It has become increasingly difficult for independent filmmakers to get their movies made in a time when the word “independent” has lost all meaning. The film “Juno” claims to be, but it was financed by 20th Century Fox’s company Fox Searchlight.

But Oscar-nominated writer/director John Sayles, considered a pioneer of independent filmmaking, along with his producer and partner, Maggie Renzi, continue to make films the same way they did when they made their first movie “Return of the Secaucus Seven” in 1979 - they use their own money.

Sayles’ career began as a novelist and short story writer with the 1975 publication of “Pride of the Bimbos,” followed in 1977 by “Union Dues,” a National Critics’ Circle and National Book Award nominee.

Their sixteenth film, “Honeydripper,” opens next weekend as part of a grassroots campaign Sayles and Renzi started when the film opened the Indie Memphis Film Festival last October.

“The films out there right now, like ‘Atonement’ and ‘Juno,’ those movies have over $20 million spent in advertisement and distribution. We had $1 million,” Renzi said.

They use the money Sayles makes from working as a screenwriter on studio films, such as 1978’s “Piranha” to fund “Secaucus.” He was one of three screenwriters on last weekend’s hit movie “The Spiderwick Chronicles” and used it to pay for “Honeydripper.”

The film stars Danny Glover as Pinetop Purvis, the owner of The Honeydripper, a fledgling juke joint in 1950s rural Alabama. When a legendary guitar player fails to show up for a gig Purvis had hoped would pull his club out of debt, he turns to Sonny, a young man played by newcomer Gary Clark Jr., who drifts into town with a homemade electric guitar to stand in for the famous musician.

Charles S. Dutton plays his best friend, and their chemistry and hilarious quips provide the comic relief as the movie shows us a glimpse of the hard life black people had working the cotton fields, owning businesses and just trying to survive.

“The story is inspired by a short story I wrote about the real Guitar Slim who had a big hit in the early fifties,” Sayles said. “He wouldn’t show up, so the club owners would get whoever could play the guitar and put him on stage.”

The research for the film involved studying books written about the period, but Sayles relied on his own instincts for the dialogue.

“I have always had a good ear for it,” Sayles said. “The further you get from a big city, you can hear certain locutions. Memphis has a certain locution. Rural Alabama as well.”

Once the research was finished, Sayles took the characters and set them in the racially charged South, when the military first integrated troops for the Korean War. At one point, the sheriff arrests Sonny, charges him with vagrancy and puts him to work in the cotton fields.

“They really did that back then,” Sayles said. “Whoever the guy was, he would ask ‘When’s my sentence up?’ and the sheriff would reply, ‘When there’s no more cotton in the ground.’”

After Sayles wrote the script, Renzi took to the road in search of funds for the picture.

“Maggie went out for a whole year, with Danny Glover attached, looking for money. But no one was interested,” Sayles said. “By the time she returned, we had missed the cotton and had to wait.”

It has taken four years to get “Honeydripper” to the screen, but the journey was worth it. Glover gives the best performance of his career, and his chemistry with Dutton is so palpable, it amazed me the two had never worked together.

“They’ve known each more than 30 years and have understudied for each other in plays, but never shared a line before now,” Sayles said. “They worked so well together, that, often times, I would pull the camera back and give them all the space they needed.”

It’s a wholesome, whimsical tale that just may be the most important family film to come out in quite some time. It deals with heavy issues without using violence, sex or language. And even without all those elements that seem to define a good drama these days, anyone of any age can enjoy “Honeydripper.” It could easily be an Oscar contender, had the film reached a wide audience.

Sayles has always had to struggle to get his films made. One of the reasons he writes for studios on big budget blockbusters is to be removed from the process. But screenwriting is not without its problems.

He was hired by Steven Spielberg to write a script for “Jurassic Park IV,” but when a copy of it was leaked to the popular film fan Web site Ain’t It Cool News, the project was put on hold.

