
Throughout her four-decade career as a writer and director, Susan Seidelman has told complex stories about unconventional women striving to express themselves and maintain their autonomy. Her genre-melding films fuse a passion for the pleasures of Hollywood spectacle with a playful punk ethos informed by the years she lived in downtown Manhattan in the midseventies.
Like many of the heroines she has created, Seidelman left suburban life for the allure of the bohemian city. After high school, she enrolled in the film department at New York University, where she directed two short films that prepared her for making her debut feature, Smithereens (1982). A lo-fi blueprint for her subsequent portraits of women reinventing themselves, this gritty and glamorous 16 mm snapshot of a bygone era of New York life became the first independent American film to compete for the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival. Its success placed Seidelman in the Hollywood spotlight and set her up for her next film, Desperately Seeking Susan (1985), a madcap New York odyssey that revolves around mistaken identity, starring a pre–Like a Virgin Madonna alongside Rosanna Arquette in her first leading role.
But rough-hewn urban character studies are hardly Seidelman’s only forte. She has ventured into several other styles, including the prescient sci-fi of Making Mr. Right (1987), which stars Ann Magnuson as a publicist who falls in love with a handsome android (John Malkovich), and the diabolical revenge comedy of She-Devil (1989), in which Meryl Streep plays a narcissistic romance novelist who seduces a married man and suffers the wrath of his wife (Rosanne Barr). Then, in the nineties, Seidelman further cemented her status as an iconic New York artist when she directed the pilot episode of Sex and the City, setting the tone for one of the most beloved television shows of all time.
With a collection of Seidelman’s films now playing on the Criterion Channel, I spoke with the director about the feminist spirit that runs throughout her work and the collaborations that bring her vibrant films to life.
What was your relationship to cinema when you were growing up in the suburbs of Philadelphia?
It was the sixties, so moviegoing for me meant going to the cinema at the local shopping malls—that was before they all became multiplexes. What stands out from my memories of being a little girl is seeing Hayley Mills in The Parent Trap, which is interesting because that’s a movie about twins and the idea of doubles. Someone looks like someone else, gets mistaken for them, and then finds themselves having an adventure. Little did I know that would be a main theme throughout my own films one day. Occasionally, I’d see films like The Pink Panther or Breakfast at Tiffany’s—a favorite of every girl with an escapist dream. I was drawn to female protagonists even then.
You’re drawn to several other art forms—music, fashion, design—so how did you come to realize that filmmaking was the path you wanted to pursue?
I’d never made a movie before going to film school, but I knew I liked watching films and thought this would be a good opportunity to be around other film lovers. I wanted to leave Philadelphia and didn’t know what I wanted to do with my life, but this was a good motivation. I applied to NYU without a portfolio; I had never done anything with a camera, but I liked design, and films are about making designs move, then adding music and a story. During the second year of my program, we got our first chance to make a black-and-white narrative film. I made one called And You Act Like One Too, which ended up being nominated for a student Academy Award. I was thrilled, and that gave me confidence to say, maybe this is something I can do, maybe this is a form of storytelling that I’m comfortable with.
You can see your interest in the everyday complexities of women’s lives and their desires blossoming in these early shorts.
My eyes started to open when I was in college and began reading feminist literature. I started to think about what it meant to be a woman at that time. That theme suddenly became very important for me, and now I consider all of my films to be feminist films in one way or another. In And You Act Like One Too and Yours Truly, Andrea G. Stern [another short Seidelman made while studying at NYU], you can see my awareness of feminism emerging; I was exploring how women’s roles were changing and no longer fitting into the traditional modes they’d been stuck in.

