Interview with Gael Garcia Bernal and Diego Luna - June 21st, 2009

Promoting: Rudo & Cursi
Venue: The Caledonian Hotel, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Film Festival
Interview type: One-on-one (one-on-two)


ViewLondon (VL): What's the film about, first of all?

Diego Luna (DL): The film is about these two brothers that come from a little town in Mexico, called Tlachatlan, that is in the Pacific Coast. And one wants to be a football player, he's a goal-keeper, my character, who is nick-named Rudo or “Tough”. And Gael's character, who's nick-named Cursi, which means “Corny” or “Cheesy”, he wants to be a singer. And it's the journey of these two guys and the story of their relationship and the love between these two brothers and how life changes for them. It's a really fun film to watch.

VL: What attracted you to the project?

Gael Garcia Bernal (GGB): The prospect of working with Diego again was very exciting and also working with the people who introduced us to cinema (director Carlos Cuaron and producer Alphonso Cuaron). Alphonso and Carlos are responsible for us being able to do what we like. We worked with them and they included us on Y Tu Mama Tambien, in a way that we felt part of the project, more than we had ever felt before. And they're still our very good friends. And the story was great too, the idea of playing football players. So I guess little by little everything started to add up and every reason to be in the film was the correct one.

DL: Also, you know Carlos wrote Y Tu Mama Tambien and he was always there for us, so in a way it made a lot of sense to be part of his first film [as director] and to be there as he was when we started.

VL: Was it easy to get back into the groove of the four of you working together again?

DL: Yeah. It was really easy, in fact, because it was a necessity. We so wanted to act together again and to work with the two brothers. We also really wanted to shoot in Mexico again. We'd shot a lot of amazing things out of Mexico, but the idea of returning to shoot in your own country with the same team that you'd enjoyed working with so many years ago was pretty hard to resist.

VL: The film is quite broad in places. Were you worried about slipping into caricature with the characters?

GGB: Yes, definitely. We constantly wanted to have a good barometer that allowed us to stop falling into that and that's what the director is for. I like those movies in general, there's nothing wrong with them, but then it would have been like a Ben Stiller or Jack Black movie, where the caricature is intentionally ridiculous and it's like a commentary on the comedy, where you have to be in on the joke. We wanted to do something where the characters existed for real and they're not conscious of the joke. So that was very difficult, but it's a great challenge for actors to be able to do that.

VL: The film's also about sibling rivalry. Is there any rivalry between the two of you?

DL: No rivalry, no. There is kind of a legal competition, you know? Sometimes, either when we play football or, when we were younger, if there was a cute girl at a party, probably we would compete for her, a little bit. But normally what we do is we complement each other really well and I think that's a lesson that comes from acting and shooting film, where it's not a race you achieve yourself. You have to be around people who want the same thing and are aiming for the same goal and there's room for everyone. So I think it's because there's no rivalry between us that our characters can be so much in competition and we can talk about it. And we also used a lot of our experiences with the Cuaron brothers – these guys compete a lot, so we looked at them and took from them. Because we're not brothers, we're friends, so we choose to be friends every day. You know, you don't have to have breakfast at the same table every day – you either call each other or not.

VL: Are you both football fans?

GGB: We're both football fans and we like good football a lot. And I think we're going through a stage in our lives where football has become very important, intellectually as well. It's really become a very strong intellectual necessity, football – more than the physical activity, because we hardly ever get time to play. And if you're not fit, football can be one of the most dangerous sports that exists. For me especially, I can say that every time I play football without having played for a while, I get hurt, big-time. But intellectually, it's part of our discussions and we like talking about the problems in football as if they were incredibly important. So it definitely plays a big part on our consciousness, to metaphorise about life, with football.

VL: Which of you is the better player?

DL: Okay, you got to the point.

GGB: Yeah, this is where the competition starts.

DL: I have to say that we're not allowed to answer that, because we've always played in the same team and it's not about who scores, it's about the team.

GGB: I've got to say that at the moment I'm really terrible and even Diego can beat me right now.

DL: “Even” Diego! Ha ha!

VL: Do you have a favourite scene in the film?

DL: My favourite scene is Gael's music video. When he sings, it's unbelievable. It's amazing. That's a real piece of art.

GGB: I like the first penalty kick scene a lot. It's really well written and full of...something. Nitty gritty?

VL: Were you always going to play the characters that way round, with Diego as Rudo and Gael as Cursi?

DL: Yes, but the smart thing Carlos did was he went for the opposite to our characters in Y Tu Mama Tambien. Not because one is rough and the other is corny, but also the opposite in reality – Gael is a year older than I am, so giving me the role of the older brother would definitely change the dynamics of our relationship. And that also allowed us to really come up with these characters that are so different from us.

VL: How does Carlos' directing style compare to other directors you've both worked with?

GGB: Well, it was his first feature and yet he was incredibly experienced – in a way, it didn't feel like it was his first film. But one thing he has is that he's a very good writer. So the parts that come from being a writer differentiated him from other more visual directors.

DL: He knew exactly what he wanted to do and he also surrounded himself with interesting and talented collaborators so he always had someone interesting to talk to. And even though he knew the kind of film he wanted to do, he allowed everyone to say what they were thinking. And in the beginning I was scared because I thought he'd just be manipulated by all these talented people, but no, he was strong enough to say no when he wanted to say no and to stay firm on that. And that takes a lot of maturity that normally a first-time director wouldn't have.

Interview with Carlos Cuaron (director of Rudo & Cursi) - June 21st, 2009

Promoting: Rudo & Cursi
Venue: The Caledonian Hotel, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Film Festival
Interview type: One-on-one


Interview with Carlos Cuaron (writer-director of Rudo & Cursi)
Venue: The Caledonian Hotel, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Film Festival
Interview type: One-on-one

ViewLondon: What's the film about, first of all?

Carlos Cuaron (CC): It's a sibling rivalry story between two brothers who work in a banana plantation in the Pacific coast in Mexico. The older brother, Rudo, played by Diego Luna, has the dream of becoming a football player. And his younger brother, Cursi, played by Gael Garcia Bernal has the dream of becoming a singer. So it's a rivalry story between these two guys in the context of football in Mexico.

VL: Where did the story come from?

CC: Well, my original idea was that I wanted to make a mockumentary about a footballer who came from a humble background and made it big and when he was at the peak of his success, he mysteriously disappeared. So I told this concept to Diego and Gael separately, during the Y Tu Mama Tambien publicity tour and they both said, “I want to be that guy”. So I was honoured, obviously, but I had the problem of having two actors and only one character. So I realised that what I really wanted to do was to work with both of them again, so I created a brother with his own conflicts with the other one that I already had and that's how it all started.

VL: Did the actors play the parts that you wrote for them?

CC: When I brought the original idea to them - when it was going to be a sibling rivalry story and not a mockumentary at all - Gael's original reaction was to say that he should play Rudo and Diego said, 'Yeah, yeah and I should play Cursi'. But I told them that I didn't want to repeat myself, that I wanted to do something original and to do that I needed to start from scratch and I needed to cast them against their natural types. They immediately got it and started to throw in ideas, because they are great, creative, imaginative actors.

VL: Was it easy to get back into the swing of working together again?

CC: Oh yeah, it was automatic. Because we wanted to work together again. During the publicity tour for Y Tu Mama Tambien, we would just make up stories and we were thinking that they would both be acting and Alphonso would be directing and I'd be writing or maybe that I would direct whatever I wrote. And so it was automatic – when I got the idea and told them they said yes and when I told Alphonso [Cuaron, Carlos' brother and producer] he said, 'Okay, man, whenever the script is ready I'm going to help you set up this movie'.

VL: Do you have plans for the four of you to work together again in the future?

CC: Yeah, why not? Though my intuition says that it's not going to be soon. And probably the director is going to be Jonas, Alphonso's son, the writer-director, and that probably Alphonso and I are going to help him produce it. But I would very gladly work with both of them again or separately.

VL: Do you have a favourite scene in the film?

CC: I like the first penalty kick in the small village. I like the way it's written, but I also think that we all did a great job in that scene. Diego, Gael and Guillermo Francella are just amazing in that scene. I also think the photography in that scene is beautiful.

