Michael Winterbottom has been making films since 1990 but it wasn’t until 2010’s The Trip that international audiences pivoted their heads towards his product. Sure, 2007’s A Mighty Heart marked a turning point for Angelina Jolie‘s career – with Winterbottom’s somewhat acclaimed film demanding the actress be taken more seriously than her resume of late – and 24 Hour Party People, though not quite deserving of the title, is cult-like in its reach, what with career-beginning performances from Steve Coogan and Andy Serkis. Read More
Talking with Alfonso Gómez Rejón of ME & EARL & THE DYING GIRL
Six months ago, Alfonso Gómez Rejón‘s stock was of Jordan Belfort’s penny list variety. He himself had to push it on people. And that’s exactly how he landed a gig directing the Sundance-winning, indie-record-breaking, standing-ovation-inducing Me & Earl & The Dying Girl [our review here]. Says Rejón, “I had to fight for the job…. It was torture.” But Rejón would gleefully admit that the painstaking process that got him from point A to point sitting behind that coveted director’s chair was one well worth it. After all, he’s gone from penny stock to Fortune 500 in one quick go. Read More
Talking with Atticus Ross of LOVE & MERCY, GONE GIRL, SOCIAL NETWORK
There are few composers who intrigue me enough to want to pursue an interview: John Williams, Hans Zimmer, Alexandre Desplat. Atticus Ross. Unlike many of his contemporaries, Ross lends his talent out sparsely – completing just a pair of film scores each year while his peers often churn out four to seven. He earned his name alongside Nine Inch Nails band leader Trent Reznor scoring David Fincher‘s The Social Network, a game-changing composition that went on to Academy Award acclaim. Since then, Ross has joined each of Fincher’s projects working alongside Reznor to provide dark, harrowing musical compositions to underscore Fincher’s devilish palette. Read More
Talking With Nick Kroll of ADULT BEGINNERS, THE LEAGUE
Nick Kroll first showed up on our televisions as a puka-shell wearing caveman in Cavemen, ABC’s short-lived, ill-fated adaptation of the popular Geico commercial. (Preparing for this interview, I watched an episode and Kroll’s bone-dry comic sensibilities are almost fully formed already, and it was surprisingly funny and apparently (ironically) ahead of its time.) Shortly thereafter, he collaborated with pre-fame Aziz Ansari, Paul Scheer and Rob Huebel for a few eps of Human Giant before landing a major gig on The League alongside Scheer, where he played antagonistic lawyer Rodney Ruxin. Kroll got perhaps his widest audience exposure featuring as radio jockey “the Douche” on Parks and Recreations where he met now girlfriend Amy Poehler. In 2013, Kroll launched his own variety show, The Kroll Show, that has now seen its curtain call after three seasons. Read More
Talking With Alex Garland of EX MACHINA
Alex Garland has been lurking through the film world since the turn of the century, trying on all kinds of hats on all kinds of projects. His career began somewhat inauspiciously when Danny Boyle turned Garland’s 1996 Thailand travelogue nightmare into a critically flunky Leonardo DiCaprio project (though I’ve always had a bit of a soft spot for The Beach, both the novel and the film.) Shortly thereafter, Garland teamed with Boyle again to greater effect; producing what was to become one of the greatest zombie features of all time in 28 Days Later…, a film that really set the stage for the success of a cultural phenomenon like The Walking Dead. Read More
Talking with J. Davis and Tobin Bell of MANSON FAMILY VACATION
In a move that surprised even me, Netflix scooped up their second film of the SXSW festival with off-kilter drama/comedy with an unexpected thriller bent Manson Family Vacation. Starring Jay Duplass and Linas Phillips, Manson Family Vacation tells the story of two brothers – the prodigal son and the black sheep – who reunite after a long stay of absence, one of them having developed a sudden but keen interest in Charles Manson. From our review:
From Lina Phillips’ ticks – his quick-burst nervous laughter after nearly everything he mutters, the awkward, uncomfortable way he holds himself, his unsettling obsession with Charles Manson – we know something’s off. The journey is uncovering what and the platform is J. Davis‘ Manson Family Vacation – a dark family drama that knots itself up in misunderstandings and a trembling desire to be accepted. It’s eerily funny, smartly performed and more twisty than you would expect for an independent film.
I sat down with director J. Davis and co-star Tobin Bell (Saw) to discuss the process of making the film, its difficult classification, historical accuracy, Tobin Bell’s creepiness and, of course, Charlie Manson.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
There is a lot of intelligence to the film, a rare sort of a grace that you navigate, so well done. For people listening, or reading in, can you describe what is ‘Manson Family Vacation’?
J. Davis: Well, it’s about a guy who lives in Los Angeles, and has a kind of comfortable life with his wife and son. And then his estranged brother shows up in town for a surprise visit. And all the brother wants to do is visit sites related to The Family. So he kind of pulls his brother around town, and eventually, out into the desert, where they kind of enter the modern day world of Charles Manson.
So I want to tread a little lightly, especially here at the beginning, because I don’t want to reveal the “big twist”, as it were, in the film. A lot of the time, I feel like, with independent cinema, there isn’t so much of the film predicated on a twist ending. It is, very much, here. How do you combine the elements of a somewhat restrained family drama with a more thriller-esque aspect?
JD: I feel like it was always kind of felt like under the hood it is a thriller.
Tobin Bell: It’s grounded in what you call “the twist” but that is grounded in historical fact. So that, even, makes it… I’m treading lightly also. I like that aspect of it.
JD: I think that the realistic performances, and the drama of the movie, I was hoping, would lead you to believe one thing could happen, and then you begin to think something else.
And I love that. I love how it transforms. I think it adds a lot of depth to it. In terms of logistics, when you were shooting at the locations of these Manson sites – and you’ll probably be able to tell but I’m not very well versed in my Manson history – but were those the actual locations of the death sites?
JD: Some locations are real. I don’t want to get into specifics of it, just because I don’t think it will add to it.
TB: It was definitely in the neighborhood. It won’t add to the experience of the movie.
JD: Yeah. I wanted to have the movie in the real world that we know and these places are around. I used to live down the street from these places.
