logo
When a Pasadena rest home became a movie set, the residents got creative

When a Pasadena rest home became a movie set, the residents got creative

Director Sarah Friedland knew she wanted to set her debut feature, 'Familiar Touch,' in Los Angeles. The decision was, in part, personal — both her grandmothers lived in the city — but also thematic. 'Familiar Touch' is about an aging woman, Ruth (Kathleen Chalfant), dealing with memory loss.
'I didn't want the viewer to have a sense of time passing that Ruth doesn't,' 33-year-old Friedland tells me at the film's publicity office on a gray New York day. 'So it needed to be somewhere where you couldn't tell that there was seasonal change.'
But Friedland, who was born in Los Angeles but grew up in Santa Barbara, also had another goal in mind. She wanted to shoot in a real senior living community where the residents could participate in the production.
Friedland ended up making 'Familiar Touch' (in theaters Friday) at Pasadena's Villa Gardens in a unique collaboration with both the staff and denizens. Before her 15-day shoot, she and her team held a five-week workshop on filmmaking for Villa Gardens' seniors, who later became background actors and production assistants on the project. It was an example of Friedland essentially putting her money where her mouth was.
'It came a lot from the anti-ageist ideas of the project,' Friedland says. 'If we're going to make this film the character study of an older woman that sees older adults as valuable and talented and capacious, let's engage their capaciousness and their creativity on all sides of production.'
Friedland, whose background is in choreography, wrote the screenplay inspired by her own experience as a caregiver to artists with dementia. In the film, Ruth is disoriented when her son (H. Jon Benjamin), whom she does not recognize, moves her into a senior living home. Ruth does not see herself as elderly, instead making her way to the kitchen and working alongside the staff. That's where she is comfortable, having spent years as a cook.
In order to find her perfect setting, Friedland started researching just as if she were a child of older adults looking to move her parents. She heard about Villa Gardens from the sister of her own grandmother's caregiver, and it was exactly what she wanted: a place with the resources to accommodate her crew that felt appropriate for the story she was trying to tell. In her mind, the community in her fictional story should be one of privilege, a circumstance in which Ruth, who grew up in a working-class Yiddish family, could initially feel ill at ease.
The history of Villa Gardens also was appealing. It was founded in 1933 by Ethel Percy Andrus, who also started the AARP and was California's first female high school principal.
'It's a community that draws a lot of retired educators and social workers,' Friedland says. 'So there's this culture of lifelong learning.'
Before Friedland could move in, however, she had to prove herself. Villa Gardens executive director Shaun Rushforth turned her down four times before saying yes. Having worked at Kingsley Manor in East Hollywood — another senior living community which is often used as a location thanks to its handsome brick facade — he was skeptical of inviting the crew.
'Small independent films were the ones I'd had the worst experiences with,' Rushforth says. 'I wasn't sure how this was going to fly with the residents.'
Still, every time Rushforth thought he was going to give Friedland a strong no, it ended up being a 'soft no,' he remembers. Eventually, she won him over with her commitment to telling an authentic story. With that pledge in place, Rushforth gave her a final test: She had to convince the residents. Lisa Tanahashi, 68, a resident who ended up assisting the 'Familiar Touch' art department, was happy Rushforth gave Friedland a hard time.
'I feel bad that Shaun always has to say that he turned her down four times,' she says on a joint Zoom call from Villa Gardens with Rushforth. 'And yet from my perspective, that's exactly what we residents want him to do.'
Jean Owen, 87, who was the elected president of the residents' association at the time, was immediately impressed by Friedland and the narrative she wanted to tell.
'We need more information about senior living,' she says in a video call from her apartment at Villa Gardens, her face hovering at the bottom of the frame. 'We need more information about dementia or Alzheimer's or whatever we call it — anything that can give it a good spin, not a negative, because we're all aging.'