VL: It's interesting that there's hardly any football action in the film – it all happens with audience reactions and so on. How did that come about?

CC: Well, the problem was that while I was writing the script, I felt that football was getting in the way of the drama, of the rivalry between these two guys. And I didn't know how to deal with it because it was the background, the context. And then one day I saw Michael Haneke's Funny Games, which is probably the most violent film I've ever seen in my life and yet all the violence is offscreen. And when I finished watching that movie, I said, 'That's what I've got to do'. That's where I got the idea. So we actually understand what is happening on the field in the stadium from the human emotion, from the people's reactions on the stands and the sports-casters narrating the game. We only go down on the pitch in the climactic parts of the rivalry between these two guys, so it's not important if it's a yellow card or a disallowed goal or anything – what is important is what's happening between the two of them.

VL: What's your next project?

CC: I don't know yet.



Interview-based anecdote: This was actually quite frustrating. I'd been booked in to do the same interviews twice - once on camera for MovieBeat and once for print only for ViewLondon. The problem was, it seemed ridiculous to all of us that I was basically asking them the same questions twice, with the result that Alphonso Cuaron bailed on the second interview and Diego and Gael spent the second pissing about more than they did in the first. Ah well.

Interview with Brian Geraghty - June 20th, 2009

Promoting: The Hurt Locker and Easier With Practice
Venue: Delegate Centre, Edinburgh Film Festival
Interview type: One-on-one


ViewLondon (VL): What's the film about and who do you play?

Brian Geraghty (BG): The film's about three guys who are doing a job and they happen to be in a war. I play Specialist Owen Eldridge, who's kind of like a regular young guy, going through extraordinary circumstances in war.

VL: Can you explain the title?

BG: It's called The Hurt Locker, which is like the ultimate place of pain. It's not explained in the film, but I think it's a literary reference from somewhere. It's basically like, we'd joke and say, “Ah, I'm in the hurt locker” after a rough day of working, you know, being out in the sun.

VL: What attracted you to the part and how did you get involved in the film?

BG: I went to [director Kathryn Bigelow]'s house and just had an audition with [co-star Jeremy Renner], who was already cast, and we read and whatever. It didn't go great, I didn't think, but they'd liked me and thought I was right for it. And then I really read the script and I was like, 'I gotta do this, it's an amazing role'. It's an action film but it is at war and there's only really three central characters. It was very attractive.

VL: You said you didn't think the audition went very well. Had they seen you in Jarhead?

BG: I think they might have seen some things. I don't know if that was a help or, you know, was a problem or whatever, but I think they thought I approached work with integrity.

VL: What was it like working with Kathryn?

BG: I mean, she's just incredible, you know, to see her vision. I had no idea it was going to be that intense. She's doing a thousand things at once, talking to us, making us feel comfortable. Never sleeps, she looks beautiful all the time.

VL: How did her directing style compare to other directors you've worked with?

BG: For this particular movie, it was very different because she kind of just let us go. We had two to four cameras going the whole time so it was kind of like, 'Don't worry about the cameras, just do your thing and we'll find you', so it was kind of like a documentary style. It was freeing, for us, as actors.

VL: But you had to stick to the script, presumably?

BG: Yeah, we stuck to the script. I mean, there was a moment here or there that came out that's in the film but we stuck to the script. They were great words, so...

VL: So she didn't exactly encourage improvisation but she didn't mind...?

BG: Well, spontaneity, not just taking something and putting it in there to improvise. It comes out of the moment of what we're doing and little moments would happen but it wasn't like she would do multiple takes and encourage us to do something different each time, no. The scenes were well put together and crafted.

VL: The film has a fantastic cast. What was it like working with Jeremy Renner?

BG: I was a big fan of his. I love Dahmer – he's incredible in that. He's the nicest, greatest guy. And Anthony Mackie, who I know – we did We Are Marshall, we played best friends – so it was really, just easy.

VL: Did Kathryn see something in you and Anthony already knowing each other?

BG: I don't know, again. I mean, yeah, they kind of took that into consideration but you know, we're actors, we can act like we're best friends. I think it was more about finding the right people in her mind.

VL: Without giving too much away, there are some big-name cameos in the film. Was that a deliberate thing? Did Kathryn go after those actors deliberately?

BG: I think for the initial one, she set it up that way. And it's kind of genius, because it's like, 'Wow, the lead actor just died – no-one's safe'. But her and Ralph [Fiennes] obviously are friends from when they made Strange Days so she was like, 'Can you come out and play?' And David Morse, she wanted someone commanding and he was terrific.

VL: It seems to be a received wisdom, rightly or wrongly, that people don't go and see Iraq movies. Was that a concern for the film?

BG: Yeah, I think it always was. They've positioned it differently, because I think it's not an Iraq war movie – that's the backdrop. It's really an action movie about three guys and this one guy and how he's dealing with his job.

VL: How did that affect the film getting made in the first place?

BG: I think it was a smaller budget than usual but it was really about trusting Kathryn. I mean, she had all the power – I can't get any money for a movie. But to not have to cast big stars – not that Jeremy's not on his way – but to not have big movie stars that are going to put people in seats, that's a tough aim for that size movie.

VL: What was the shoot like? Was it tough shooting in the desert?

BG: Well, it was as tough as making a fun movie and one of the best jobs you've ever had in your life can be, but yeah it was very hot and strenuous but ultimately it was pretty incredible. We were in Amman, Jordan and we shot for three months.

VL: What was the hardest scene to film?

BG: The U.N. building for me, because I had a lot of running to do and it was continuous takes. But it was fun, it was more like doing a play with action. And the sniper scene was hot and sandy, but I think that was one of the most beautiful scenes in the film.

VL: What research did you do?

BG: I trained with the E.O.D (Explosive Ordinance Disposal) down in Fort Irwin and we basically just learned about the bomb suit, how to put it on, blasting caps, the bombs, 155s, all of that. And then we did weapons training and had to simulate how we'd go into a building and so on. And we had advisors out there to help us too, plus we talked to people who actually did the job and got some personal insight from them.

VL: Did they cut anything out that you hated to lose?

BG: It's been so long, we shot it about two years ago, but I don't think so, no.

VL: Do you have a favourite scene in the film?

BG: The sniper scene is my favourite, for sure. I think it's just beautiful, I love all the characters going through real moments and the guys coming in. It was such a fun thing, it could be its own little movie in a way.

VL: What's your next project?

BG: I'm supposed to start this movie called Open House, it's kind of a horror, thriller, genre film where I play a sociopathic killer. So I'm trying to work that out. And I'm also in this movie called Easier With Practice, which is sort of a phone-sex road-trip movie – that's how we're selling it. It's a completely different character from The Hurt Locker for me. It's been exciting – it's at Edinburgh and people are liking it and it also just won the Grand Jury prize at CineVegas.

Interview with Justin Long - May 25th, 2009

Promoting: Drag Me To Hell
Venue: The Soho Hotel
Interview type (one-on-two, with Alison Lohman - see below)

Note: This interview was conducted on behalf of FilmStar Magazine (now sadly deceased), where a version of it first appeared.


Filmstar: Justin, this is your first horror film since the Jeepers Creepers movies. How did it feel to come back to horror after so many comedy roles?

Justin Long (JL): I love the genre, so I'm glad to be a part of another horror movie but it didn't feel like doing a horror movie, certainly not like my experience on Jeepers Creepers. My part is much more of a passive role – it was more like doing a romantic movie for me, so it didn't feel like doing a horror movie. But then I did one after this, where I was much more of an active participant in the horror. I'd forgotten how exhausting it is, just how physically demanding it is. And also seeing [co-star Alison Lohman] go through that, it reminded me a lot of that experience, to maintain that level of fear throughout a couple of months and long takes and several takes, it just gets to be really physically exhausting.

But I do love the genre and I had wanted to do more horror movies after Jeepers Creepers. It wasn't for lack of trying, I was always throwing my name in the hat and I auditioned for all the Halloween 12 and Freddy versus Jason versus Alien versus Predator. But then it got to the point where I was starting to be able to be more selective of roles and the truth is that those parts in those movies are a lot more stock and not as interesting as other roles so I just stopped trying out.