Wow. Is that something that sort of initiated your professed fascination with the Manson character?
JD: I wouldn’t say it initiated it because I was interested in this stuff since I was a kid. There’s a story in the movie, about finding ‘Helter Skelter’ on the bookshelf, and I kind of pulled it down, as a kid, and looked through these pictures and saw these crime scenes. This family; these young, attractive people who were responsible for all this stuff that had happened. And pictures of Charlie. And my Grandfather, who was the Chief Of Police in the town I grew up in, came in and caught me with it, and took it out of my hands, and put it on the highest shelf. But I managed to, of course, get it down again.
TB: That just made it more attractive, right?
The allure of the unobtainable item.
JD: My interest in it sort of started young and it was this thing that I was forbidden to be interested in. And Jay Duplass and I are friends and we both had a lot in common. But when I started talking about my interest in the Manson Family and that kind of thing, he was kind of horrified. So I decided to write a script, to kind of explore that difference between us. And once I wrote it, while I was writing it, I was thinking of him as the horrified brother. So I asked him to play the horrified brother. He wasn’t doing much acting at that time, but he quickly, within seconds, said yes.
He was just right for it?
JD: Yeah
One of the things that you played with in the film, which is based not only in historical fact but on events that are still going on today, is people’s obsession with Charlie Manson and his ideologies and even his music.
TB: Which means that people, when they come into a theater with Charlie Manson in the title, are naturally going to be predisposed to some kind of attitude about who Charlie Manson is and what his track record is and all that. I think J. Davis has done an amazing job of giving what is an expected experience, because of the Charlie Manson name, a different kind of tone, and a different kind of feeling. I think the film is very successful in that way because you get a meal that you don’t expect to get and I like that aspect of it.
So, J., did you do much research into more current iterations of what Manson following there is today, like we see in the film? Where there are groups of people who maybe still live out in the desert together? Or is that you taking a little creative liberty there?
JD: Yeah. I kind of know, vaguely, that there are, but I didn’t do a ton of research about it. I just kind of wrote what I thought was an interesting story.
So Tobin, to put this lightly, you have a bit of a creepiness to you whenever you’re in a film. “Oh, it’s Tobin Bell! It’s the guy from ‘Saw’! He wants to play a game.” And so, when you appear in this film for the first time and you’re wielding this lead pipe, we think “Uh oh! Trouble’s coming!” And then you turn out to be somewhat intimidating but also somewhat of a gentle soul. Can you talk about what it was, for you, that defined that character?
TB: Well, the lead pipe part was easy. You pick up the pipe and you chase the guy. It’s no different than any other role. I ask myself a series of questions about who Blackbird is, what his background is, how did he meet Charlie? What is his relationship with Charlie, really? How deeply involved with Charlie is he? Or not? So, for me, it was easy, because the script tells me so. It gives me clues and then I fill in backstory like I do with every other character. In this case, I had a lovely girlfriend who obviously was much younger. I wanted to go into it in terms of her relationship with Dennis and all that. Which I think is lovely, and done marvelously. For me, the script gave me every marker that I needed. J. and I did discuss some lines that we changed slightly because there’s an environmental theme, in this story, and we wanted to talk about that thread, a little bit, to strengthen what Conrad is doing in his quest. It’s part of Conrad’s quest, so we wanted to support that a little bit more. So for me, it was very clear, very easy. Hiking around in the desert is a lovely thing, especially with that kind of landscape. It’s great stuff.
JD: And I should say, Tobin, after he read the script, had such incredible notes. They weren’t limited about his character – they were about the whole script. We talked through the entire script. We had notes about the brother’s relationship. It was great in the moment. I knew he’d be perfect because he was thinking of the entire movie and not just his part in it.
Was there any point during production where anyone reached out to Charlie Manson?
JD: You’d have to ask Lennis.
If Charles Manson did see this film, what might you think his reaction might be to it?
JD: I’d hope that he would realize that, although he’s the lynchpin, and his name is in the title, that it’s really about the era. It’s a character and relationship movie, in which Charlie’s name is in the titles because events around him is what these two brothers are struggling with. So hopefully he would think, “Huh, they did a pretty damn good job telling a story about a brother who feels disenfranchised.” And I’m sure that Charlie probably felt that way, himself, during his formative years. It’s that simple. It’s not really about Charlie Manson, although Charlie’s pretty much Ground Zero He just kind of is at the tiller.
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter
Talking with Taissa Farmiga and Ben Rosenfield of 6 YEARS
For all the schmaltzy young love that pollutes our movie screens (*cough* If I Stay, Fault in Our Stars *cough*) there comes the ocassional tale of youth and young love that actually merits a watch. 6 Years is that movie. And now that it’s been picked up by Netflix, you’ll actually probably watch it. How novel! From our review;
Emotionally raw though a dash melodramatic, Hannah Fidell’s 6 Years is a bittersweet look at love and sacrifice at the ripe young age of 21. Fidell plants us at the focal point of their oft imploding relationship with truly intimate camerawork that operates in tandem with the film’s unobtrusive technical aspects – like Julian Wass‘ mellow score and Andrew Droz Palermo‘s low profile cinematography work – to create a convincing, and affecting, narrative. Able to share its time equally between the two leads – both of whom offer excellent performances – 6 Years paints an important and empathetic portrait of young relationships without necessarily taking a side. Like Boyhood and Blue is the Warmest Color before it, 6 Years enters a class of independent film that young people should be made to watch before making any major life decision.
Speaking with 6 Years stars Taissa Farmiga and Ben Rosenfield, we discussed morphing technology, favorite flicks, American Horror Story, dream directors and getting advice from their older generation.
—————————————————————————————————————————————
So first of all, congratulations! Your film was just picked up this morning by Netflix!
Taissa Farmiga: Thank you.
Which is kind of crazy, because Netflix is really shifting, in the way that they’re now acquiring exclusive material. They picked up ‘Beasts Of No Nation’ as well [and also Manson Family Vacation.] So, when you guys are thinking about the future of film and what medium that film comes in, does that play a part in how you think about your roles, and what opportunities you might want to take?