Owen, like Tanahashi, signed up for Friedland's twice-a-week workshops, where she learned about cinematography and production design from 'Familiar Touch' department heads who were patient in their teachings.
'We're not easy,' Owen says. 'We don't mean not to be, but there's just something about the aging process that it takes a little longer to catch on. She made us feel so comfortable. They all did.'
Once the workshops concluded, the participants could then decide what department they wanted to contribute to during the actual filming. Owen helped cast background actors for scenes. She says she received very little pushback from her fellow residents. Only two complained.
'One man said he had better things to do for four hours than to sit at a table with stale food,' she says. 'And the other woman complained because in her scene, which was a dining scene, they kept serving the same food and it was cold.'
(Friedland confirms this gripe: 'The scrambled eggs being cold was the main point of complaint.')
Friedland worked with Rushforth and other members of the staff so that the filming wouldn't interrupt the daily rhythms of life at Villa Gardens. Caregiver Magali Galvez, who has worked at Villa Gardens for around 20 years, fielded questions from 'Familiar Touch' actor Carolyn Michelle, who plays the woman who assists Ruth.
Although Ruth is supposed to be in a memory care unit, the production did not collaborate with those receiving similar treatment because Friedland believed they would not be able to give consent to be on camera. Ultimately, close to 30 Villa Gardens employees worked on 'Familiar Touch,' along with 80 residents.
The movie's 80-year-old star, Chalfant, who shot the film when she was 78, saw the people living at Villa Gardens as her peers.
'We're all old people,' she says. 'The oldest person in the crew was in their middle-30s. In an odd way, that was a kind of division and also a collaboration between old people and young people. There wasn't any hierarchy.'
One issue Friedland had directing the non-professional actors was that they often became entranced with Chalfant's performance.
'Kathy's such a magnetic performer that there were some residents who would start out playing their background role, and then Kathy would start her dialogue, and they were mesmerized and watching her,' Friedland says.
One sequence where Chalfant was supposed to be floating alone in the pool drew crowds of residents watching through windows. Meanwhile, the video village, where a director typically watches playback footage on screens, was perpetually crowded. 'Video village was a village,' Friedland says.
But the participation also kept the filmmakers honest. Through working with the Villa Gardens community members, Friedland strove to inject humor into the film based on what she observed. A moment where Ruth sees a woman wearing a potato chip clip as a hair adornment captures that atmosphere.
'The residents, when I pitched the film — one of the first things they said was that this film can't be too depressing,' she recalls. 'There's so much humor in our daily lives. This has to capture that sense of humor, but we can't be laughing at them — we have to be laughing with them, and it has to be absurd and uncanny.'
Watching the final product has been a bittersweet experience for those from Villa Gardens, who both are thrilled to see themselves on screen but recognize that some of their fellow castmates have since died.
'It's wonderful to see them real again,' Owen says, also noting that she found the portrayal of the onset of dementia true to life.
Many saw the film for the first time during its AFI Fest premiere at the TCL Chinese Theatre, a screening that Friedland says gave her more nerves than the movie's debut at last year's Venice Film Festival, where it won the prestigious Lion of the Future award, as well as prizes for directing and acting.
'The residents and staff put so much work into this, and I wanted to do them proud,' Friedland says. 'But it was so joyous.'
The day after the Chinese Theatre screening, Friedland brought the film to Villa Gardens for those who couldn't make it to Hollywood. She also brought along the Lion statues the team won in Venice and got the festival to send an extra award certificate to give to the community. It is going to live in the Villa Gardens library, forever connecting the place to its cinematic history.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Yo-Yo Ma and friends anchor a Tanglewood weekend of music forged in unprecedented times
Yo-Yo Ma and friends anchor a Tanglewood weekend of music forged in unprecedented times