Smithereens




I’d love to know more about your early days in New York. Did you feel a sense of community with other artists making work in the downtown film and music scene at that time?
I never lived above Ninth Street, and if you lived downtown in those days, you got to know the other people who were doing the same things as you. That’s when I met Amos Poe, Jim Jarmusch and Sara Driver, Beth B and Scott B . . . It was a very small world. I don’t think we were influenced by one another as much as we were living in an environment that influenced us all in our own way. What was cool about the late seventies and early eighties in New York was that it felt like an open city where you could do whatever you wanted. I didn’t even know you needed permits to film in the streets! There was a sense of freedom, and, culturally, there was so much going on; the city was an incubator for art and music and performance. It was a fun time to be there.
Something I’ve always loved about your work is its portrayal of a certain kind of messy New York woman—someone who is ambitious and self-made, independent and living a bit dangerously, but who has a strong sense of her identity and an almost romantic pursuit of creative expression. It’s an archetype that feels different from the very put-together, more manicured women characters who were on-screen at that time, played by actors like Diane Keaton or Jill Clayburgh.
That’s interesting, because that’s also how I see myself: as a messy New York woman who is also ambitious. But for me it’s not about the traditional notion of attaining wealth or status; it’s about doing things and having things to say and wanting to be able to express them to the world.
Although Desperately Seeking Susan was a script you were hired to direct, it felt like such a natural extension of the characters and themes in Smithereens. Did you instantly feel a connection with the material and know you could infuse it with your own sensibility?
As a director, I always want to put my stamp on the scripts I’m working with and bring my own voice to what’s on the page. I look for scripts that have both an architecture and a story that I really love. This one also happened to have the name Susan in the title, which I took as a sign. Leora Barish wrote a great script, which gave me the tools to develop my own vision. I knew right away that this was the kind of material I was looking for, because it spoke to two sides of myself: the suburban girl I was and the woman I could have become [Roberta, Rosanna Arquette’s character], and the person I moved to New York City to be [Susan, Madonna’s character]. I’m not Madonna, but I was someone making her own unique way through life in New York.
Before I came on board, the character of Susan was more of a young Diane Keaton type. In fact, they were even thinking of casting her or Goldie Hawn. But after making Smithereens and feeling very comfortable in that downtown and East Village world, I wanted to shift the story more in that direction. I didn’t change the structure, but the film evolved tonally. I saw Madonna’s Susan as a more successful version of Wren, the protagonist in Smithereens—or at least a version of her that was more successful at being manipulative.

Desperately Seeking Susan




Desperately Seeking Susan has become such an iconic New York film, especially because of how cinematographer Ed Lachman captured the color and the pulse of the city.
This was the first narrative feature Ed made in New York. He’s a real artist and someone who likes to paint with light. One of the important things he taught me was that a frame shouldn’t have more than two strong colors in it at any time. When you’re watching a bad TV movie, often your eye doesn’t know where to go because there are so many colors; there’s nothing guiding your eye toward a certain thing. But Ed would craft the lighting in such a way to illuminate where your focus should be. He lit the exteriors with colored gels, which was unusual at the time—for example, the scenes outside the Magic Club, which he lit with green and purple gels.
That use of color works so well with Santo Loquasto’s production design. I’m thinking of one of my favorite shots, which shows Rosanna Arquette sitting in her perfect pink kitchen watching TV with a giant decal of an ice-cream sundae behind her.
I love that shot too. I find it fun to make visual jokes within the frame. I see that shot as a nod to the sweetness of the saccharine world she’s living in, which some people will appreciate and some will just see as decoration. But it was always great working with Santo, who was also the costume designer. We spent a lot of time trying to create two distinct worlds for the characters of Roberta and Susan, each with very specific rules. Roberta’s world was going to be all pastels and soft hues, and Susan’s world was going to be a mix of vibrant colors and black. Because Santo was doing both costumes and design, he had a unique overview of the look of the film. When he was dressing a character, he knew exactly what the frame was going to look like at any given moment.
How did you two approach the two lead characters’ wardrobes? I’m very curious about Madonna’s pyramid jacket.
First we established the theme and color palette for each character, then Santo presented me with a ton of options. For Madonna’s wardrobe, he went to her apartment and picked out a lot of stuff from her own closet. As for the jacket, he created it! That article of clothing was actually written into the script, but it was his choice for it to have a pyramid with a seeing eye on top. I liked that he was playing around with symbols and adding a mystical meaning to it. But that’s also the symbol on the dollar bill, so it had a material girl meaning as well.
You then moved on to a larger budget with She-Devil, which was the first time that audiences saw Meryl Streep in a comedic role. Can you tell me about working with her to craft that performance?
Meryl was my top choice. I always like working against type when it comes to actors. It’s fun to be the first person to use somebody in a surprising way. That was the case with Madonna in Desperately Seeking Susan, Meryl in She-Devil, and John Malkovich in Making Mr. Right. I knew Meryl had done some comedic theater at Yale, but I thought it would be great to have this very serious, esteemed actress play this very frivolous, very narcissistic romance novelist who lives in a pink palace. I do think comedy can be harder than drama, because it’s so dependent on timing and precision—and you really have to go for it. You can’t be timid. There’s a scene in the bedroom with Meryl and Ed Begley Jr. when she says, “But I’m an artist, Bob.” She’s sitting on the bed, and she shakes her butt in this very funny way. It made me think, wow, she’s not afraid to push it.