Ben Rosenfield: I think it effects it – just in terms of what a movie is going to. It’s a different medium, so it broadens the scope of how things might work, you know what I mean? A film like this, I think, is going to work beautifully on Netflix, and there are other ones where it’s like, it belongs in a movie theater, properly, in that way. Netflix, and the internet, is just creating a wider variety of platforms.
It’s changing everything.
TF: It’s letting more people access it now. Which isn’t, it’s not a negative thing. Again, it’s just thinking, “Where’s the best place?” Some things belong in the movie theater.
So with this, what was it about the director, Hannah Fidell, that basically won you guys over and where you felt comfortable saying, “This is the project I need to be a part of?”
TF: When I was reading the script, I immediately fell in love with the characters – they’re so relatable, and so personal. I just thought, “I would love to play this,” because, also, I’m 20, and I’m figuring life out. I would love to portray that. So the script actually had a bunch of images in it, for visuals, for tonal references…
Oh, cool.
TF: So I got to see a little bit of Hannah’s mind, and what she envisioned the project. It was very helpful. Then I had a Skype with her and Mark Duplass, and I heard them talk about it. They just sounded so smart, and like good people, and I was like, “”I want to make a movie with them.”
They had a vision?
TF: Yes.
BR: Also, all of what Taissa is saying is similar to the experience I had, and then I also watched ‘The Teacher’ before, and I thought it was a really interesting film.
So, Taissa, how has it been for you, navigating the film world, having your older sister showing you the ropes, saying, “You should do this, and this…” I’ve gathered that you have a strong bond but do you ever feel like, “Back off! Let me do my own thing here!”
TF: No, never! I feel so blessed to have my older sister. She’s been through it all; she’s been through the ringer. If I call her up, and go, “[Vera], what do I do? I’m in this circumstance – I’ve got to pick this job, or this job.” She’s just always there for me. She’s helped guide me. I owe her so much. It’s nice to have someone to talk to, and now she’s got someone to talk to. I know how hard it is. So yeah, it’s great! It’s nice to have your own personal wealth of information, right there. I pick her brain all the time.
Taissa, you found your breakout with ‘American Horror Story’, and Ben, I know the last film you worked on was ‘A Most Violent Year’. So can you both talk about working with these exquisite talents? Like Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain as well as Kathy Bates and Jessica Lange, who’s just phenomenal in that show?
TF: Man, it’s just incredible to have not been in this industry for so long and to get to work with these incredible people. I mean, just massively talented people. I love to just sit back and watch how these people work, rather than be like, “Oh, tell me everything!” I’m more of a…
An observational learner.
TF: To see how they operate, and take what I can from that. If they want to throw a couple of tips out there, I gobble them right up.
BR: It’s amazing getting to work with great actors. You learn a tremendous amount from them. It’s like the best. Taissa didn’t go to college. I didn’t go to college. But I think we’re both getting a pretty great education, based on that.
Do you have any funny stories, where one of these actor giants has just taken you aside and tried to guide you one way or another?
TF: I stepped on Jessica Lange’s line once during ‘American Horror Story’. It was totally fine, I was just too over-eager to like show my stuff and because they switched the lines a little bit and I didn’t know what was happening. I go to go, and I see her look over at me, and I shrink.
That terrifying Jessica Lange stare.
TF: I mean, it was nothing, but you know me, of course. “Oh my God, the lion’s looking at me.”
Following up on ‘American Horror Story’, I think the show is one of the best platforms for female performances, not only in television but in movies. That kind of makes me think of a quote from Zoe Saldana, where she said something like, “Genre films – sci-fi, horror, etc. – really have the best opportunities for women to work.” They get better opportunities when they work in these genre niches. Is that an experience that you’ve had?
TF: Well, it’s interesting because, like in the horror genre, females are very empowered. Like The Final Girls, the one that wins; it’s the woman.
Especially in ‘American Horror Story’.
TF: Especially in ‘American Horror Story’. In ‘Final Girls’, as well, it was uplifting a woman, which was nice to play.
BR: I think there’s also a lot of objectification of women going on in horror films, too.
There is.
TF: That’s what’s so nice about ‘Final Girls’. It makes fun of those tropes. Like ‘The Slutty Girl’, ‘The Mean Girl’, ‘The Shy Girl’. It makes fun of that. It’s like, “That’s in the past, guys.” It brings a fresh way of doing it.
My final ‘American Horror Story’ question: I know you’ve been in, you’ve been out, you’ve been in it again, kind of oscillating back and forth, from season to season. So, if you were to follow your trend, you would be in the next season. Is that something that you’ve discussed and talked about?
TF: I’m just so busy with movie stuff lately. And I also just got another pilot, for a show called ‘L. A. Crime’, for ABC, so I’m excited for that because it shoots on the Sunset Strip. If it works out to do ‘American Horror Story’ I would love to do that show. I was there in the beginning and it meant so much to me. If I could poke my head in and say “Hi,” I would love to.
So, unfortunately, I’ve not yet seen ‘6 Years’, I was sick as a dog from food poisoning.
BR: I’m so sorry. That sucks!
That always seems to be what happens when you travel. But can you just kind of give me a bird’s eye perspective of what the film is about, and how you divorce it from previous incarnations of this young, romantic drama film? What sets it apart?
BR: To answer the first part, it’s the story of a young couple who’s been together since high school, and they’re now approaching the end of college, and their paths are starting to diverge.
They’ve been together for six years?
TF: Yeah, their relationship started in this youthful place and as they’re transitioning into adults, and they’re changing, either their relationship is changing with them, or it’s not.
BR: I think what’s different about this film is the way the split happens, the way it manifests itself. It’s told in a unique way. There’s some domestic violence which happens, which you don’t see very often with young people. I think the fact that me and Taissa are actually the ages of the people we’re playing is cool.
Rather than thirty-year-old people playing college students?
TF: That’s what’s so nice about it. It feels so real. Because we’re the real age. We’re also going through these transitions in our lives, so we can relate to these characters really well. It just feels so relatable. It’s personal. It’s intimate.
BR: And we improvised a great deal of the film.
Oh, okay.
BR: Which happens, but again, you don’t see a lot of films with young people improvving.
So did you guys draw on any particular relationship in the past that you’ve experienced in order to play this?