Boston Globe

timea day ago

  • Boston Globe

Yo-Yo Ma and friends anchor a Tanglewood weekend of music forged in unprecedented times

Advertisement The topic of the discussion was the year 1803, and the geopolitical tempest amid which Beethoven composed his Symphony No. 3, 'Eroica,' which was (in a piano quartet transcription) the centerpiece of Sunday afternoon's program at the Koussevitzky Music Shed: Ma and Ax with violinist Leonidas Kavakos and violist Antoine Tamestit. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The symphony's origin story includes one of classical music's more memorable bits of trivia: Beethoven, who admired Napoleon Bonaparte, supposedly had planned to name the symphony after him. But upon learning that Bonaparte had declared himself Emperor of France in 1804, he furiously retracted that dedication. 'He will think himself superior to all men [and] become a tyrant!,' the composer raged, according to his student Ferdinand Ries. He then scratched out Bonaparte's name with such force that he tore a hole in the manuscript. Advertisement On its own, that story neatly slots into the narrative of Beethoven as a cantankerous but high-minded son of the Enlightenment. But Ax offered another possibility that could cast that outburst in a different light — that the symphony may have remained 'Bonaparte' if the Little Corporal had been willing to pay him for it. The discussion circled an unspoken and unanswered question: Because Beethoven lived and worked during a period of intense political upheaval in Europe, might there be any wisdom for our time hidden in the 'Eroica,' akin to the guidance Richardson excels at distilling from the annals of American history? The three danced around the topic without touching it. Ma at one point said that 'the young people will go further than the alte kakers (Yiddish for 'old farts') like me.' Perhaps, if there is any wisdom for our current moment in the 'Eroica,' it comes from the inspiration individuals might take from it, not anything encoded in the score. If the 'Eroica' took shape in turbulent and violent times, so too did the two completely unrelated pieces the BSO performed on Saturday evening with conductor Elim Chan, Korngold's Violin Concerto and Rachmaninoff's Symphony No. 2. The Austria-born Korngold had been hailed as a wunderkind, the 20th century's answer to Mozart. Then, the Nazi takeover of his home country spurred him to relocate his family to Los Angeles, where he was already working on movie scores. Rachmaninoff penned the Symphony No. 2 in Dresden, Germany, where he'd relocated – resigning his post at the Bolshoi Theatre – to escape both the pressure of celebrity and the rumblings of the coming Russian Revolution. Advertisement It was the first time the BSO had ever performed the Korngold concerto, perhaps an oversight from the time when 'sounds like film music' was a much greater insult. The concerto doesn't just sound like film music; it incorporates themes from several films Korngold worked on, all of them keen and exquisite. Kavakos seemed to be a few hairs out of tune with the orchestra; passages that might otherwise have resounded with celestial consonance instead bristled with friction. But one can rely on Kavakos for two things, and the first of those is symbiosis with the orchestra. He's a true master at playing with an ensemble, not just in front of one. He took cues from the orchestra and Chan's agile and lush treatment of the music, and the ensemble in turn responded to what he played, adding extra zing or crunch to certain phrases to echo him. The tuning issues had mellowed out to an interesting pungence of tone by the third movement as well, and the final movement was a thrilling, high-energy caper. The other thing one can usually rely on him for is a sublime Bach encore, and he delivered that too. After intermission, Chan led the orchestra in a tremendous and sweeping performance of Rachmaninoff's Symphony No. 2, which featured (among other things) a heartstopping clarinet solo in the slow third movement from William Hudgins Never could anything with words convey pure love so clearly. Elim Chan, in her Tanglewood debut, gave the music agile and lush treatment. Hilary Scott/BSO Traffic was backed up on all roads leading to Tanglewood for the following afternoon's all-Beethoven program with Ma, Ax, Kavakos and Tamestit. The first three have been playing as a piano trio with some regularity for a handful of years, but have not formed an official ensemble; they're recognizable enough on their own that they surely don't need to. Tamestit collaborated with them at Tanglewood in 2022 during a series Ax curated, and at the time I noticed the similarities between the violist's warm sound and Ma's. In the two pieces Sunday afternoon that featured him, which were both orchestral transcriptions, he seemed to be the special sauce that bridged Kavakos's tart, papery sound and Ma's genial richness. Together, the three instruments alchemized into something larger than the sum of twelve strings, while Ax's muscular command of the piano (and transcriber Shai Wosner's keen ear for arrangements) laid an unshakable foundation. Advertisement The 'Leonore' Overture No. 3, usually a forgettable orchestral chestnut, fairly exploded with vitality. Tanglewood Music Center fellow Raul Orellana delivered a clean offstage trumpet solo, and the piano quartet beckoned him on stage to congratulate and introduce him afterwards. The Trio No. 4 in B flat allowed Ax more delicacy, with the responsibility of representing entire orchestral sections no longer on his shoulders. Here also, Ma and Kavakos were attuned to one another, responding and building on the other's input. Does the 'Eroica' pack the same punch without a full symphony orchestra behind it? No, but they're not playing in the same weight class. Wosner's transcription was written for Ma, Ax, Kavakos, and whichever guest violist they have (if you're reading this, guys: just make your nameless trio a quartet with Tamestit) and though the sonic power might not have been as overwhelming, it was playful in a way that full orchestras rarely explore. Beethoven's dynamic contrasts are often extreme – in Ax and Ma's conversation Saturday, they compared it to a film cutting away from a car crash to a completely unrelated scene – and without the large ensemble's sonic palette to work with, the musicians brought the drama of 'Eroica' by way of accents and variations, never playing anything the same way twice. Take the second repetition of the second movement's funereal melody, which usually belongs to the oboe; Ax transferred that to the piano, and each note was as smooth and discrete as pebbles in a cairn. Rather than try to mimic the oboe, he played it as only a pianist could. Advertisement BOSTON SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA / YO-YO MA, EMANUEL AX, LEONIDAS KAVAKOS, AND ANTOINE TAMESTIT Tanglewood, Lenox. Aug. 2 & 3. A.Z. Madonna can be reached at

