. Don’t cut it. Don’t cut.” What was it like to witness and reconstruct the person you were while filming The Room?

GS: My experiences making The Room were hilarious and crazy. Tom and I filled up an entire flash drive with audio interviews. It was also really great to interview the cast and crew, who were very supportive, and who filled in many bits of detail and dialogue that I’d forgotten. Also, Tommy invited me on tour with him while I wrote the book, which helped me get his perspective on the film’s success, and to get to know him in a different way. Our best source, though, might have been the behind-the-scenes footage. For clothes, times of day, dialogue, and all those details, that footage was a gold mine. Tom and I spent hours watching it all up in Michigan a couple winters ago. I don’t think Tom’s mouth closed for several hours.

The Disaster ArtistTB: I was, indeed, shell-shocked by the experience. The-Room-the-movie is, as we all know, incredible. The-Room-the-behind-the-scenes-footage is an entirely other experience. Never seen anything like it. My God someone could make an incredible documentary about the movie with that footage alone.

6. Greg, are you still close with Wiseau?

GS: I’ve known Tommy for fifteen years. I think, when you’ve gone through such a unique experience with someone, like we have, you’ll always share a certain bond. A strong bond. Tommy has been supportive of the book and attended the L.A. book launch, which meant a lot. 

Share
Single Page

More from Jeffery Gleaves:

Six Questions October 1, 2014, 8:00 am

Discussing On Immunity: An Inoculation with Eula Biss

Eula Biss discusses vaccinations, motherhood, and metaphors

Six Questions March 28, 2014, 1:05 pm

The Empathy Exams: Essays

Leslie Jamison on empathy in craft and in life

Six Questions August 8, 2013, 12:40 pm

The Faraway Nearby and Unfathomable City

Rebecca Solnit on how personal stories can fail to satisfy, the architectural space of the book, and the pleasures with which the landscapes of our lives are salted

Get access to 168 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

October 2018

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Printed Word in Peril·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February, at an event at the 92nd Street Y’s Unterberg Poetry Center in New York, while sharing the stage with my fellow British writer Martin Amis and discussing the impact of screen-based reading and bidirectional digital media on the Republic of Letters, I threw this query out to an audience that I estimate was about three hundred strong: “Have any of you been reading anything by Norman Mailer in the past year?” After a while, one hand went up, then another tentatively semi-elevated. Frankly I was surprised it was that many. Of course, there are good reasons why Mailer in particular should suffer posthumous obscurity with such alacrity: his brand of male essentialist braggadocio is arguably extraneous in the age of Trump, Weinstein, and fourth-wave feminism. Moreover, Mailer’s brilliance, such as it was, seemed, even at the time he wrote, to be sparks struck by a steely intellect against the tortuous rocks of a particular age, even though he labored tirelessly to the very end, principally as the booster of his own reputation.

It’s also true that, as J. G. Ballard sagely remarked, for a writer, death is always a career move, and for most of us the move is a demotion, as we’re simultaneously lowered into the grave and our works into the dustbin. But having noted all of the above, it remains the case that Mailer’s death coincided with another far greater extinction: that of the literary milieu in which he’d come to prominence and been sustained for decades. It’s a milieu that I hesitate to identify entirely with what’s understood by the ringing phrase “the Republic of Letters,” even though the overlap between the two was once great indeed; and I cannot be alone in wondering what will remain of the latter once the former, which not long ago seemed so very solid, has melted into air.

What I do feel isolated in—if not entirely alone in—is my determination, as a novelist, essayist, and journalist, not to rage against the dying of literature’s light, although it’s surprising how little of this there is, but merely to examine the great technological discontinuity of our era, as we pivot from the wave to the particle, the fractal to the fungible, and the mechanical to the computable. I first began consciously responding, as a literary practitioner, to the manifold impacts of ­BDDM in the early 2000s—although, being the age I am, I have been feeling its effects throughout my working life—and I first started to write and speak publicly about it around a decade ago. Initially I had the impression I was being heard out, if reluctantly, but as the years have passed, my attempts to limn the shape of this epochal transformation have been met increasingly with outrage, and even abuse, in particular from my fellow writers.

As for my attempts to express the impact of the screen on the page, on the actual pages of literary novels, I now understand that these were altogether irrelevant to the requirement of the age that everything be easier, faster, and slicker in order to compel the attention of screen viewers. It strikes me that we’re now suffering collectively from a “tyranny of the virtual,” since we find ourselves unable to look away from the screens that mediate not just print but, increasingly, reality itself.

Photograph (detail) by Ellen Cantor from her Prior Pleasures series © The artist. Courtesy dnj Gallery, Santa Monica, California
Article
Among Britain’s Anti-Semites·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

This is the story of how the institutions of British Jewry went to war with Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party. Corbyn is another feather in the wind of populism and a fragmentation of the old consensus and politesse. He was elected to the leadership by the party membership in 2015, and no one was more surprised than he. Between 1997 and 2010, Corbyn voted against his own party 428 times. He existed as an ideal, a rebuke to the Blairite leadership, and the only wise man on a ship of fools. His schtick is that of a weary, kindly, socialist Father Christmas, dragged from his vegetable patch to create a utopia almost against his will. But in 2015 the ideal became, reluctantly, flesh. Satirists mock him as Jesus Christ, and this is apt. But only just. He courts sainthood, and if you are very cynical you might say that, like Christ, he shows Jews what they should be. He once sat on the floor of a crowded train, though he was offered a first-class seat, possibly as a private act of penance to those who had, at one time or another, had no seat on a train.