TF: Not specifically. Obviously, I drew on just past experiences, with people that I’ve connected to and dealt with in my life. But nothing specific.
A couple of quick shot questions that you can just do quick answers to. If there’s any director that’s working today and said, “I need you in my next film,” who’s the one you just couldn’t turn down?
BR: P. T. Anderson.
TF: Oh, that’s a good one. I’d love to work with Danny Boyle. I almost got to. I got to audition with him. He directed my hand in the audition room. To be able to do that, for a real movie.
BR: Also, Todd Rohall. I want to work with Todd Rohall. He’s a genius.
And another quick one: what was your favorite film of last year, and what really speaks to you in these kinds of movies?
BR: I guess I’ll say ‘Force Majeure’. I loved that movie. Last year was good so I’m just naming the first thing that came into my head. I loved it because it’s very, very sad and it’s very, very funny. I love art that has both sides. It’s so well done.
TF: You know what I actually loved, and you can’t bitch because you were in this? I loved ‘The Most Violent Year’. I love Oscar. I thought it was a great cast. Obviously, part of me wanted to see [Ben] in it to talk about it. I loved it – it was a little bit of a slow burn, which is not usually my taste, but I really loved it. Jessica Chastain was so subtle in it.
She’s so good! And, finally, where are you guys off to next? What’s the next big projects, and things you’re circling right now?
TF: I’ve got a couple of projects here that are about to come out, and hopefully they’ll sell. But I’m about to go shoot a pilot in L.A.
‘L. A. Crime’, that you were talking about?
TF: Yeah. So that’s cool.
Anything else on the docket for films? Going back to the TV world for a little bit?
TF: I shot a Western last year. I got to work with Warren Beatty, as well. I’m hoping those are about to come out soon. I want to get those out into the world.
BR: I’m in a play right now, so I have to leave the festival and go finish that up. In another Manhattan Class company. And then this summer, I’m in Woody Allen’s new film. And then I might go to England, and record some music. Not filming anything in particular though.
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter
Talking with Robert Duvall of WILD HORSES
With Wild Horses, Robert Duvall returns to the director’s chair after a 13 year stay of absence. Though he attempts to craft an unlikely movie with meaning inside the confines of a thriller/western, the film gets away from him. From our review;
“The proof-of-concept for Wild Horses is in the pudding: Robert Duvall in front of and behind the camera, festival “it” boy James Franco and once teenage heart-throb Josh Hartnett saddled at his side. Even though Duvall hasn’t directed a film since 2003’s widely panned Assassin Tango (what. a. terrible. name.) there is promise in the idea of the diverse trio hidden beneath cowboy brims mugging through difficult family dynamics. Duvall, Franco and Hartnet aptly square off but there is just so much wrong with Wild Horses that it’s hard to overlook its bumbling, clueless ways.” (Full review here)
Though we touch on the film and its “terrible” roots – his words not mine – Robert opens up about the awards season, his favorite films of the last few years, foreign film, young actors, his directorial style and roles that he’s offered now that he’s well into his 80s.
——————————————————————————————————————————————-
Over the last decade, you’ve been somewhat choosy with your roles, and as a living film legend, you must get offers left and right?
RD: Well, some.
Not as much as you might think?
RD: Not as good.
Well still, even with what is coming down the pipeline, what in particular really attracts you to a project, or a film, or a filmmaker these days?
RD: The character, first. The character and the writing. And then the director, and then the overall script. But maybe if I can do something a little bit different with this character then I did before. Maybe. A little different. It’s always the character that is the initial impetus.
And when you’re looking at characters, are you mainly looking for someone you relate to, or do you mainly look for ways to experience something you haven’t already?
RD: Both. Yeah, just something different. Like I told people before, it really had been presented to me, and then it wasn’t. I wanted to play something related to Don Quixote. And when I did ‘Lonesome Dove’ Mark Tree was influenced by Cervantes, I had heard. Man on horseback, saving ladies, that kind of thing. Sometimes when you plan something, something else comes around the corner and surprises you that just takes over what you’re planning, so you never know what’s around the corner. This guy’s got a script for me to read – have you seen ‘Wild Tales’, by the guy Damian Szifron?
Yeah.
RD: Wow, what a film!
It was awesome.
RD: And now he has a film western, he wants to do. I owe it to him! He wants to go up and everything. But you know, I do have the rights to ‘The Days The Cowboys Quit’, the novel by Elmer Kelton, the great Texas playwright. He was one of the greatest Western writers of all time – a lot of people in Texas don’t even known him. He’s a great writer who died recently, who wrote a novel, a true story, about some cowboys who went on strike, which they never do. They don’t unionize for anything! But they want to strike, because the big ranch owners wouldn’t let them have small bands of horses and cattle. So AMC is going to do it as a two-part miniseries.
Is that something you would be directing, or starring in?
RD: Oh, no. I’m back off of it. I’ve had enough for a while. No, I would play a part, and help produce, and help attract good actors, because there are so many good actors. Young actors now are better than ever.
Who do you like, in particular?
RD: Well, the performance last year by McConaughey – Brando couldn’t have done better than that. Whether or not he’ll ever be that good again, I don’t know. His older brother is a good friend, he’s coming today – Rooster McConaughey, crazy fellow. Lot of good guys! I saw a thing the other day about Brad Pitt doing a part when he was young. People knock him, everybody criticizes him, but he was wonderful, Brad Pitt. And now Joaquin Phoenix could be good, in a certain way. There’s a lot of good actors around. To me, they’re better then ever – black actors, white, Spanish, this, that. There’s more of a chance for people to go into it. I saw this little film here, two years ago, ‘Dynamiter’, better than some of the big Hollywood pictures. They picked people off of the street to be in it – it’s very pure. So I like small films. Like ‘The Apple’, by the seventeen-year-old girl from Iran. She was seventeen years old! Anyone can pick up a camera, anywhere in the world, and do something.
Just last year you were nominated for your second Academy Award but at this point, when you’ve done the ceremony so many times…
RD: I have been a lot.
But it’s been fifteen, sixteen years?
RD: It’s been a while.
But is that something, when you go back into it, are you kind of exhilarated, or are you kind of over it?