Shining a light into the lives of girlhood friends tackling the art world
Shining a light into the lives of girlhood friends tackling the art world

Boston Globe

time23-07-2025

  • Boston Globe

Shining a light into the lives of girlhood friends tackling the art world

Both girls have fathers, although we don't meet Maria's until halfway through the book; Ruth's is a kind of immigrant Bartleby, a man who 'spent decades working and eating and keeping things to himself.' He loves his daughter — his gift of colored pencils sparks her passion for drawing — but is mostly a silent figure. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Wambugu's is a novel primarily about girls and women. The male characters who exist are not particularly interesting on their own — they appear as obstacles or challenges or simply circumstances with which Ruth and Maria must contend. This isn't a failing on the author's part, simply a choice about which stories and people and ideas interest her. Art, after all, cannot look at every single thing on earth; we choose what stories to tell and to hear. Advertisement It turns out that questions about art — who makes it, who consumes it — will become central to Ruth and Maria's lives as they grow up. They graduate from Holy Name and matriculate together at Bard College, both yearning to make art, and to live as artists (not entirely the same thing, as Wambugu slyly points out.) Rooming with her childhood best friend isn't a complete cure for the culture clash Ruth feels on campus. For the first time, she meets people for whom '[b]eing who you were even if your sense of self was in flux or in the process of drastic refashioning, was more important than getting along with others, being liked, being courteous, loving God, or honoring your parents.' Among her other abundant gifts, Wambugu is brilliant at capturing the contradictions of early adulthood — both the specifics of Ruth and Maria's 90s hipster milieu and the universal tension between breaking from one's elders and seeking their support: 'Senior year, everyone talked of dropping out and moving to New York City, though who knew if it was true or just a pose. Everyone wished to seem rebellious, but at their core their wish for order and approval was paramount.' Advertisement 'Lonely Crowds' is both a coming-of-age novel and what the Germans call a Künstlerroman, an account of the artist's growth. Wambugu doesn't dwell overmuch on the details of Ruth's or Maria's work (both do end up in New York pursuing creative lives), but she's adept at sketching the details, and the stakes. In short, blunt sentences, the book devastatingly portrays the realities of money, race, sexuality, ambition — along with the gossipy competitiveness of any insular scene — that both Ruth and Maria confront in New York. Maria is a charismatic, complicated love object throughout the book. Wambugu ably chronicles her struggles. But it's Ruth, through whose eyes we see everything, who shines in all her imperfections. From her childhood carelessness, when 'things seemed to exist only once I'd drawn them,' to a guardedness that stems from a need for clarity ('was it because of my constant drawing that I was missing the details of what I was meant to understand?'), the novel's main character is a real, relatable guide to what it feels like to be a girl, a woman, a friend, a lover, a wife, an artist. As a prose artist, Wambugu plays in different registers, from the brevity of her exposition to the occasional lingering image, such as the Rhode Island winters Ruth witnesses, when '[t]he snow fell and was pissed on and driven over until there was no whiteness left, and when it seemed it couldn't absorb any more human waste, spring came and it melted into the gutters.' And she's wise about childhood, the way we believe in things that turn out to be illusory, or at best, vastly overpromised: 'The Bible, television, the movies, were full of prodigal sons coming home, full of seamless repair, resurrection, outlandish reunions at the last minute, but in life you were lucky if even one person said sorry and meant it.' Advertisement If I have a mild quibble, it's that the book opens with a chapter in Ruth's adulthood before flashing back to that first glimpse of Maria, which is when the reader's heart really starts beating. This is truly minor, and offered mostly as encouragement to keep turning the pages, for as the novel unfolds, it emerges as one of the most emotionally and intellectually rich debuts I can remember reading in this or any year. Kate Tuttle edits the Globe's books section. Lonely Crowds By Stephanie Wambugu Little, Brown, 304 pages, $28 Kate Tuttle, a freelance writer and critic, can be reached at

