Alexander Payne on Timelessness, The Holdovers as a Christmas Classic, and Making Movies for Theaters

It’s been a hot minute since writer/director Alexander Payne released a film. His last was 2017’s sci-fi satire Downsizing, which didn’t land with audiences. That same year, he became a father for the first time and restarted his creative process. Several projects almost happened, including directing the HBO miniseries Landscapers. But it wasn’t until Payne connected with screenwriter David Hemingson (Whiskey Cavalier) to develop his idea for The Holdovers into a script that his creative path became more certain.
An intimate ‘70s-era period piece set during Christmas, The Holdovers is a coming-of-age story, a tale of adult regret and a meditation on the loneliness of the season. Payne finally reunites with Sideways star Paul Giamatti, who plays much-despised Paul Hunham, adjunct professor at an all-boys prep school. Forced to spend his holiday break babysitting the five students who have nowhere else to go, Hunham ends up bonding with the biggest troublemaker, Angus Tully (Dominic Sessa) and school head cook, Mary Lamb (Da’Vine Joy Randolph). Now, The Holdovers is one of the best reviewed films of the current awards season.
Paste Magazine recently got on a Zoom with Payne to reflect on two modern classics from his film resume, how The Holdovers finally got him working with Paul Giamatti again and how he’s navigating the rough waters of financing his particular niche of adult drama films.
Paste Magazine: A few months ago, Laura Dern was on a book tour and Citizen Ruth (1996) came up as a film that still resonates with her. It got me thinking about the almost timeless quality to it and Election, which both feel like films that could have been made right now. Is that something you spend any time thinking about in the writing stage, or does it just happen with the aging of a film?
Alexander Payne: That’s at once wonderful to hear and kind of heartbreaking. Certainly with Citizen Ruth, Laura Dern and I both got a bunch of calls last year with all the Dobbs shenanigans. Of course, we’re delighted that people are still interested in that movie. But sad for the immediate reason why.
And the question is flattering, “How do you program timelessness?” And no, it’s just a matter of luck. I mean, certainly, this is an easy answer, but like in The Holdovers when [Hunham] talks about the 1% in that speech he gives at the Christmas party, you can say it’s a period film, but he’s talking about today. He’s talking about every time. People are always fighting about racism and classism, and that’s always the case.
But let me say this, though, because you’re pinpointing, specifically, Citizen Ruth and Election, which can be seen as political metaphors in some way. If they are still relevant, if they’re still watchable, I think it’s because, as a director, I’m more interested in the human dynamics, not in the specific politics of it. In Citizen Ruth and Election, Jim Taylor, my co-writer and I were consciously more interested in how people’s individual psychodramas are played out in a public arena, often political. And we certainly know that from our former president, where we were all victimized by personal psychodrama.
How did The Holdovers coalesce as your follow-up to Downsizing, which was six years ago now?
After Downsizing, this one happened because another one I was going to do in 2019 fell through just the week before production was to start. That was heartbreaking, but okay, so be it. And then it was simply the script that was ready. [Writer] David Hemingson is a pretty good and fast writer so the script was ready. Of the two, three, four [scripts] that were kind of percolating on my stove top, that was the one that was ready.
The Holdovers very much feels like a ‘70s film plucked from that time and released now. What was the appeal of telling a story so specific to that era, and was it a particularly nostalgic time that you and David wanted to dig into?
The fact that it was a period [piece], it just came coincidentally. Early on, we had pinpointed 1970 as the year in which this was to be set. We knew it had to be a period film because there are no more single-sex boarding schools to think of. And then, it was not in the ’50s because that’s too much like a Peter Weir movie. So, how about 1970? I think David thought that the political winds going through a year like that gives us something as screenwriters. There are just some good chew toys there that informed his conception of the cook character, Mary. What’s she going through? Because of class and race, her son had to go to war and has just been killed. She has that. And then the boy, he’s a troublemaker. If he gets kicked out again, he might go to military school and might go off to war. It just gave us good, meaty stakes to surround some of the characters with.