Chris Robert Riegel’s new film, Expectations is a satirical companion piece to Charles Dickens beloved classic Great Expectations. Like Pip and Estella, characters from the book, Chris also grew up as an orphan. His unique lens serves as a marker of authenticity that he brings to telling this story. Through the film, he will be able to start a deeper conversation about gender roles and class. The film also features the debut performance from Rina Lipa (Dua Lipa’s sister) as well as Emily In Paris star Samuel Arnold. Below we explore Riegel’s influences, upbringing, and indie cinema. He hopes the viewer will begin to ask themselves if some of the issues we faced in The Victorian Era are not much different than issues we are facing as a society today.
Reserved: So first, why don’t you tell me a little bit about your upbringing and how it continues to influence your work?
Chris Robert Riegel: I have what you would call an unconventional upbringing. It does change the way I see the world. You can find a lot of the projects that I do influenced by that upbringing because of the fact that, let’s face it, we are the amalgamation of all the experiences that we’ve been able to collect.
I’m a big believer in balance and you see that in my work, but you also really see it in “Expectations” because for all the characters that go through all the gamut of all the things that they do, there’s a lot of negative, but there’s a lot of positive about the things that they want and the aspects of that. You see that very much as well in the film because I had the pleasure of growing up around so many different cultures, you see it in the film as well with characters that have been adapted before from Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations, you see them with a new lens or you see them look a little bit different, than you’re traditionally used to. And that also encourages the fact that there’s a lot of new elements to this that are different mixtures of different cultures.
Have you always been a fan of Dickens? What made you want to retell this story?
When I first read it, I would tell you that the tween-age version of me would take great exception to the adult version of me, he would’ve been asking me, “Haven’t you had enough of this story and these characters yet?”
But here I am years later making it effectively. I think it’s the first of its kind. It’s not a straight adaptation, but a continuation of the events. There’s such an interesting attribute of it (The Victorian Era) where we look at some of the motifs of that society and we have to ask ourselves, “Are we still battling sociologically some of the exact same motifs?”
The question I asked when I wanted to begin this process and with our producers was, “How do we take Great Expectations and make it not our grandparents’ Great Expectations?”
You’re tackling a lot of big issues that we’re dealing with in our society today, such as gender roles and class. Why are you choosing to tell the story through a satirical lens?
Look at some of the works of Adam McKay and you begin to realize as a filmmaker, sometimes lampooning or comedy is such a good and digestible way to begin a conversation. But beyond that, through the veil of comedy, it gives us such an opportunity to not only laugh and connect and relate, but to have a very earnest reflection.
This film is really no different. And I think even that in its concept, it was never an errand to create it where we could ultimately be in a position to deal and tackle with these big issues.
It was meant to be a fun conversation that evolved just from an organic standpoint. And so what that is then, for me, and obviously the biggest thing communicating to our audience is the opportunity for them to see what they want to see. That’s the nice thing about film for me as a medium, I leave it up to the people who watch it, and that’s part of the fun of why we do what we do.
What do you think separates Indie films from larger studio films in terms of both artistry and authenticity when it comes to storytelling?
Obviously, for me, speaking in a unique position because I’ve had great experiences working on both and it’s a lot of fun, honestly, being between both worlds and being able to participate. For me, working with the studio, whether it’s the filmmaker, as a producer, or being an executive on a project at the studio, it’s a really cool experience because the idea of what the film will evolve into some degree, and where it’s going to go, and how they want to premiere, and even sometimes the marketing of it, all of these things.
I really equate it to this idea of just having this great support staff who comes in with ideas and resources and things that maybe you never even, as a filmmaker, would ever think were possible. And having that level of guidance allows you, in my experience, to see the vision through to its absolute best end. And sometimes those things connect with an audience, sometimes they don’t, but you’re always a part of something bigger than yourself.
On the indie side, you’re still part of a team, but that team’s mission is different. You are trying to find it.
That’s one of the reasons why I like to do both because I have nothing but positive things to say about both versions of it, but it’s always just understanding. Again, I’ve had the ability from 35,000 feet in my career to experience both to learn that dichotomy and learn how to appreciate both.
Is there anything else that you want the viewer to know prior to watching the film?
You don’t need to know the source material to go on this ride. There are a lot of people who do and they watch it and they see some of their things which are treated more like Easter eggs, but to not know the source material is just as fun because half the cast are all new original characters created to interact and identify with the literary characters. The other aspect of it is because it is a companion piece and not a straight adaptation, these characters are on a completely different path, a completely different journey in a way we’ve never seen them before.
Interview by Ashley Cooper