RD: No, it’s exciting. I want [my wife] to experience it as well – it’s great, to have her there with me. It’s fine. It was so interesting, because I was sitting there, and this guy sitting behind me, this Russian guy who did this nice film, he was practicing his victory speech. It was great, because the script won! ‘Leviathan’.
A beautiful film.
RD: It was. Very moving. Ida was my favorite movie of the whole year.
There were some fantastic foreign films last year.
RD: A good second place was ‘Wild Tales’.
‘Force Majeure’ was also excellent.
RD: That was pretty good. I saw one recently, from Denmark, a couple of weeks ago.
So, you being both an actor and a director, what are some of the added challenges for you, when you’re doing both. I know that ever since ‘Angelo My Love’, back in 1983, you’ve been starring in all of your directorial debuts.
RD: Since then. I did one other, before then.
The documentary, ‘We’re Not the Jet Set’.
RD: I was the only professional actor in that. I used Egyptian actors, not Romanian, but Egyptian nationals. I always think that being a good actor comes from being a liar, or being a truthful person. But that Egyptian is amazing! It’s still action and cut. Instead of having some guy out there saying, “What do you think?” to the director, “Okay, let’s move on.” I don’t have any of that. I’m there by myself. I kind of trust myself. I’ve done it enough that I can kind of trust my instincts. I don’t even like to look at the monitor that much.
Really? Do you just kind of go by the feel of the take?
RD: Yeah. I know when something is right. I’m superstitious. By the time you get back to the monitor, maybe it’s no good. It looks good for me!
What is it that usually throws you off? “That wasn’t the right take. Let’s do that again.”
RD: Little things. “It’s okay. Let’s try it again.” When myself, or the other people are going too much offhand. Even the big, emotional scenes in life, sometimes, you do things. There’s always something offhand. Let the process take you to the result. I worked with a director once, an old-school, who said “When I say ‘Action’, you tense up, goddamn it!” Imagine saying that to Stossi, when he’s playing the bears? There’s a difference between intensity and tenseness. There’s a difference. But that’s unique to me. A lot of them – when I direct, I went back to tell the folks. I don’t do tests. He was like a mentor, without even talking to him. I saw actors who weren’t as good as they were in his movies, because he got them to be very natural. So I try and do that – to try and let them, like a horse, to give them some sort of freedom.
Speaking of horses, tell us about Wild Horses.
RD: It’s something I inherited. A guy from around here had written a screenplay that was not very good. There was something about it, I liked it. Because of the part of a lady Texas ranger. There were actually only three in Texas in real life. It was very chauvinistic. They have women rangers now. And I wanted her to play a woman ranger, even though she had played one in ‘Tanglewood’. That’s when she took up jiu jitsu and law enforcement and everything. Studying to play the part. I took a look at the movie, and I kept that on my ranch – I have a ranch in the movie. It’s a Western, but not just a Western. It’s a family thing. Fifteen years ago, it was different. I kicked my son off the ranch because he was gay. Which, you know, things were different then. Now, years later, he comes back to the family, to read the will and set things right, and there’s been a disappearing person. The day he left, his young lover disappeared. It’s almost like there’s been a crime, but no one can prove anything. So when he comes back, for the second time, the woman who lost her son, who disappeared, I got Luciana Padraza, do you know that actress, was in ‘Babel’? The woman who lost the baby in the desert? She has her own theater company in Florida. I went and found her and put her in the movie. She plays a woman whose husband dies, and he says, “When I’m dying, I want you to re-open the case, and find out what happened to our son who disappeared.” And with the Texas rangers, with a closed case, a cold case is never really cold. It’s always open. So she goes to her, because she’s a woman ranger, to re-open the case, to find him, and she said she would help. That’s when we find out what happened, what I might have done to make that young boy disappear. And it’s kind of like uncovering that, but without being heavy-handed. That’s what it’s about mainly, and the family.
So you said you thought the script itself wasn’t very good, but there were compelling elements?
RD: It was terrible. You don’t have to say not good.
It was terrible?
RD: It just didn’t work. She was going to start a fire in it. It just didn’t work. I wanted to keep the lady ranger. I just wanted to make it. We worked on it, and worked on it, and worked on it. I had Billy Bob Thornton read it, and give me his opinion. To get it okay. We raised some money, and had a lot of problems – the money, who’s in charge, we only had twenty-three days to film it. With the Judge, we had sixty days. We only had twenty. We just had to jump in and do it. We did it in Utah, for Texas, because it was cheaper. But Skull Valley, Utah looks just like West Texas. At one point we used real Texas Rangers, because they’re great natural actors, because the undercover work they do anyway. So we did this scene on the Rio Grande and he texts some real Rangers in Rio Grande City, Texas, this ranger in Utah texted them, and said, “What part of Texas is this?” I said, “Rio Grande City,” he said, “No, Utah.” So we found parts of Utah that sufficed. It was kind of a family drama, a family thing, a little bit of a crime. Once again, offhand. When you look up the word tale in the dictionary, tale can mean a lot. A tale can mean a lie, but a tale also means a story, a small story of fiction. So that’s where I took a quote from the Bible, “A tale that is told.” That’s what I said for the movie: “A tale that is told.”
Was the gay character already in the original script?
RD: Yes.
And you kept it?
RD: I kept that.
Because it’s a very current subject, I guess. People have been more open to it. You said he kicks him out because he’s gay.
RD: That was part of the original script. I had to give him something. He was a nice young man. We kept that in there. We got Franco, he does all these movies about gay guys. He can take a paragraph like this, and learn it in ten seconds. So that’s why I think he can direct four movies in one year. Because of his memory. And then we got Josh Hartnett to be in it. We got Pedraza. We got Angie Cepeda from Columbia. So we had a very good cast.
How was your collaboration with James Franco?
RD: It was okay. He’s a handful! He’s a legitimate handful. I worked with him years ago, and he seemed different then. He could ride horses better than anyone in Hollywood. He’s a very talented guy.
How do you get Josh Hartnett out from not doing films, and just doing television shows to do this? I haven’t seen him in anything for years.