Filmstar: What was it like working with Sam Raimi?

JL: He's incredibly giving as a director. He's very patient and incredibly kind and he's funny, he's very funny. He's by far my favourite director I've ever worked with, more for how he treats people and how he conducts himself than for his body of work, which everyone knows is great. So you'd think there would be some element of him that would be tyrannical or officious but he's anything but, he's just so collaborative and warm and a really kind guy, a really great guy.

Filmstar: How does he approach the more effects-heavy scenes?

JL: Off-camera, I think it was really important, because a lot of [acting] is like impulsive and natural and you can't deconstruct it and get heady about it and so Sam would give Alison a lot to respond to. I mean maybe not as much as you'd like ideally, because there's a lot of stuff you just can't do because of the green screen and post stuff, so Sam would be there getting really passionate off-camera, doing the sounds for, like, the Lamia [the film's evil spirit] chasing you up the stairs, anything that you had to be reacting to, he'd be like [puts on monster voice], “And I'm WALKING UP THE STAIRS and I'm BANGING ON THE DOOR” and he got very into it, really passionate, like he was a part of the movie. Much more directly than most directors are.

Filmstar: What are your thoughts on horror generally? Were you a fan?

JL: I realise I'm not as big a fan as other people. I think it might belie how I really feel to say I'm a big fan, like it might be disrespectful to actual big fans. But I really enjoy horror movies. I don't know how big of a fan I am anymore, but I do love them.

Filmstar: Have you seen Night of the Demon?

JL: No, but I know that was a heavy influence for this movie and I'm really curious to see it. And now I'm glad that I redefined how big of a horror fan I am, before you asked that question.

Filmstar: Did you feel left out of the gory special effects scenes?

JL: Oh, absolutely, yes. I mean, at the time there was an element of relief, because Alison was working so hard and I got to go home early and I got my sleep. I even got to shoot another film – I had so much time off that I shot another movie in the middle of this movie. But of course, you just want to play. You feel like a kid and Sam was acting like a kid with the purity and the love of it and I just wanted to get in there and get my hands dirty. And certainly watching, of course, you want to do the fun horror movie stuff. But it was so nice just to be a part of it and to be involved.

Filmstar: What's your next project?

JL: I'm doing a movie this summer called Going The Distance, it's a romantic comedy about two people who are trying to figure out a long-distance relationship. It's a pretty simple, straightforward story, but hopefully done in a kind of raw, much more real kind of like Apatow-ian way. I hate using that, but it applies.

Interview with Alison Lohman - May 25th, 2009

Promoting: Drag Me To Hell
Venue: The Soho Hotel
Interview type: One-on-two (with Justin Long - see above)

Note: A version of this interview appeared in FilmStar Magazine (now deceased), as the interview was conducted for FilmStar, not for ViewLondon.


Filmstar: What was it like working with Sam Raimi?

Alison Lohman (AL): Great. Sam is a director I've always wanted to work with, so it was really great to work with him.

Filmstar: You've worked with Tim Burton, Ridley Scott and Atom Egoyan. How does Sam compare to other directors you've worked with?

AL: It's hard to generalise all the other directors in one category, but I just feel that Sam stands out because he's just so incredibly patient. He's such a gentleman. And he also gets really passionate about each detail of every scene, but not in an analytical way, in a sort of fun-loving, child-like, curious way, not in an intellectualised, in-your-head way. Because I don't think that you're productive when it's too intellectual, especially for an actor, you know, they have to be free with their body and that's mostly where the emotion's coming from.

Filmstar: How demanding were the various scenes you had to go through?

AL: Oh, incredibly demanding, yes. Oh my gosh. Much more so than I ever thought.

Filmstar: There's a scene in the film which I believe is known as the “gumming” scene (the old lady clamps her toothless jaw over Alison's face). How was it filming that?

AL: That one was interesting because, you know, it's only two sentences on the page and it takes a whole day to shoot. When you're reading it you just kind of read over it and you don't really think of it as anything, you're just more focussed on the dialogue in heavier scenes. But actually, it's those smaller scenes that are heavier in horror films, for me.

Filmstar: What was the balance between CGI and more traditional effects?

AL: On this film, it wasn't so much CGI – I had all the props that I needed to make it feel real. And, you know, Sam would play the monster. And the fly that goes in and out of my nose.

Filmstar: How did he play the fly?

AL: Well, he had like a fishing pole and a piece of tape attached to it and he would dangle it. And he got way too much enjoyment out of it, he would do take after take after take.

Filmstar: Were you a fan of horror films beforehand?

AL: I didn't especially like horror films but I have an appreciation for them now.

Filmstar: What's your approach to acting generally? Do you do lots of research?

AL: I do, I try and do as much as I can and then just try give up the rest and just kind of leave it to trusting your instincts. Wherever you can find inspiration, you know, even if it's just one scene in a movie.

Filmstar: Did you spend any time in a bank for Drag Me To Hell?

AL: I did, actually. I did. I met with a loan officer and talked with her a few times, tried to get as much information to try and make sure it was all valid and legit.

Filmstar: Did you watch any horror movies in preparation?

AL: I did. I watched as many horror movies as I could and I really enjoyed one called Let's Scare Jessica To Death (1971). There's one scene where you just die watching it, she's coming out of a lake and there's this monster and it's like even more real than real life. It's just hard to explain, the way her reaction was.

Filmstar: What attracts you to a script, usually?

AL: Everything. Not so much the story, but the director, actors who are involved and my character. And the story too, but it depends, I don't really try to find a particular story, if you know what I mean.

Filmstar: What was it that attracted you to Drag Me To Hell?

AL: Working with Sam Raimi and Justin Long and also just being really inspired by Sam.

Filmstar: What's your next project?

AL: I'm in a film called Gamer. It stars Gerard Butler and Amber Valletta, it's a really great cast. The story is humans playing humans on a global scale, through video games. It's actually kind of hard to explain the whole movie, but it's wild. I play this girl Trace, who's part of the resistance, who tries to get Gerard Butler back to his family. But after that, I don't have a next project – I'm on holiday, a big long break.

Filmstar: Are Gamer and Drag Me To Hell part of a conscious decision to move into more mainstream movies?

AL: No, not at all, not at all. I've never had any desire to do action films or horror films, so it's just interesting that they kind of came up at this time. I mean, I don't mind doing them – I loved working on them.

Interview with Charlie Kaufman - May 12th, 2009

Promoting: Synecdoche, New York
Venue: The Mayfair Hotel
Interview type: Round table


ViewLondon (VL): The film has as its main themes mortality and existential angst – are these anxieties which were specific to you at the time of writing it or is it just something that interests you?

Charlie Kaufman (CK): I think that mortality is a concern of everybody, isn’t it, on some level? Or am I just imagining that? But yes, it is. I don’t want to single myself out and say it’s a concern of mine, but it is a concern of mine, yes. I tend to write about the things I’m thinking about at the time. Perhaps I was arriving at an age where it was becoming more of a middle-aged experience where you’re dealing with your body changing and also watching people you know dying. Not to be dramatic about it, [but] as you get older, you’re surrounded by more of it, at least that's my experience. So I thought I'd write about it.

VL: How was your experience of directing your first feature? Do you have plans to direct again?

CK: I enjoyed it, I mean, mostly. It was a lot of work and it was hard but not overwhelming and I will do it again if anyone lets me do it again. It's not entirely up to me, but I would choose to do it again if I can.

VL: Following on from that, you've directed two plays in the past and this film is about a theatre director who is, ultimately, seeking direction. How much of the film stems from self-analysis of being a director?

CK: You know, it's interesting that when I start a project -and it happened in this case too- I sort of know what the character's going to be but I don't necessarily know what his or her job is. So I have to choose a job and in this case, I knew that the couple were both going to be artists of some sort, because it was important that his work not be respected by his wife. So I had to think what kind of artist he would be and I'd used a few different careers before and I couldn't use them, so I thought about a theatre director, not really realising where it was going to lead. But it did lead into a lot of things that were interesting to me. And I think that's how I work, I allow something to sort of, like, be explored. So I didn't set out to make any big pronouncements about myself or about being a theatre director, is what I'm saying.