“I was pissed at (Ain’t it Cool) for a while,” Sayles said. “They kidnapped it, either from Spielberg’s office or my agency and they printed a review of a draft of a screenplay! I guess the review wasn’t negative, but Spielberg’s people were not happy.”

People almost lost their jobs because of it.

“Our assistant was sort of in trouble for it,” Renzi said. “We all kind of stood accused as though we had anything to do with it.”

For the “Jurassic Park” fans who yearn for another installment, Sayles had one response: “They must be training the dinosaurs.”

But unlike the disastrous experience of “Jurassic Park IV,” his involvement in another fantasy film wielded fantastic results. He helped write “The Spiderwick Chronicles,” which made $24 million over last weekend.

“I was one of three writers that got credit,” Sayles said. “Originally, they wanted to make it into two movies, but I was the one who suggested it just be one.”

While watching the movie, Sayles said he had an internal dialogue trying to find his touch in the film.

“I could tell as I watched it, ‘Ok, that’s something they did to eliminate one creature that’s expensive, probably saving them $2 million,’” Sayles said. “Sometimes, I couldn’t figure out why they changed things, but all in all, I think they did a good job.”

As for the future, Sayles is returning to his roots as a novelist.

“At the moment, I’m mostly working on a very big novel set during 1897-1901 that deals with, among many other things, the Philippine-American War,” Sayles said.

Never underestimate the power of gold. Did you really think the studios would let the films they vigorously campaigned for go unappreciated at this year’s Academy Awards? Not a chance with a year like 2007.

Not since 1994, when “Forrest Gump,” “Pulp Fiction” and “The Shawshank Redemption” were
nominated, has a year boasted so much talent.

A few weeks ago, I launched a contest to see if students and faculty had what it took to beat me at the Oscars. If you pick more winners than I do, you win a gift certificate to Videos, Movies and More down the road at 3125 Poplar Ave. If there is more than one, a winner will be chosen at random. I chose the top eight categories because, for the first time in recent memory, they truly represent the best of filmmaking for 2007.

Best Supporting Actor

Hal Holbrook - “Into the Wild”
Phillip Seymour Hoffman - “Charlie Wilson’s War”
Tom Wilkinson - “Michael Clayton”
Casey Affleck - “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”
Javier Bardem - “No Country for Old Men”

Javier Bardem deserves the win for this role and performance that still chills months later. Normally, I sympathize with the villain and have a secret wish that they, not the good guys, win in the end. But with Bardem’s portrayal of a man with nothing but pure, black, evil blood running from heart to head, I wanted nothing but this man dead in the ground. Nothing, not even a sympathy vote for the older Holbrook, can take the gold from Bardem’s hand.

Best Supporting Actress

Tilda Swinton - “Michael Clayton”
Saoirse Ronan - “Atonement”
Ruby Dee - “American Gangster”
Cate Blanchett - “I’m Not There”
Amy Ryan - “Gone Baby Gone”

In this five-woman race, Ronan has no chance. This newcomer shows so much talent that the Academy knows they will see her again. Dee’s chance lies in her age and long career, not her hammy performance. She had one scene that could be construed as memorable, but its poor staging was indicative of the film’s shortcomings.

Entertainment Weekly, practically a bookmaker’s guide to the race, gave Swinton their vote because it is the only chance “Clayton” could win anything. But really, it’s between Cate Blanchett and Amy Ryan. I thought Blanchett as Bob Dylan was great for an experimental film, but that’s why we have The Independent Spirit Awards.

Hands down, the best performance of a supporting actress last year was Ryan. I didn’t like the movie, but I am a long time fan of the series, written by Dennis Lehane, and felt director Ben Affleck had no understanding of the characters. If it hadn’t been for Ryan, this film would’ve been ruined. As the drug-addicted wastrel whose daughter is kidnapped, Ryan turned an oft-seen character into someone truly memorable.

