| Thirteen Conversations About One Thing | |
|---|---|
 Theatrical release poster | |
| Directed by | Jill Sprecher |
| Written by | Karen Sprecher Jill Sprecher |
| Produced by | Beni Tadd Atoori Gina Resnick |
| Starring | Matthew McConaughey Alan Arkin John Turturro Clea DuVall Amy Irving |
| Cinematography | Dick Pope |
| Edited by | Stephen Mirrione |
| Music by | Alex Wurman |
| Distributed by | Sony Pictures Classics |
Release dates |
|
Running time | 104 minutes |
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| Budget | $3 million[1] |
| Box office | $3.7 million[1] |
Thirteen Conversations About One Thing is a 2001 Americandrama film directed byJill Sprecher. The screenplay by Sprecher and her sister Karen focuses on five seemingly disparate individuals in search of happiness whose paths intersect in ways that unexpectedly affect their lives.
The film is divided into 13 vignettes, each prefaced by anaphorism. Set inNew York City, the story revolves around ambitiousdistrict attorney Troy, who is stricken with guilt following ahit and run accident in which he injures Beatrice, an idealistic cleaning woman who, forced to reassess her life during her recuperation, finds herself thinking more like her cynical co-worker Dorrie. Mid-level insurance claims manager Gene, unable to cope with his son's downward spiral into drug addiction, is rankled by an unrelentingly cheerful staff member and suffers pangs of regret after firing him without just cause. College physics professor Walker, trying to cope with amidlife crisis, becomes romantically involved with a colleague, an infidelity his wife Patricia is forced to face when his wallet, stolen in a mugging, is mailed to their home and she discovers incriminating evidence inside it.
The Sprecher sisters scriptedThirteen Conversations About One Thing over the course of eight weeks. The script was completed before Jill's directorial debutClockwatchers was released in 1997, but due to a lack of funding the film took over three years to make.[2] The plot was inspired in part by events in Jill Sprecher's life, including two muggings and a subway assault.[3] The character of Beatrice is based on Sprecher's experiences when she moved toManhattan following college graduation:[3] "Clea Duvall's character is very autobiographical ... I was that person who only saw good things around me and then, of course, after getting mugged, I sort of changed my opinion of human beings."[4]
The film premiered at the 2001Venice Film Festival and was shown at theToronto International Film Festival, the MIFED Film Market inItaly, the 2002Sundance Film Festival, theHong Kong International Film Festival, theSan Francisco International Film Festival and theWisconsin Film Festival before going into limited release in the United States. There, it opened on nine screens, earning $89,499 and ranking #34 on its opening weekend. It eventually grossed $3,288,164 in the US and $418,488 in foreign markets for a total worldwide box office of $3,706,652.[5][6]
Review aggregator websiteRotten Tomatoes reported that 83% of 114 critics gave the film a positive review, with an average rating of 7.3/10. The site's critics consensus states: "Thirteen Conversations About One Thing is an intelligent and poignant look at lives intersecting."[7]Metacritic, which uses aweighted average, assigned the film a score of 74 out of 100, based on 26 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews.[8]
Thirteen Conversations About One Thing was generally well received by critics,[9] who praised the quality of the cast and the treatment of the film's themes.Roger Ebert described the movie as "brilliant ... It is philosophy, illustrated through everyday events."[10]A. O. Scott of theNew York Times called the film "both straightforward and enigmatic" and said that "the quiet naturalism of the acting balances the artifice of the script and the almost finicky precision of Ms. Sprecher's frames". For Scott, the film is "thrillingly smart, but not, like so many other pictures in this vein, merely an elaborate excuse for its own cleverness. As you puzzle over the intricacies of its shape, which reveal themselves only in retrospect, you may also find yourself surprised by the depth of its insights."[11]Houston Chronicle reviewer Eric Harrison called the film an "intricately devised and thoughtful comedy",[12] whileSan Francisco Chronicle reviewerMick LaSalle said it "makes a case for cinema as a vehicle for conveying moods and ideas and, hardest of all, the internal movements of a soul."[13]
Negative reviewers wrote that the film had problems of tone and a lack of depth to its philosophical underpinnings.Peter Bradshaw ofThe Guardian awarded the film two out of five stars and commented that the film "suffers fromcurate's-egg unevenness, though its good points certainly stick in the mind."[14] According toEntertainment Weekly criticTy Burr, the film has "luminous performances, but a genteel tone of despair drags the whole thing down".[15] TheVillage Voice's Jessica Winter said "the film succeeds only when it peers up from the intro-philosophy book for the occasional glimpse of everyday beauty".[16]