VL: You’ve said that a big part of directing is about being a grown-up…

CK: (laughs) I did say that. Where did you read that? I haven’t said that recently.

VL: That was on YouTube. I wondered, therefore, do you feel that writing is actually removed from being a grown-up?

CK: Yeah, what I meant when I said that is, as a writer on other movies, I’m a shy person who gets really awkward around actors. I could go off and sulk on the set if I wanted to. It just became clear very quickly that, as a director, I couldn’t do that. I have to be the person whose mood is constant. I have to take care of the problems of the actors who tend to need to go off and sulk. I have to solve those problems, so I felt like it was similar to being a father, which I am, of a young child. You are constantly deciding which of your terrors you should/could reveal. You have to feel safe; the child has to feel safe. And that’s what a director has to provide for the cast. So, I guess that’s what I meant by that. It’s a good exercise for me to do that, because it’s a discipline. There were times, especially late in the day, when I really didn’t want to be the grown-up, but I was.

VL: Is it hard to be a shy director?

CK: No. I don't think it's hard. I think maybe the thing I've decided is that you use the thing that you are. If you're an honest person, then you use your personality, like you would in any endeavour. I mean, I need to be able to talk to people but I don't need to be mean to people or lord it over people like some directors do -and maybe very effectively- but it's not what I do and I don't have to do it.

VL: Now that you've directed -and I know that you've been unhappy with the direction of at least one of your screenplays in the past- do you feel you'll ever be able to give one of your scripts to another director again?

CK: You know, mostly I've been pretty happy. I was unhappy mostly with the George Clooney movie [Confessions of a Dangerous Mind], just basically because he cut me out of the process of making it and he changed my script and stuff. I'm very happy working with Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry and I would do it again. I think if I was going to write something that someone else was going to direct again, I would probably go to one of those two guys, because I know who they are and I know what I'm going to get by working with them. But right now, I'd prefer to try to do it again myself. So that's what I'll do next, if I can.

VL: Did you always envisage Philip Seymour Hoffman as Cayden or was it something that came to you later on?

CK: No, I didn't. I don't write with actors in mind, at all. For me, it's not an effective way to create a character, because I start to think about what I've seen the actor do and then I'm not really creating a character anymore, I'm writing a role for Philip Seymour Hoffman, so that, added to the fact that I wasn't going to be the director of this movie when I was writing it, makes the answer a resounding no. But as soon I was going to be the director, Philip was the first person I thought of and went to. He was my choice.

VL: Was that because of seeing him in other films or had you worked together before?

CK: No, I'd met him briefly but we hadn't worked together before. Yeah, I remember seeing him in Boogie Nights. That's the first time I was aware of seeing him. It's a very small part but every time he was on screen, that was all I wanted to watch. To me that's always a good quality in an actor. He was great to work with.

VL: Can you say a little about the casting process for everyone else, especially as you have different actors playing the same characters. Particularly in the case of Samantha Morton and Emily Watson?

CK: Well, I cast Samantha – she was my first choice for Hazel. And when I was looking to cast [the character who would play Hazel], Emily is also one of my favourite actors, so, you know. But I think that there's a quality that they both share, or at least, they share the same space in my head. So I went after her to see if she would do it and subsequently found out that they're often confused, by many people. And Sam told me that she was hired by a director, who, at the table reading for the movie that they were doing, he told her how much he liked her in Breaking the Waves. But that's why I cast them. And I cast Tom Noonan to play the Phil Hoffman part because I love Tom Noonan and I thought the idea that Cayden would cast somebody who was so physically wrong for himself because he was trying to look past the physicality and he's trying to be brutally honest and this person, even though he looked nothing like him, he was going to cast him and it ends up being, for me, visually fun.

VL: Oliver Stone was once overheard telling his lead actor that he had to keep it simple because the audience wouldn’t understand. In that respect, I was just wondering what acting notes you gave Philip Seymour Hoffman in this.

CK: I didn’t really give notes on this. The way that Phil and I worked together is that we did a lot of rehearsal beforehand, which consisted mostly of talking. We went through the script and rehearsed it, but mostly it was talking about the character, talking about issues of ageing and children and illness and all these things, so that we could come to an understanding. And once we came to an understanding, he was Caden as far as I was concerned. So working with Phil was kind of like - I don’t want to say it was easy, but he was definitely a self-starter and he’s definitely self-critical and he is definitely completely committed. The biggest thing I tried to do with Phil, as much as I could, was not make him do too many takes. Sometimes it’s so excruciating what he’s going through, I just don’t have the heart to ask him to do it again. And he’s told me that he thinks that the difference between stage acting and film acting is that film acting happens in the first take and it’s not repeatable; it’s got to be fresh. And stage acting is something you have to figure out how to make fresh each time. It’s a different process and knowing that’s what he thought, I tried to be very prepared – not only technically, but so that we understood each other by talking through things.

VL: There’s a perception of you as a cerebral screenwriter and a lot of the critics commented on the fact that this film is quite an uncommercial film. Do you think, firstly, that that’s fair and, secondly, do you think that commercial considerations ever come into play when you’re coming up with a new idea?

CK: I try not to think about commercial considerations, which basically means trying to figure out what people will like. I think that’s the way you have to do it. I feel that if I’m not going to do something honest to myself, then I might as well be selling potato chips because that’s what you’re doing. On the other hand, though, if no one goes to see my movies then I won’t be making them anymore. It’s tricky, especially with this one, because it opened in the United States and it really didn’t do much business. Someone said to me, ‘What I love about you is that you really did a big fuck you to the system; you said, I’m going to make a movie that no-one’s going to go and see’. And I said ‘No I didn’t. I would never do that.’ I’m a nice guy. I would never take somebody’s money thinking that no one’s going to see it. I guess there’s always a chance of that, but I wouldn’t ever set out to do that. It put me into a weird situation, because the other movies I’ve done haven’t been giant box office successes, but they’ve been commercially viable so I could keep doing them. I felt okay about keeping on doing them. But now I’m thinking, you know a movie costs this amount of money, and if there’s only 40 people watching – and those 40 people are really important to me, by the way – then maybe I shouldn’t be making movies. I should be writing books or something that doesn’t cost so much money up front. So it’s put me in a bit of a pickle. We’ll see.

VL: Did you have to cut out anything from the film that you really hated to lose?

CK: Yeah, there were a few things. There were a lot of things. There were things that I loved, there were moments that I loved, but the movie didn't support them. It's a weird thing, you have to find it out when you're editing. It's like, 'Okay, we have to move here' and it's very hard to get to that moment where you're willing to do it. But there were moments and scenes; there were long sequences with some of the actors that I loved. And I feel bad about it – I protected them as long as I could. I feel bad about it for the actors because it's like, 'Oh, no, this is their big scene'. And then there was like a whole little sort of story with Samantha Morton's character where she finds a dog that's been run over by a car and it's completely flattened in the middle but it's not dead and it looks like it's going to die but it doesn't die and she keeps the dog for the next 40 years, she calls him Squishy. And we couldn't keep it – we had to let it go. You can see a little remnant of him behind her at the box office at one point.

VL: Might some of those scenes end up on the DVD?

CK: No. I feel sort of strongly -maybe wrongly- but strongly that this is the movie that we made and that other stuff, as much as I like it, it's not the movie and I don't know what purpose it serves to put it out there.

VL: When I’ve seen your films, I’ve listened to other cinema-goers’ comments and it’s often, “I’m not sure if it’s a work of genius or not.” I’m just wondering why someone would be confused as to whether it’s great. Do you think it’s the surreal nature that might play negatively to people?

CK: Um...I have no idea. I don’t know why people think what they think. Maybe with this movie I’ve seen it more, but I’ve seen it with other things that I’ve written. I think people are really, really afraid of being conned. There’s a thing that I’ve read about; maybe because I get so much attention and people think it’s justified, they talk about me like the Emperor’s New Clothes. I think that if you thought that through, as a human being, that criticism, the idea that I would spend five years of my life trying to trick people…why wouldn’t I spend five years of my life trying to do something that interests me? What type of person would do that? I can understand them thinking that about a movie that aims to go out and make 200 million dollars because then there’s a motivation. That isn’t to say my movies are good; I’m just saying that my motivation is not to con people. People are so afraid of being conned and, I think, kind of rightfully, because so many people are being conned all the time.