A Lonely Portrait of Lifelong Friendship
A Lonely Portrait of Lifelong Friendship

Atlantic

time22-07-2025

  • Atlantic

A Lonely Portrait of Lifelong Friendship

The English novelist E. M. Forster believed that people know the characters in the novels they read better than they know one another. In fiction, he argued, a character's true nature and deepest secrets are plainly available, whereas 'mutual secrecy' is 'one of the conditions of life upon this globe.' This idea is strikingly isolating. Can it possibly be true? By the end of Stephanie Wambugu's debut novel, Lonely Crowds, I could see where Forster was coming from. Following the decades-long convolutions of an intense and volatile friendship between two women, Ruth and Maria, Lonely Crowds poses similar questions about the limits of personal relationships. As the girls grow older and their unhealthy childhood patterns repeat in adulthood, their friendship begins to seem more dangerous than idyllic. Perhaps the most prevailing myth about childhood friends is that they know each other completely and love each other best. Wambugu counters such sentimentalism by revealing the many secrets and misunderstandings at the core of Ruth and Maria's friendship. In their world, a lifelong bond is not a comfort but a liability. Lonely Crowds begins in the contemporary present with Ruth, as an adult, seeming very lost at her own birthday party. As the novel's title suggests, a crowd full of people can be a remarkably lonely place. 'That Maria wasn't here at the party was a source of great distress,' Ruth thinks, blowing out the candles. Ruth recalls that when she met Maria years ago, 'I learned that without an obsession life was impossible to live. I'd forgotten. Now, I remembered.' Despite her success as an art professor and painter, Ruth feels adrift and bitter. She thinks she sees Maria everywhere. As she falls asleep the night after her party, she recollects her history with Maria, starting from the beginning. Ruth's obsession with Maria sparks from their first encounter, in a uniform shop for the Catholic school where they will soon be classmates. The scene is a small spectacle of shame: Ruth watches while Maria's aunt tries to buy a uniform for Maria on layaway, promising to pay when her disability check comes through. The owner refuses and castigates Maria's aunt in front of a long line of customers, throwing the two of them out of the store. As they leave, Ruth makes eye contact, and Maria 'looked back at me as she crossed the threshold, wide black eyes, perfect. Then she was gone. I felt doomed.' Ruth decides she will befriend the girl at her new school and spends the rest of the summer besotted with the idea. Maria and Ruth meet again on the first day of third grade at Our Lady in Providence, Rhode Island, where the two are the only Black girls in their class. They're the same age, but to Ruth, Maria seems much older and wiser. During their first real conversation at school, Maria brags about her pearl earrings, a gift from a teacher, offering to let Ruth borrow them if she's careful. 'Oh, I'm not careful,' Ruth responds. 'I'm careless.' Her utterly honest response demonstrates Wambugu's knack for capturing the humor of childish intransigence on the page. But the scene also looms large for young Ruth: Maria's earrings represent the mysterious world of adults, one that Ruth is hungry to learn more about. That the gift is inappropriate simply does not register for her. Ruth is an only child, sheltered by her parents, who are Kenyan immigrants to a working-class neighborhood in Pawtucket, outside of Providence. Her mother values hard work and minding one's own business, while her father is 'lonely, mercurial, romantic,' often changing jobs and exacerbating marital tensions. Ruth's upbringing is strict but stable. Maria lives with her aunt, who is severely bipolar, after her mother's death by suicide. The girls' first playdate sets the stage for the uneven dynamic they'll share for the rest of their friendship. After inviting Maria home from school with her, Ruth reminds herself to 'come across as measured, impassive, and