When Corbyn became leader of the Labour Party, the British media, who are used to punching socialists, crawled over his record and found much to alarm the tiny Jewish community of 260,000. Corbyn called Hez­bollah “friends” and said Hamas, also his “friends,” were devoted “to long-term peace and social justice.” (He later said he regretted using that language.) He invited the Islamist leader Raed Salah, who has accused Jews of killing Christian children to drink their blood, to Parliament, and opposed his extradition. Corbyn is also a patron of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and a former chair of Stop the War, at whose rallies they chant, “From the river to the sea / Palestine will be free.” (There is no rhyme for what will happen to the Jewish population in this paradise.) He was an early supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement and its global campaign to delegitimize Israel and, through the right of return for Palestinians, end its existence as a Jewish state. (His office now maintains that he does not support BDS. The official Labour Party position is for a two-state solution.) In the most recent general election, only 13 percent of British Jews intended to vote Labour.

Corbyn freed something. The scandals bloomed, swiftly. In 2016 Naz Shah, Labour MP for Bradford West, was suspended from the party for sharing a Facebook post that suggested Israel be relocated to the United States. She apologized publicly, was reinstated, and is now a shadow women and equalities minister. Ken Livingstone, the former mayor of London and a political supporter of Corbyn, appeared on the radio to defend Shah and said, “When Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.” For this comment, Livingstone was suspended from the party.

A protest against anti-Semitism in the Labour Party in Parliament Square, London, March 26, 2018 (detail) © Yui Mok/PA Images/Getty Images
Article
Nothing but Gifts·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

If necessity is the stern but respectable mother of invention, then perhaps desperation is the derelict father of subterfuge. That was certainly the case when I moved to Seattle in 1979.

Though I’d lived there twice during the previous five years, I wasn’t prepared for the economic boom I found upon this latest arrival. Not only had rent increased sharply in all but the most destitute neighborhoods, landlords now routinely demanded first, last, and a hefty security deposit, which meant I was short by about fifty percent. Over the first week or so, I watched with mounting anxiety as food, gas, and lodging expenses reduced the meager half I did have to a severely deficient third. To make matters even more nerve-racking, I was relocating with my nine-year-old son, Ezra. More than my well-being was at stake.

A veteran of cold, solitary starts in strange cities, I knew our best hope wasn’t the classifieds, and certainly not an agency, but the serendipity of the streets—handmade for rent signs, crowded bulletin boards in laundromats and corner grocery stores, passersby on the sidewalk; I had to exploit every opportunity that might present itself, no matter how oblique or improbable. In Eastlake, at the edge of Lake Union between downtown Seattle and the University District, I spied a shabby but vacant one-story house on the corner of a block that was obviously undergoing transition—overgrown lots and foundation remnants where other houses once stood—and that had at least one permanent feature most right-minded people would find forbidding: an elevated section of Interstate 5 just across the street, attended by the incessant roar of cars and trucks. The house needed a new roof, a couple of coats of paint, and, judging by what Ezra and I could detect during a furtive inspection, major repair work inside, including replacing damaged plaster-and-lath walls with sheetrock. All of this, from my standpoint, meant that I might have found a solution to my dilemma.

The next step was locating the owner, a roundabout process that eventually required a trip to the tax assessor’s office. I called the person listed on the rolls and made an appointment. Then came the moment of truth, or, more precisely, untruth, when dire circumstance begot strategic deception. I’d never renovated so much as a closet, but that didn’t stop me from declaring confidently that I possessed both the skills and the willingness to restore the entire place to a presentable—and, therefore, rentable—state in exchange for being able to live there for free, with the length of stay to be determined as work progressed. To my immense relief, the pretense was well received. Indeed, the owner also seemed relieved, if a bit surprised, that he’d have seemingly trustworthy tenants; homeless people who camped beneath the freeway, he explained, had repeatedly broken into the house and used it for all manner of depravity. Telling myself that inspired charlatanry is superior to mundane trespassing—especially this instance of charlatanry, which would yield some actual good—I accepted the keys from my new landlord.

Photograph (detail) © Larry Towell/Magnum Photos
Article
Checkpoint Nation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Laura Sandoval threaded her way through idling taxis and men selling bottles of water toward the entrance of the Cordova International Bridge, which links Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, to El Paso, Texas. Earlier that day, a bright Saturday in December 2012, Sandoval had crossed over to Juárez to console a friend whose wife had recently died. She had brought him a few items he had requested—eye drops, the chimichangas from Allsup’s he liked—and now that her care package had been delivered, she was in a hurry to get back to the Texas side, where she’d left her car. She had a …
Checkpoint on I-35 near Encinal, Texas (detail) © Gabriella Demczuk

Acres of crossword puzzles Americans fill in each day:

54

In Burma, a newly discovered noseless monkey was assumed to be critically endangered because—despite its efforts to keep its head tucked between its legs on rainy days—it sneezes whenever rain falls into its nasal cavity and thereby alerts hunters to its presence.

Paul Manafort accepts a plea deal; Brett Kavanaugh accused of sexual assault; Jeff Bezos gets into the kindergarten racketon the clock

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Happiness Is a Worn Gun

By

Illustration by Stan Fellows

Illustration by Stan Fellows

“Nowadays, most states let just about anybody who wants a concealed-handgun permit have one; in seventeen states, you don’t even have to be a resident. Nobody knows exactly how many Americans carry guns, because not all states release their numbers, and even if they did, not all permit holders carry all the time. But it’s safe to assume that as many as 6 million Americans are walking around with firearms under their clothes.”

Subscribe Today