Seven: What do you mean by conned?

Kaufman: You know, like movies do. Not that this movie is equivalent to that because it’s a different type of movie, but we’re constantly being sold things and movies are things we’re being sold. Get people into a theatre any way you can, with crap. Or, in my case, get people into the movie because ‘you have to see it because it’s an event and it’s an important cinema milestone’, and, you know, it’s not. They’re like, ‘fuck you; that’s not what this is; I’m not going to believe that.’

It’s almost meaningless anyway to me, to decide whether it’s a work of genius or not. If you don’t like the movie, you don’t like the movie; it’s fine. If you do like the movie, you do like the movie. I’m not suggesting my movies are smarter than anybody else’s. I’m not suggesting anything. I’m just trying to do work that interests me and I guess I have a hope that I can continue to do that and support my family while doing that. It’s a fairly honest thing I’m doing.

But I tell you something. Quite frankly, I have had a much more uniformly good reaction over here than in the United States for anything that I’ve done, so I don’t feel that over here. I’m sure it exists, but people have been very nice to me.

VL: What’s your next project?

CK: I’m writing something that I hope to direct. It’s kind of too early for me to talk about; it’s going to be a comedy of some sort. I spend a lot of time not writing. I walk a lot; I think a lot. The thing I’m working on now, I haven’t written a single page of script yet, but I have 60 pages of notes. I just don’t feel like I know what I’m doing with it yet. I just need to figure out this world. I don’t outline in a conventional way. I get to point where I don’t know where I’m going with it, so then I get stuck and then it takes maybe a few weeks for me to find something in it and I get back into it. I think that’s why it’s taken me so long to write these scripts. This one, for instance, has taken me two and a half years. It’s way too long; I’ve got to work out how to do it differently. If I’ve learned anything from Synecdoche, New York, it’s that I don’t have a lot of time left (laughs).

Interview with Stephen Frears - May 5th, 2009

Promoting: Cheri
Venue: Premier PR offices, Berwick St
Interview type: One-on-one


ViewLondon (VL): How did the film come about?

Stephen Frears (SF): I read Christopher [Hampton]'s script.

VL: As simple as that?

SF: Well, kind of. We share an agent and I said, 'Perhaps I should read it' and then said, 'Well, this is rather good'.

VL: At what point did Michelle Pfeiffer come on board?

SF: Well, people started talking about Michelle and eventually I rang her up and said, 'You'd better read this'. She got it on the Friday and accepted on the Monday.

VL: So what was it like working with Christopher and Michelle again, 20 years after you all worked on Dangerous Liaisons?

SF: You know, these are clever people. It's just always a pleasure. People are clever.

VL: I don't know if you've read the press notes for the film, but the press notes have you giving a very sort of glowing comment on why Michelle was so great for this part.

SF: What did I say?

VL: You said, “Pfeiffer upsets you. She was upsetting in Dangerous Liaisons – I knew that as soon as I met her – and she's upsetting in this. She's unnerving, as though being that beautiful contains its own tragic quality”. Is that something you said? And if so, could you say a version of it for me?

SF: Well, that sounds good. Well, I could see that – well, you know what it's like. Talented footballers contain their own tragedy, don't they – it's somehow being separated from other people. Yes, no, it's a wise thing to say. Go on, you can take the quote from the press notes.

VL: Obviously the film isn't technically a sequel to Dangerous Liaisons, but did it ever feel like one, in that you were working with the same people?

SF: Well, only that Christopher had written it and Michelle was standing there. John Malkovich isn't in it.

VL: No. Did you try and get him in it?

SF: John? (laughs) No. There's a limit to the trouble I can cause.

VL: How did you come to cast Rupert Friend?

SF: Well, we couldn't find an American boy. One of the things I knew about Michelle was that she could play a European woman. I know concede that that was sort of inside knowledge I had. And we tried to find an American boy for, you know, reasons of consistency and the American boys just couldn't make sense of this character. So we came back to England and Rupert auditioned better than anybody else. And didn't apologise for it all, didn't have any self-pity in him. He just was...a spoilt brat. And was dazzling-looking. And upsetting – again, he sort of moved you. You know, when it starts to come out about how dreadful his childhood was.

VL: Had you seen him in anything else before that?

SF: No.

VL: Because I think he's a very good actor.

SF: Yes, he's a lovely fellow.

VL: How did you come to cast Felicity Jones?

SF: My casting director brought her in. The truth is, everybody knows who's good and coming up and she was on that list.

VL: Who else is on that list?

SF: I'm not telling you. Talent is easy, it's rightness that's difficult. They just say, 'The next person who comes in is talented'. Right, fine. Whether the person is right or not is the more interesting question.

VL: And Kathy Bates?

SF: Kathy someone suggested and I said, 'Oh, that's a wonderful idea'. She's...she should be on Mount Rushmore. She's fantastic.

VL: You mentioned the list of talented people. I noticed that Toby Kebell has a small part in the film.

SF: Oh, he's wonderful. He came to see me and I said, 'Oh, you look fantastic. I'm going to write you a part.' We wrote him in, really.

VL: I was going to say, he has such a small part in it that I was sorry he didn't have more to do.

SF: I'm sorry he didn't reappear. He's a smashing chap. He's very, very good.

VL: Did you have to cut out anything that you hated to lose?

SF: I think I had to cut stuff out that Christopher hated to lose, but not that I hated to lose, no. There was one scene cut, but if I think about it, I'd been gunning for it since the film was in script form. I said, 'Why is there two scenes here when you only need one?' You know, and it didn't have enough narrative in. I think he was rather upset. What you're trying to do is assess within the scene, well, is there enough narrative to keep it going, as well as all the diversions and entertainments.

VL: What was it about the script that appealed to you?

SF: Well, it's hard to answer. I mean, I liked the script. It made me laugh and then, at the right moment, it made me sad. That was all I needed really.

VL: Is that really all you look for?

SF: I like the writing very much. The writing is very, very important.

VL: And Christopher, obviously, with Dangerous Liaisons and so on – would you pretty much make anything Christopher wrote?

SF: Nope.

VL: So what does he have to do to make it past your approval threshold?

SF: Well, I have to like it. It's as simple as that.

VL: What's your next project?

SF: Dunno. I've got two films. There are two films at the moment, which has never happened before in my life. And it's causing havoc. You'd think that having two films would make life a lot easier but actually it makes life a lot harder.

VL: So they're at similar stages, are they?

SF: Ish.

VL: So it's whichever one gets out of the gate first, so to speak?

SF: They're very complicated things to make, films. And you have to get a lot of balls in the right holes, or whatever you call it. And if you get something wrong right over there, it affects you over here and it drives you crazy.

Interview with Georgia King, April Pearson, Calvin Dean, Alex Pettyfer and Tom Hopper (stars of Tormented) - April 24th, 2009

Promoting: Tormented
Venue: The Soho Hotel
Interview type: One-on-one (actually one-on-three and one-on-two)



ViewLondon (VL): What's the story of the film and who do you play?

Tom Hopper (TH): I play a character called Marcus. The film starts off at a funeral of a character who killed himself. And we play the characters in the in-crowd and we have a big party and stuff and basically people start getting killed or injured and something is doing it to them. So it's basically how all these people start getting killed off in very grusome lovely ways.

Alex Pettyfer (AP): I play Bradley, who's kind of a manipulative psychopath and the story's basically about revenge.

April Pearson (APn): I play Tasha. She's a bit of a cow, in fact, a complete cow. She's got her two cronies, Kalilah and Sophie, and she's got no remorse, she bullies everyone. She'd stab her friends in the back if she could, she'd probably stab her boyfriend in the back.

Georgia King (GK): I play Sophie. She's one of the in-crowd and she's a total bitch. She's the sidekick of April's character and she follows the in-crowd. She's horrifically mean, she's air-heady, she's slutty, she goes out with the main football guy and she laughs a lot, when she shouldn't.