confident.' By the end of supper, Maria's politeness and intelligence have charmed Ruth's parents. But the success of the evening is punctured when Maria, as she is leaving, turns around to ask Ruth, 'What's your name again?' Although Ruth never tells the reader how she feels about the question, nor how she responds, the moment feels pivotal, capturing how Ruth's earnestness and longing are so often met with coolness, even rejection. But she soon wins Maria over, and eventually Maria comes to be a part of Ruth's family. Like her biblical namesake, Ruth is loyal and steadfast to her friend, while Maria is independent and creative, often controlling the narrative of their relationship and even determining their future trajectories: Maria is an extrovert, so Ruth must be an introvert. Maria is the type to never settle down, while Ruth is going to get married. Ruth always looks to Maria for advice and approval, and Maria's responses to her vary among love, tolerance, and disgust. Reading scene after scene in which Ruth is so passive can be frustrating. She is content to be molded by Maria, unaware of the danger: She is becoming a person who knows herself only in relation to her friend. When Maria decides she wants to be an artist in New York, the girls both apply to and get into Bard College, where Ruth takes up painting and Maria studies film. Maria sees this moment as her great escape from bleak Pawtucket, while Ruth worries that she, too, is part of the past that her friend wants to leave behind. Maria is clear about one thing. 'When we go to school, we have to go our own way,' she tells Ruth. 'We don't have to be together all the time. We still can be close and be … separate.' In college, Ruth and Maria do pursue different paths and new relationships. The biggest test of their friendship comes when they move to New York City after graduation and both try to make it in the art world of the 1990s. Their childhood competitiveness grows into an adult professional envy: Where Maria meets easy success as a filmmaker, Ruth's path is more complicated, riddled with self-doubt and jealousy. Like a piece of cherished childhood clothing, their friendship appears more and more ill-fitting as time passes. The two grow apart, not because they change, but because they do not; they are stuck in the same dynamics, unable to find new ways to connect to each other. As the novel progresses, Ruth often stops existing on the page, overtaken by her endless loops of fixation on the thoughts and feelings of others. In part because the reader has no insight into Maria's perspective, Ruth's narrative voice makes it hard to discern what either woman gets from their friendship, or even the extent to which they know each other at all. I don't believe that Maria enjoys Ruth's overbearing attention, or that Ruth likes being consistently rejected by Maria. After a final confrontation, the women appear to accept their incompatibility, and their friendship becomes something more distant. But even when Ruth gets a prestigious fellowship at Bard and moves upstate with her new husband, her obsession with Maria never really disappears; it just morphs. If Ruth never stands up to Maria, it's because nothing is worth the risk of losing her. When they're teenagers, Maria asks Ruth to throw away the many portraits that Ruth painted of her; Ruth complies. 'I had a hard time forgiving her for that,' Ruth reflects, though she never tells that to Maria. Decades later, in New York, Maria uses footage of Ruth in a video without asking her permission. Watching herself on-screen, Ruth is unable to 'shake the feeling that there was a violent thrust to the video and that something had been done to me that I hadn't asked for.' Yet when Maria asks her what she thinks, Ruth demurs, telling Maria the piece is 'cool.' 'I would have been content spending the rest of my life walking behind her,' she thinks, as the two women cross the gallery back to their partners. It's an insight that makes the risk of their friendship clear: For Ruth, losing her friend would mean losing herself, too.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store