RD: I wanted to get him because he’s serious. So we had him smile, we had improvisation, we got him out and laughing and he had different colors. So we just kind of called him up.
So you just sent him the script?
RD: Yeah. And he said okay. I’m coming in tomorrow! He’s a talkative guy. But Franco more! I’ve known Franco for years now. So I went to see him in a Broadway play, and I liked him, and I gave him the script. I hadn’t seen him in a long time. I was like, “Oh, come on! New York!” He looked at me like I was a frickin’ doorman. Hundreds of people waiting outside of the theater for Franco. He’s got twelve-million people on his Twitter list, or whatever you call that. The only guy with more is Downey.
Do people still recognize you on the street?
RD: Me? Especially in Texas. From ‘Lonesome Dove’. But Franco, that’s another thing, and Downey.
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter
Talking With Ross Partridge of LAMB
One of the most interesting, complex films of SXSW 2015 to date is Ross Partridge‘s Lamb. With the film, Partridge subverts our psychological expectations, flipping a difficult concept on its head and bleeding it for all its unsettling, deep dramatic worth. From our review:
Not one to worry about getting too literal with their metaphors, Partridge frames the eponymous Lamb as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. A predator preying upon the trust of an 11-year old, Lamb’s intentions are shape-shifting and piercingly hazy. On the one hand, Lamb seems like a man of good intent and could just be seizing the opportunity to shape the maturing innocence of a neglected child. In his own words, he just wants to show her something beautiful. On the other hand, ew. That sentence alone is enough to conjure up all the yucky sentiments of 45-on-11-year old action. We instinctually associate any relationship between a middle-aged male and a twig-framed girl with a very particular (read: vile) expectation. When he reaches out to brush hair out of her face, you cringe. Even if the gesture itself might be innocent. In Lamb‘s purgatory of good sense and bad taste, we never know exactly we should feel but that rarely stops us from feeling a whole damn lot. (Full review here)
I had the chance to sit down with Ross and really dive into the tender meat of Lamb. Though I would caution you to seek out the film and consume all its juiciness for yourself before diving too deep down our rabbit hole, this is still a fitting avenue to familiarize yourself with the man and his work.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–
There’s so much going on here – it’s so complex. The material is so delicate, and so fragile, that the slightest miscalculation in performance or directorial choice would have really made this house of crumble.
RP: Yeah, for sure.
How do you approach the tone, in each and every scene? How did you make it out of this balancing act?
RP: I think, early on we knew the challenges of it. I knew that I had to be patient, and I had to allow myself the truth of each scene, and not worry about appeasing. Not try to think about what’s entertaining,. It wasn’t going to try and be, certainly, seducing in any way. Really, my whole goal with it was to not get in the way of the story from the beginning. I read this book, and I adapted it, and I was like, “If I can just not put an imprint on it in a way where you can feel my involvement,” which is obviously so big, as a director and a writer and an actor. But I just wanted to tell the story as simply, and as quietly, as possible so that people can feel it on their own. I wanted to make it as intimate as possible. Tone wise, it was just a process. I was always trying to think about other characters, and my character, as subtly as possible. To take my performance levels down and not try and push anything.
It’s funny that you say that you want to get out of the way of the material, because in a sense, that is the approach, but on the other hand, without the finesse that you bring to the directorial chair, this whole thing just falls apart. Because you directed it, you wrote it, you starred in it, how much of a mindfuck is taking on all of these roles on this one project, especially on a project that is, as I said, as fragile and delicate as this is?
RP: I sometimes don’t know but I think that’s the key. There’s very few experiences you have as an actor, and as a director, or just being in this business in any rung, that is blind faith. And you read something, you read a piece of material where, for the first time in my life, when I read this, I had no fear. At all. I contemplated how it would land with people but my desire to want to do this, and take this risk, were so strong. That had never happened to me. I’m not that kind of person. I don’t make decisions very quickly, except for on this, when I was directing. It all became very clear, and it was very certain all the time. So I think sometimes you just have to give up to that. In life, sometimes there’s things you give up to. There’s an instinct that you’re supposed to be doing exactly what you’re doing, right in this moment. I just kind of held on to it, to try and make it and to try and keep clear of that.
So both yourself and Oona are just phenomenal in the film, and so much of the movie rides on these performances. She blew me away!
RP: Can we talk about her forever?
Can we?
RP: For real.
I know that she won a Tony, and she was nominated for a Grammy at 10 years old. Is that basically where you found her?
RP: Yeah. The casting director was never like, “You have to meet this person; she won a Tony and was nominated for a Grammy.” The casting director – Alison Esher – she’s from New York, she’s known me for years. We have a great relationship. In the pursuit of casting this, we knew that if we didn’t have the right Tommy, we would never do it.
Oh, totally! It falls apart.
RP: So it’s like, “Okay, let’s start the process.” Alison, early on, said it wouldn’t be that difficult. “What do you mean, it’s not that difficult.” You hear about people searching for years. She said, ‘It’s not going to be that hard. There’s only about five girls who actually, probably can do this role. And you’ll know.” I think that makes me feel better – I’m not sure. We saw a lot of girls, and there were a few that I walked into the room, and I met Oona, and as soon as I walked in, she had these little glasses on, she was kind of in her own little world. She was like, “Hi, how are you?” Just was non-phased about everything. I just looked at her, and she was this young girl who was so much an individual, and confident in who she is, and was so unique an individual at 11-years old. It’s infectious.
So, at some point did you kind of sit her down and go, “Look, this is a really delicate role, and we’re playing with some really culturally touchy issues”? Was that a conversation you had with her parents, or with her, and how did that go?