Calvin Dean (CD): I play Darren Mullet, who's a bit of a loner, a bit of a geek. He gets bullied a lot and through this he commits suicide and comes back as a zombie-ghost-creature thing and takes his revenge over the in-crowd kids.

VL: I was going to ask you about that, because the press notes say Darren's a “zombie-ghost-thing”. How did you see him?

CD: Do they really say that? Zombie-ghost-thing? I see him mainly as a zombie, although he can sort of make himself appear or disappear with different people.

GK: And I think their conscience starts to maybe creep up on them, so he's part of that too. So it's like, is that imagination or is it not and I think sometimes he is a ghost because he appears and disappears and only certain people see him. And he's referred to like Banquo's ghost in Macbeth. But then he's also a zombie in that he's very much real and does sit on people and kill them and swing shovels and so on.

VL: Alex, you're obviously cast against type, since you normally play good-looking hero types. Was it important to you to move away from that?

AP: I just wanted to take the role because it scared me, man. And if I was honest, yeah, I hadn't played anything like this and I kind of am breaking away from that, but I think any actor at one point or another has a choice to break away and if they do or don't, it's really up to them. And I think, you know, breaking away and showing that you're versatile kind of shows you as an actor and going into this role and not knowing what to do was my biggest challenge and my biggest fear and pulling it off was – well, I don't know if I pulled it off, but trying to pull it off was hard.

VL: The press notes say that you originally read for one of the other parts, but you decided you'd rather play Bradley.

AP: Yeah, that's right. I was originally going to play Alexis (the good-looking hero type).

VL: How did you get involved in the film and who was already on board when you came on?

TH: When I came on board, April was already on board, as Tasha and Alex was set to do Bradley. But I got a call about this character called Marcus in a teen horror and I thought 'Okay, cool' and I read the script and thought it was my kind of thing. I did think I was a little bit too out of the age bracket, because I'm 24, but, you know. So, yeah, I went to this meeting with Jon [Wright], the director and Manny, the casting director, had a meeting, had a read-through and then we did some workshops. In fact, in our group, apart from Tuppence and Dimitri, that was pretty much the group that got picked.

VL: So you did workshops before everyone was properly cast?

TH: Yeah, just to see how we all sort of gelled together and what relationship we had. I mean, me and Alex got on really well straight away, so that was really important. And I thought – I don't know if Alex thought this or not – but I thought 'If I get the part, I hope Alex gets Bradley.'

AP: Yeah, I wanted someone else to play Marcus.

TH: (laughs) I knew it! I set myself up for that.

VL: Again, the press notes say that you're a bit of a horror fan. Is that true?

AP: No, they got that wrong. I'm a bit of a wimp, actually. When I watch horror, I'm watching from behind my hands, like this (mimes). But I loved making Tormented and I like making horror movies. And I would definitely make another one.

CD: I wasn't a horror fan before, but I bought around 40 horror DVDs and watched them in preparation and I'm a total convert now.

VL: Was there anything that stood out for you in the films you watched?

CD: I did take quite a lot from the original Halloween, actually. Just the stillness that you get from Michael Myers, which I hope I got a bit into Darren, because I think that works quite well and is really creepy.

VL: Did you see anything in the film that was similar to your own school experiences, in terms of bullying?

GK: Absolutely. I think every school has those crowds, be it like a grammar school or private school or whatever kind of school, you will get groups and you will get bullying and you will get power-play and gossiping and manipulation and what-not. So I think it's pretty relevant to everyone, actually.

VL: Was it weird filming your death scenes?

GK: Yeah, it's weird watching yourself die. Mine's a very open death so you see me stop, like...yeah, it's weird.

AP: Yeah, I had my head chopped off, so that was weird. But even then, I had to lie on the ground as if my head was cut off and they cut my body off in post, even though I did have a prosthetic head made. So that was really odd, to imagine that your head is still working when it's detached from your body. I actually really enjoyed filming my death scene.

Interview with Trust (from Sounds Like Teen Spirit) - April 30th, 2009

Promoting: Sounds Like Teen Spirit (sort of)
Venue: The Rhythm Factory (following gig for East End Film Festival Closing Night screening of Sounds Like Teen Spirit)
Interview type: One-on-four

Trust (l-r): Eva Storme, Mirek Coutigny, Matthieu Renier and Laurens Platteeuw

ViewLondon (VL): How did the gig go?

Mirek: It was great! It was our best gig ever.

Matthieu: The crowd were amazing!

Eva: It was also the first time we played our own songs in a concert.

VL: The film says that you've recorded an album. Is that true?

Mirek: Yes, I think it's finished now.

VL: How did you form the band?

Mirek: Well, me and Matthieu and Eva were all in the same class at school, so we started it in school and then Laurens just sort of invited himself into the band.

Laurens: It's true.

VL: How many times have you seen the film now?

Eva: This was the second time, for all of us.

VL: Did it make you cry?

Eva: Yes!

VL: Did you cry more or less the second time?

Matthieu: More, I think.

Mirek: I was crying with laughter, because Laurens is so brilliantly stupid in it.

VL: Do you have a favourite part of the film?

Matthieu: I think all the scenes with Laurens are so funny – they're all my favourites.

VL: I gather you're all big Spinal Tap fans?

Laurens: Me, Mirek and Matthieu are – we love it. Eva hasn't seen it.

Eva: I've seen some of it. I don't like it as much as you do.

VL: Are you still in touch with Giorgos, Mariam and Marina?

Laurens: Yes. We stay in touch via MSN chat. They are all doing well and they're very happy the film is coming out.

Eva: We are still in touch with Bab, too.

VL: Eva, the film makes quite a lot of your search for “a cute boy”. Did you find one?

Eva: Yes, I did! He's here somewhere.

VL: The film was made two years ago. Why don't any of you look any older?

Eva: I don't know. It's strange. I think we are just lucky.

Video of Trust performing at The Rhythm Factory.

Interview with Jamie J Johnson (director of Sounds Like Teen Spirit) - April 23rd, 2009

Promoting: Sounds Like Teen Spirit
Venue: Home
Interview type: One-on-one (phone)


ViewLondon (VL): How did the film come about?

Jamie Johnson (JJ): Basically, I was watching the adult contest the year that Finnish latex monster band Lordi won and when they won I thought, 'Wow, this is beyond pantomime and would make a brilliant subject for a feature doc', so I pitched it to BBC Films and they liked it but they already had four Eurovision projects in development. So then I said, 'Well how about the Junior one?' and they said 'Hmmm...' so I started researching it and then I was just kind of like, 'Why has nobody made this film yet?' So that's kind of how it started.

VL: So how did you find the different kids after that?

JJ: Basically I flew round with a camera and a sound recordist and we went to all the countries that we could – I think I went to about seventeen – all the countries that were having the heats, as it were. And then we'd sort of film with the kids before the national final and then interview the winner and then try and sort of go to the house of the winner to see what their home situation was like the following day. So that was the sort of casting process to see who we might then follow to the Rotterdam final.

VL: So how did you narrow it down from seventeen to four?

JJ: Well, I know this probably isn't the most stringent method of selecting them, but I just basically chose my favourites out of all seventeen countries. I just chose the ones I sort of wanted to hang out with, so that was basically how they were selected. We didn't pick them based on who we thought might win or anything like that.

VL: I was curious as to whether you'd seen [US Spelling Bee documentary] Spellbound?

JJ: Yes, I have very much seen Spellbound.

VL: Did you talk to the directors at all?

JJ: No, I didn't, actually and I would have liked to. I think it would have been probably helpful if I had. There was another film called Taxidermy: Stuff the World, by a British director, about the World Taxidermy Championships. And I'd sort of seen both of those and I watched both of them quite carefully. Because I was just shitting my pants, basically -excuse my language- before I went out to each country of the kids that we'd chosen, because I was like, 'Oh my God, I don't have much time with them and what if we don't get anything that's any good?' And you know, in Spellbound, what would they have needed to do? So I kind of broke it down and did almost like a shopping list based on, you know, they went to this kid's house and they did an interview in their bedroom and they did them at school and blah blah blah. So I tried to work it out and just cover bases like that. And then I sort of threw all of that stuff away slightly, when I got out there and just realised you can't really control anything, actually.