She-Devil




Your films play with genre in a very interesting way. Can you tell me about your interest in that—particularly with Making Mr. Right, which combines science fiction with social satire?
I like playing with genres and using them to tell more personal stories. Making Mr. Right is a sci-fi movie that talks about the power dynamics between men and women. A lot of what’s in these films reflects where I was in my life at the time I was making them. When I was working on Making Mr. Right, I was a successful working woman, and my professional life was very together, but my personal life was very confused, so I wanted to tell a story about a woman who is also experiencing that disconnect.
Making Mr. Right is also playing in our AI collection on the Criterion Channel. Like many of your films, it feels so ahead of its time. How was it received upon its release three decades ago?
It got a lot of mixed reviews. Critics had an absurd interpretation of John Malkovich’s character. They saw him as, like, a walking dildo or some kind of sex bot, as if this woman was falling in love with hardware. But what’s been interesting to see over the past few decades is how much the human relationship with AI has grown. It’s no longer so strange, is it? Even something like Siri—it’s like a friend. These things are a part of all of our lives in ways that are increasing rapidly.
How did you approach the costume and production design for this kind of near-future sci-fi story?
In the eighties, a lot of the films set in the future felt very scary and dark and threatening, like Blade Runner or Mad Max. But since we knew this was a comedy and a social satire, we wanted to represent the future as something more playful. I referred to when I thought the future was going to be fun, like in The Jetsons or the Space Age midcentury look of the World of Tomorrow at the World’s Fair. I loved the idea that robots weren’t scary but playful.

Making Mr. Right




With the twenty-fifth anniversary that Sex and the City just celebrated this summer, I’ve been thinking a lot about the show and its impact. I’d love to know about your experience directing the pilot, because its themes and style do feel so connected to your films.
It was a great experience. When I read the script, I really liked the story and the characters. I thought it was bold and something I hadn’t seen on TV before. I asked Darren [Star] if I could shoot it more like a movie than a TV series, which he thought was great, and he let me hire an amazing team. I hired cinematographer Stuart Dryburgh, who shot The Piano, and production designer Mark Friedberg, who had worked with Mira Nair. It was important for the editing to be inventive and for the tone to be a little dark and funky. I wanted to bring a certain level of grittiness. I wanted the characters to be glamorous but also a little sad. In the pilot, you see that Carrie doesn’t live in the apartment that appears later in the show; she lives in a walk-up on top of a coffee shop with a neon sign. The show and the films ended up having a more aspirational tone, which is also great, because most people who move to New York City are, to some extent, hoping to reinvent themselves.
What’s on the horizon for you now?
I recently wrote a memoir, which is going to come out in 2024. It’s been interesting to think about the lessons I’ve learned from successes and failures from the perspective of now being seventy. I’m thinking about which lessons I can pass on and which ones I can teach myself at this age. I’m still trying to figure out what it’s like to be an older woman who doesn’t feel like an old lady and who still has some things to say.