RP: I felt like I was going to have to have that conversation, and that was a worry of mine, but it never happened, in the sense that it didn’t have to happen. Oona, we don’t give enough credit to kids, and how intelligent they can be. She got this right away. She totally got this. And there were other families who, the parents of other kids, who understood the compassion and the empathy we were trying to go after. I thought I was going to have to do the sales job, and really talk to them about why I was doing this, and what my intentions were. Oona’s mother had read the script, she was in Chicago – one of her other daughters was working on a movie – and Oona wasn’t going to audition because she was so busy. She was in school – she could have done after-school stuff. She could have cared less. Her mom read the script, and called her husband, and said, “You have to get Oona to this audition. She has to play this part.” I met them as we were considering – we sat and had lunch. We talked about everything other than that, because they were like, “We get this. And she gets this. We would be so thrilled to have her on this, and she gets exactly what it’s about. She really wants to do this.” The irony is that we cast her, and two days later, she got a call from Harvey Weinstein, who basically offered her the lead in Anton Fuqua’s movie ‘Southpaw’ that’s coming out with Jake Gyllenhaal. And there was actually a moment where our schedule… where we thought we might lose her. But Oona’s like, “I’m doing both movies. I’m not not doing them.”..The performance is just phenomenal. As I mentioned in my review, I wouldn’t be surprised to see her pick up a Supporting Actress nomination, even though she’s very much a lead here.
RP: Anything that comes her way, I think, is well deserved. We were constantly.impressed. On day two, we shot the end of the movie – the last scene in the movie, which is such an emotionally charged end. Her second take, even the boom operator was crying. We were all crying. You could hear people being emotional and we were like, “This is something so rare to see.”
On day two?
RP: On day two. From that moment, everyone was just so supportive, and knew there was something special in this girl, in this performance, and in this story. It was a real collective effort. Everyone from my producers Nell Eslen, who really took charge of this whole thing. Jenn, and Taylor Williams, who has the balls to fund a movie like this. I can’t give enough credit to someone like him, who says, “You know what? I see this. I want to be a part of something like this. It’s different. It’s unique. How many opportunities do you get to do that?”
We’re giving a lot of credit to Oona, as we should, but her performance really pivots on yours. And you are just so perfectly disorienting in the role. There’s just scene after scene where I’m literally just standing on the edge of my seat, biting my nails, like, “Oh God, he’s reaching out to touch her. Don’t do anything weird! Please don’t do anything weird.” You play that so perfectly. There’s just this fine line that you’re riding and threading the needle so carefully. For you, from a performance perspective, is this something you could define as a pinnacle in your career?
RP: I don’t really have any control over that. I know it was a huge opportunity when I read it. I was like, “Wow, this is such a complex character.” The main reason I wanted to play it so badly was not, “Oh, this is going to be an amazing career thing.” It’s just that I knew that in order to tell this story, the intimacy the actor would have to have with girl would be so monumental. I don’t think I could have translated that while working with another actor, while having the energy, and the dichotomy between that. I had to make sure it was right and that’s just one more step in making sure that those two actors actually get along, and that I have the trust between them. It was like instead of having a straight line, it would have been a triangle. And, ultimately, when playing the character, all the other stuff, the fine line and the tension that were there, I had to trust that all of that stuff would take care of itself, and that I always had to come at the character from a place of love. And that every action and everything that he did and said was really genuine, and for the best intentions, and for the best reasons. Sometimes that’s the way human beings are – I think they come from a place of goodness. The nurturing gets caught in the way of that.
And you don’t know where to direct that love in many circumstances. I think one of the many interesting dichotomies of the film is just what audiences bring to the film, our abject biases, right? You see a young girl and a forty-five year old guy traveling cross country, alarms are going off all over the place. In most every case, as they rightfully should. For how culturally unacceptable this relationship is, there is a thing of beauty and grace to it. Talk about what that is.
RP: I obviously agree with you. I think there is. We can go to movies all the time, and we can make moral judgements on less things, or we don’t make moral judgements on other things. People spend fifteen dollars and watch people mindlessly kill one another. And then all of a sudden, this becomes a huge thing. THAT becomes entertainment to us. Nobody questions that anymore, at all. And so, I find it ironic when people are so pissed and up in arms about this. It’s like, these are human emotions, and people are frail and people make mistakes. And yet, where does our empathy lie, and how far will we go? And how will we actually cure the ills of our past or the ills of our future, if we can’t find a little more empathy in the world, and try and really understand, instead of immediately judging. To watch people just kill each other, I don’t go to those movies because I just get nothing out of them. That’s where we are, as a society. That’s become okay but a relationship that’s built on complexity, and you can’t really define what it is, that is less easy to see. People want to say, “He’s a monster,” or “He’s disgusting.” It’s not there. People want it to be. It’s like a Rorscach test.
And that’s where this movie thrives. It’s these expectations… you saddle up to them, you look over the edge, but you never cross that precipice, and that’s what makes it so fascinating and so interesting.
RP: Yeah. People have mostly agreed. We were testing it all along. It’s exciting that people are seeing the movie the way you’ve seen in. The story within is actually far more satiating than the confines of our own judgements, at this point. People are excited to be questioned, and they’re excited to feel something they can’t idenitfy. That becomes a new experience. Hopefully, it’s worthwhile.
And that, again, is another reason why this film is such a breath of fresh air. It takes you in these directions that you don’t anticipate and that comes down to the source material. I haven’t read the book, but I plan to – I’m so intrigued, and I’m so compelled to read it now. Can you talk about it. I read in the press notes that you were immediately like, “This has to be turned into a movie.” But what was that thought process and the process of it becoming a film and also some challenges that you didn’t anticipate?
RP: Right. Well, when I read the book, I immediately knew that I wanted to make the film. The rights weren’t available – a very well-known actor had the rights before me, and he was trying to develop it before me.
Really? Can you say who?
RP: He’s one of my favorites. I love him as an actor, too. Kyle Chandler had the movie rights. I think it’s okay to say. He was so busy, and he and his wife were going to team up on how to do this thing, but his schedule got crazy. He and the author are still friends, and it was a real honor to have him there. I just wanted to make it, and the challenges of it were the poetry of it. The language of David Lamb is what I wanted to hold on to as much as possible, because I felt that the heightened language he spoke in was so reminiscent of his heightened belief in who he can become. Somebody other than himself, somebody completely otherworldly, because he’s so stuck in this banal world of bleakness. He wants to believe in something better and more beautiful. Keeping that language was going to be tricky. I said this before; the first two-thirds of the movie made sense to me, in the book, but the ending, the climax of this film is a very psychological climax. It’s not action based, it’s more of an emotional peak. So, how do I make that as intriguing as possible? Ultimately, it was a feeling of relief, obviously. That would be climactic enough, keeping the tension and the stress of trying to figure this out. And then, finally, we start releasing. We give it in a way that offers some hope, in a very strange way. All the things that you want to think this person is, he doesn’t turn out to be. You don’t get that feeling, “Oh, I knew he’s going to do this.” Actually, you get just the opposite. You have to question everything about this character, because he’s just the opposite.