VL: So was there much that was cut out of the film or did you pick the kids you wanted and trust that you'd get everything from them?

JJ: Yeah. Even saying it now, it does seem mental, but that's kind of what we did. We didn't follow any additional characters and then drop them or anything like that. Because I know in Spellbound they did that – the DVD has three extra spellers on it that didn't make it into the final film.

VL: How difficult was it to get permission to film backstage at Eurovision?

JJ: We had to fly to Holland. I'd managed to wangle filming at the previous year's contest, which I shot as a sort of trailer. I did a little three minute trailer and a sort of 27 minute taster from that, so we took that as a 'This is how we're going to treat the subject' and it had the war stuff in it and it had the humour and the tone, so we had to present it to all of the Eurovision Steering Committee, which is 36 heads of each country's TV and they all sat down and ummed and ahhed and then said, 'Yeah, alright then'. So we did have Access All Areas but at the same time, the Dutch crew in Rotterdam had spent probably millions on the show, at the end of it and they didn't want us getting in the way, so they were quite tight in terms of us getting on stage and where we could put cameras and so on. So it was quite difficult and there were a couple of hairy moments where we thought we weren't going to be able to film on stage during the votes. And I knew that that was a key thing, that was our key scene that it all builds up towards in some ways. But luckily, our producer, Liz Carlson just got super-charming on them and managed to turn things around.

VL: Did you know that Bab was going to be presenting the Belgian points or was that a happy surprise?

JJ: We only heard about a week before and at that point we didn't really know what our edit was going to be, but I had a rough outline that had her as the character we'd start with, so when we heard she was going to be presenting it was like, 'Oh, actually, this might all tie in quite nicely now...' But it was great to see her face like pop up, forty foot high.

VL: Are you still in touch with the kids?

JJ: Yeah, I'm in touch with all of them apart from Mariam, just because she doesn't speak English and doesn't write English well enough to email either. But I hear about her through a couple of Georgian friends that we met while we were making the film. But yeah, all the others, we email and Facebook each other and so on. We have the odd Skype conversation. And Bab's doing well – I email her dad and he lets me know when she's got a new release coming out or whatever.

VL: So what are they all up to?

JJ: They're all mainly just being kids still. I think Bab has some kind of mini record deal, Trust are recording an album on their own, just using Mirek's computer in his loft, which is pretty cool. Marina is still doing Bon-Bon but she's just being a teenager, she's just kind of buying booze to go to parties and causing trouble and probably driving her mum mad. She's alright though – her mum's got a new boyfriend and Marina likes him, so that's good. And Mariam's doing well – there was an opportunity for her to move to [Georgia's capital] Tblisi and for some reason they didn't take it, but I'm not entirely clear on what happened.

VL: Have they all seen the film?

JJ: They've all seen it apart from Mariam, which is kind of disappointing. Opportunities kept coming up that didn't quite happen, like, for Toronto, they wanted to fly her over for the premiere and she couldn't come because it was straight after the conflict. So we're still hoping we can get her over for something but if it doesn't happen soon we're just going to send her a copy. But I know she's seen the trailer and clips and has heard all about it. I feel bad now, I'll have to send her a copy.

Interview with Daniel Mays - April 20th, 2009

Promoting: Shifty
Venue: Metrodome offices
Interview type: One-on-one


ViewLondon (VL): What's the film about and who do you play?

Daniel Mays (DM): The film is ultimately about friendship and I play Chris, who returns to Essex, his old stamping ground to meet up with his best friend, Shifty, the lead character, played by a brilliant actor, Riz Ahmed. My character's been away in Manchester for four years, trying to rebuild his life and start again. And he returns to Essex, he meets up with Shifty to basically discover his old mate has kind of fallen ever deeper into the murky world of crack cocaine dealing – he's become the most prolific dealer in the area. And the story charts 24 hours of them reconnecting with each other. Chris shadows his mate and then you get introduced to all the various clients and customers within the area. And due to the sort of unpredictable life that Shifty's leading, things quickly spiral out of control. I think ultimately, it becomes what we've described as a battle for Shifty's soul. And Shifty has to sort of face up to this, you know, he has to face some home truths and some stark choices of this dangerous future that he's heading towards. But then equally, alongside of that, Chris has to basically face up to the demons of why he left in the first place. So I mean, you know, it's ultimately a kind of buddy movie – it's about friendship, but for me, there's a lot of deeper issues about wasted potential and the wrong choices that we make in life. And for my character especially, it's about seeking that redemption in some way and having closure on the terrible incident that he's haunted by, four years previously.

VL: What attracted you to the part and at what point did you get involved?

DM: My agent phoned me and she basically said, 'It's good news and bad news.' She went, 'The good news is you've been offered the lead in a new British film, which is fantastic'. I was, like, 'Great', I said, 'What's the bad news?', she said, 'Well, you're not going to get paid, it's going to be shot in three weeks'. So I said, 'What's the budget?' and she went, 'A hundred grand', so I was like [draws in breath]. I always look at the stuff that comes my way though and when I read it, you know, I come from Essex, I grew up in Buckhurst Hill in Essex and my godfather lives there too, so obviously I knew that area and when I read the script it was a combination of the sort of brilliance of the script, plus – I knew it was based on [director] Eran's own experiences - but it was clear that thte way he'd written these characters, they were just incredibly defined, they were believable people to me; I sort of recognised a lot of the characters in the script. And it did, it offered up an amazing acting opportunity, actually, to take on a lead part and to kind of flesh this guy out and bring him to life and it was the prospect of playing someone who on the surface of things is a really sympathetic character - he's likeable, he's friendly, he's funny, he's kind of like your average Joe and yet, the challenge behind it was how does the guilt affect this person's life? Because he makes out that he's got the life of Riley in Manchester – he's got a mortgage, he's in recruitment and yet when you strip away the surface of things he's kind of in meltdown, he can't hold down a relationship, I imagined that he couldn't sleep at night. And I just thought it really tapped into somebody I hadn't really played before.

But yeah, it was the potential of the script but also it was meeting them as people. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to get involved with something so low budget if I didn't feel confident in the people that were making it. And Eran sat down and he told me his dreams about his first feature, he told me about the Microbudget Scheme, which I thought was really impressive and Ben Pugh and Rory were great producers, their professionalism was outstanding. I mean, any film, regardless of budget, if it's run badly, can be a horrendous experience, but they were at the top of their game, as was everyone on the crew. So I think it was a combination of the script, the prospect of playing the character and the opportunities that threw up and of course them as people – it was sort of too good to turn down.

VL: So were you cast first or was Riz already aboard when you came on?

DM: Well, Eran had made a music video with Riz – he does his MC-ing and has his whole music career as well – I think they made The 9-11 Blues together and I think Riz was always ... I think we were both his first choices, actually, so yeah, he got what he wanted, you know?

VL: What was it like, working with Riz?

DM: It was great working with him. First and foremost, I think he's a phenomenal actor. He brings a lot of quality to the table and I really enjoyed working with him – I got on with him as a person and I think that because we both got on really well, that that has kind of coloured the sort of performances that we've given in the film. It's that thing of like, you know, you've got to try and have chemistry with someone, you can't force that, do you know what I mean? You've either got chemistry or you haven't, you know. And he just underplayed it really well. I think he's got a really great career ahead of him.

VL: Did you know each other beforehand at all?

DM: No, I just met him on day one, in the first meeting.

VL: Was there a rehearsal period?

DM: We had the opportunity to do like a week and a half of rehearsal. In actual fact, we were involved in a lot of the casting process as well, like we read with Jay Simpson, who played Trevor and we had sort of creative input on the early stages of the film. And that's the great thing about this whole experience, actually - that you wouldn't get on a big budget film, like some of the stuff that I've done – is that you had a really collaborative effort on this and you're kind of involved in the whole process of, you know, if you're not happy with a line or whatever. We really rehearsed it like we were in a play in that first week, because it was imperative that we knew exactly what we had to do, we couldn't make shit up on the day, you couldn't pick two days up at the end of filming, we were doing sort of eight to ten pages a day. So it was clear to me that we needed to be fully prepared and we did that in that first week. And that was great for us, to build the relationships up in the characters and the backstory and the history, but also to sort of really get on as people as well.