Best Actor

George Clooney - “Michael Clayton”
Johnny Depp - “Sweeney Todd”
Tommy Lee Jones - “In the Valley of Elah”
Viggo Mortensen - “Eastern Promises”
Daniel Day-Lewis - “There Will Be Blood”

No one stands a chance against Lewis. Nothing can be said that hasn’t been said before. This role and performance will be studied and admired for decades to come.

Best Actress

Cate Blanchett - “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”
Marion Cotillard - “La Vie en Rose”
Laura Linney - “The Savages”
Ellen Page - “Juno”
Julie Christie - “Away From Her”

The award will go to Christie for her role as a woman suffering from Alzheimer’s. But if it were up to me, Page would win hands down for “Juno.” Can you imagine any other actress as Juno? Neither can I. She is so heartbreakingly down to earth that she became a model for the youth of today.

Best Original Screenplay

Tony Gilroy - “Michael Clayton”
Tamara Jenkins - “The Savages”
Nancy Oliver “Lars and the Real Girl”
Brad Bird - “Ratatouille”
Diablo Cody - “Juno”

Cody’s funny and sincere script should and will win. But if anyone has a chance of beating her, it’s Gilroy for “Clayton.” He wrote what our cinemas most desperately needed - a real, no frills, adult drama. I heard several people felt manipulated by the film’s marketing campaign. It promised a thriller, but delivered a drama. But this is the studio’s fault, not Gilroy’s. If you know what you are watching, you will be amazed by the film’s subtly and precision.

Best Adapted Screenplay

Christopher Hampton - “Atonement”
Sarah Polley - “Away From Her”
Ronald Harwood - “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
Paul Thomas Anderson - “There Will Be Blood”
Joel and Ethan Coen - “No Country For Old Men”

This is Joel and Ethan Coen’s year. They will win. But as people who have read the book know, the story already had a cinematic feel, and some of the films best lines were taken straight from the book. If it were up to me, the award would go to Anderson.

In 1994, “Forrest Gump” won this award for creating the kind of film that would be revered for years to come, while barely resembling the book. Anderson pulled off the same feat with “There Will Be Blood.” Based on the Upton Sinclair novel, “Oil!,” Anderson simply took a few thematic elements and the main character Plainview, and wrote a brilliant film. To me, that’s what this award is about. But, expect “No Country.”

Best Director

Paul Thomas Anderson - “There Will Be Blood”
Tony Gilroy - “Michael Clayton”
Jason Reitman - “Juno”
Julian Schnabel - “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
Coen Brothers - “No Country for Old Men”

As strong as I feel about Anderson taking home the Best Adapted Screenplay, I feel even more strongly about a win for the Coen brothers in this category. The book had the story laid out, but only these master craftsmen had the skill to bring it to life.

Best Picture

“There Will Be Blood”
“Michael Clayton”
“Juno”
“Atonement”
“No Country for Old Men”

This year could mirror the rare occurrences of 1999 and 2005. In almost every ceremony, the film that wins Best Director also wins Best Picture. But in 1999, Steven Spielberg won the directing award for “Saving Private Ryan,” while “Shakespeare in Love” took home Best Picture. The same thing happened two years ago, when Ang Lee won for “Brokeback Mountain,” but “Crash” won Best Picture. In both cases, I was enraged! “Shakespeare” was a goofball comedy made to look like a period piece. And “Crash” was spoon-fed cheese-ball melodrama that had no business even being in the same category as “Brokeback,” let alone winning the award! Give me a moment … OK. I’m calm. The favorite to win is “No Country,” and it’s my pick. But if there is an upset and “Blood” takes it home, I won’t pop a blood vessel. Both films deserve the award. “No Country” was the best film of the year, but only by a hair.

This article was originally published in The Daily Helmsman

The following is an article I wrote that was originally printed in The Daily Helmsman.

You can blame the administration for starting the semester two weeks into the year for my late annual Best and Worst List. Why write one since thousands have already been written? Well … they weren’t written by me! So indulge my arrogance for a moment. I want you to be as moved by these films as I - or in the case of The Worst, I beg you to stay away.