It’s funny that you mention the third act, and this idea of release, because, for me, I felt like until the very last frame of the movie, I didn’t let out a breath of air. Because you’re still so much on edge, even until that very final moment! Even then, fade to black, and you just have to process it. It was a film that I sat there for 10 minutes afterwards, dissecting in my head how I felt about it. That’s an unfortunately rare experience in this industry – where you actually have to think after a movie.
RP: There’s a moment in the credits, where’s there an extended period of black, before the first credits come up. The credit is the directing credit. It wasn’t like I wanted to keep it in black the whole time, but I felt like I didn’t want to put names on the screen right away. I felt like people would really be effected, hopefully, and wanted to give it as much time as we possibly could, where they could just be a little bit neutral for a little while, listening to this beautiful song by Angel Olson, a spectactual song. It was almost like, if you could just sneak the credits in, on the side, people are not going to be in the frame of mind to just start reading credits.
Also, going off the end of it, one thing I couldn’t stop think about was, what are the implifications and the ramifications of the events in this film? I just wonder where is she five years down the line? Where is he, ten years down the line? Is this something that crossed your mind?
RP: Oh, of course. Actually, the last day of rehearsal with Oona, we rehearsed together for about a week in New York – my last question to her, before we actually would have seen each other later in Wyoming, was, “I just want to know what you think.” The characters dropped off in the end, and you say goodbye. Where do you go? And she literally, without a beat, said, “I go home, and I tell my parents that I ran away for a while. And then I go into my room. I probably take a shower. And then I go about my life.” And I’m like, “Do you tell anybody what happened?” And she says, “No. Because he gave me something that I think is going to be a gift. It’s going to help me.” So that was the hope. To hear it from an 11-year old girl, at the time that we’re making the movie, that that’s how she assessed it, I was like, “If an 11 year old can understand this so clearly, then hopefully everyone else can.”
Then there’s hope for the rest of the world.
RP: You would think. My character, I believe, this is the one opportunity to make a lasting imprint on something, on somebody, before his demise. I’m not so hopeful for Lamb, I’m not so hopeful for his outcome. I know that there’s a moment in it, for him, like he always does – that’s he’s so conflicted about it, like he’s this awful person or beast, but yet, he’ll smile, once or twice, in memory of what she gave him, and what he gave her, and maybe that might make some sort of difference in his life, if it continues, at all.
That’s one of the things that’s interesting about Lamb as a character, is his acute awareness of who their situation could be interpreted, and you see that played out in so many moments, particularly in the moment when the girlfriend…
RP: Lydia.
Yes, arrives in a cab. And you’re like, “Oh no! This is going to be a disaster!” And it kind of is a disaster. That’s another thing where I’m like, “What happens there? What does she do with that information?” But I think, for him, there is a semblance of a spiritual rejuvenation, in his ability to give his love away, in a very pure, almost non-reciprocating way. He’s not doing it to gain something, necessarily.
RP: I don’t think he’s capable of gaining. I think that he wishes he was capable of gaining love he could have received; from his dad; from his mother, who split…
From his wife…
RP: From his wife. From his younger brother. Here’s a guy who’s just so damaged. It’s just too painful when someone says to him, “I want to love you. I want to care for you.” He doesn’t think that he deserves it and he’s probably very angry, and he doesn’t understand how he’s capable of being loved. And if people put that on him, he doesn’t respect them. “Why would they want to do that?” That’s not the right thing. It’s really sad. There’s a part of the movie, that’s always one of my favorite parts, when he’s out with Tommie, and he’s talking with her while his girlfriend is there, and he says, “Do you promise me that you will always call me Gary?” Which is not his name, which is the person he would do anything to be, to be anybody other than who he is. That’s really hard – it’s heartbreaking.
I guess, kind of in conclusion here, where are you headed to next? Are you planning on directing another feature?
RP: Yeah. We just literally finished, so I’m planning on doing another feature, sooner rather than later.
Behind the camera?
RP: Behind the camera. The next one, I’m not sure I’ll be acting in. I don’t feel the necessity to be acting in all of the movies. And, in fact, one of my favorite experiences on this shoot was when I just got to direct, with Scoot and Mary and Lindsay Pulsipher and other people who are in scenes. That will be, definitely, the trajectory – to find another great piece of material, whether I write something or not. We’ll be touring this around for some time, I’m sure.
Where are you headed to next?
RP: We’re not sure. We have a few festivals that are reaching out, and we’re just kind of still just here at the premiere stage. We’re hoping to get it in as many places as possible.
Talking (in French) with Michel Hazanavicius & Berenice Bejo of THE ARTIST
The Artist was an unprecedented film. Movies don’t come in black and white anymore. And no one would think to make a silent black-and-white film in 2010.
When you chat with the brains behind the film, it makes sense. These are incredibly French, reserved folk who speak in hushed tones. I’ve spent a lot of time in France (my Grandma lives in Paris) and I’ve grown up all around their culture. For me, Paris is the Seattle of Europe: people are a little cold and abrasive, but witty and intelligent. The French tend to keep to themselves, but they’re warm at heart.
Michel Hazanavicius and Berenice Bejo started collaborating back in 2006 when she starred in Michel’s OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies alongside Jean Dujardin. Since then, they’ve made three more films together and along the way won plenty of awards for their 2011 silent black-and-white The Artist — including Oscars for Best Feature and Best Director for Michel. Both are incredibly talented, humble, quiet and fairly unflappable — Michel wasn’t impressed at all when I told him that he went to school just 20 kilometers from my Grandma’s apartment. They’re married with two kids and the fame doesn’t seem to have gotten to their heads. I got a chance to chat with them both (in French) at SIFF Cinema about their lives after the Oscars, their upcoming film The Search (a remake of the 1948 movie about war-torn Chechnya), and their filmmaking progress. Read More