VL: Can you say a little more about Eran Creevy's directorial style?

DM: I think the great quality that Eran has – I mean this is his first feature, you know. And I loved working for him and he has that great ingredient that good directors should have, that, you know, that you want to work for them. And I was really aware that this was his baby, this was his first film and he'd written the script and this had been like three or four years in the making. So I think once you agree to make something, you've got to give everything to your director and try and do the best job you possibly can. But the great thing about his qualities as a director is he's got such an insatiable appetite for it and a bounding sort of energy. You know, he energises you on set. I know the subject matter of the film is quite dark and, you know, not depressing, but – I mean, the subject matter could be seen as depressing – but we had great banter on set and that was great, you had a bit of a spring in your step every time you went to work every day.

VL: So how did Eran, as a first time director, compare with other directors you've worked with?

DM: Well, of course, he hasn't got that luxury of having a wealth of experience to draw on. I mean I did feel, to a certain extent, I mean, I was the most experienced sort of guy in the room, you know. He had no real experience of working with actors and I've been fortunate enough to go through two films with Mike Leigh and work with Joe Wright and they're real sort of actor's directors, particularly Mike, you know, you kind of spend six months on your character. So I felt that I had a lot of experience to bring to the table and I worked a lot with him, building the scenes into beats. I've done a lot of theatre as well and that background in theatre helped with really breaking down the characters and breaking down the scenes and working on the relationships. But it's all there, I mean, that was part of the appeal of doing the job in the first place, was the fact that the script was sensational and the quality in the script is in the writing, but it's the stuff that happens underneath it, it's the subtext, it's the stuff that happens in between the silences.

VL: Do you have a favourite scene in the film?

DM:I love so many parts of the film but I think what I really enjoyed when I first sat down and watched it – because I didn't go to the cutting room, I sat down and watched it when it was all completed – was those early scenes where it's awkward, they haven't seen each other in four years, Shifty could easily slam the door in Chris's face and tell him to fuck off or whatever and as an audience, you don't know what's going on. And then you find out why their relationship is fractured in the first place. So there's this great thing of like the elephant in the room that no-one's talking about and it's that thing that gives it all those different layers that you won't normally get in some – you know, there are so many British films in this genre that are just people shooting guns at each other and it all ends in someone dying and whatever. I've mentioned Mike Leigh, but for me it had a lot of sensitivity, like he has in his films or a Ken Loach or a Shane Meadows. You know, it was the stuff going on in between the lines that as an actor I really connected to and sort of helped Eran through it. But, I mean, you know, he's an instinctively great director, I think.

VL: Was anything cut out that you hated to lose?

DM: No. Everything that was shot was put in the film – I can't think of anything that was cut. Oh, no, the only thing that we dropped, there's a bit where the music's playing too loud and Shifty breaks in and Chris remains outside on the balcony and there was just going to be a moment where – and actually, when I say it now, it sounds like something out of Little Britain – but he was going to see a really young single mum, pushing a pram. But in actual fact, it does sound a bit contrived that, now, you know, I don't think you miss it. But that's testament to [producer] Ben Pugh, his professionalism in running the whole show was great.

VL: Did the microbudget cause any concerns at all?

DM: I must admit I was quite apprehensive. I was slightly worried when I rocked up on day one because everything was stripped to its bare bones. And in actual fact, the first scene was the scene where I throw his mobile into that lake and I remember looking on the wall and there was this sign saying 'No Swimming, Do Not Enter, Toxic Sewage' or something like that and I threw this thing in and because we had no money, we only had like two phones. And so Eric, the production designer went 'No worries' and he took his shoes and socks off and his jeans and rolled them up and went wading through all this shit and I was like, 'Is this what it's going to be like?' I was kind of like 'Oh shit', you know? But he did a great job. Oh, and in another scene I really loved, the scene with the cats, we wanted to use real cats but the budget didn't stretch to real cats so they were all stuffed.

VL: What's your next project?

DM: I've wrapped on the Tintin film with Steven Spielberg, but it's so top secret that I can't say anything about that - I can't even tell you who I'm playing. But that's not out till 2011 or so. In the meantime, I'm in an episode of Jimmy McGovern's The Street, which is going to be on in October, I'm a big fan of that show, great writing again. And Hippy Hippy Shake, for Working Title, that's going to be released, and I'm also doing a tiny part in the next Nanny McPhee film, which again is something really different. But what I'm most excited about, I'm doing a film called Huge, which is written by the comedian Ben Miller (of Armstrong & Miller fame) and he's going to direct, it's his first feature – it's all about two aspiring stand-up comedians, a double-act and I'm acting with a tremendous actor called Johnny Harris, who was the pimp in London to Brighton. He's a great actor, so it's all about that, trying to make it on the circuit.

Interview with Jodie Whittaker - April 2nd, 2009

Promoting: Good
Venue: The Sanderson Hotel
Interview type: One-on-one (actually one-on-two with Jason Isaacs)


ViewLondon (VL): Who do you play in the film?

Jodie Whittaker (JW): My character's Anne Hartman, who starts out as a student to John Halder (played by Viggo Mortensen) and over the course of the film it turns into an affair and then they start to see each other and then they end up being married with a child. It's one of those parts that you don't really want to think that you're very similar to, but in fact I'm incredibly similar to her in the sense that, you know, you make choices all the time without consequence because you think of your own benefit. And that's how everyone is and so that's the thing, that no-one in the film is the obvious villain but history will tell a different thing.

VL: What stage did you come on board?

JW: Well, I came in right at the end, because obviously, the first few times they'd tried to get it made, I wasn't even an actor, so I wasn't involved at all. And then I was actually doing Venus at the time and a lot of the crew had come from Good, at the time when they thought it was going to go and then it fell through. So I initially heard about it being made into a film, but I'd already seen it as a play. I saw a third year RADA production of it when I was at drama school and it was incredible. It's difficult to describe, but if someone's going to tell you, 'I want you to come and see this play' and you're like (sarcastic) 'Yeah, it sounds great' but then you actually watch it and it's phenomenal and powerful. So I had that going for me, because when I had the audition I didn't need any explanation with the part or what it was about or why people would want to make it. So I was just lucky because the producer came to see me in a play and I managed to woo her and trick her into thinking I was good enough to play the part (laughs).

VL: What was it like working with Viggo Mortensen?

JW: Oh, it was great. It's incredibly intimidating to know you're about to meet Viggo Mortensen and when we met, it was to rehearse. And you hear these terrible stories about people in Hollywood who won't rehearse, they won't meet anyone and then they'll come on set, [shoot their scene], and then just leave, you know, before you've even turned around to do you. And he was there, really eager to meet everybody and we had a good day of rehearsal, which was so exciting. And then every nerve went, because he's just such a fantastic guy. He kind of – you just want to be his mate, because he's so lovely.

VL: How much research did you do?

JW: I was really interested in the youth of the 1930s. Like, it was interesting finding what would be like pop music, because, you know, she's 20 years old in a really exciting period for Germany, as far as an Aryan young girl was concerned. Because we all know what happened and we can all look back on it and go, 'Okay, the holocaust was a result of this fundamental regime', but if you're in it, you don't see that and my character never went to a camp and never saw firsthand the atrocities that were being carried out. So I read as much as I could to do with women who thought Hitler was the way forward. And they're really honest accounts and they're really brutal self-analysis as well, because you've got to admit that you were totally wrong and what you contributed to. But how could they have known that? So it was really interesting, because you touch on stuff that you missed out in school, because at school you just concentrate on the specifics of WWII.

VL: What's your next project?

JW: I'm in a film called Perrier's Bounty that I think is coming out around September time. It's a Dublin gangster farce with Brendan Gleeson and Jim Broadbent. It's amazing, it's proper funny. Anything with Jim Broadbent in – I've literally never corpsed so much in my entire life. He's an absolute genius.

Interview with Jason Isaacs - April 2nd, 2009

Promoting: Good
Venue: The Sanderson HOtel
Interview type: One-on-one (actually one-on-two, with Jodie Whittaker)


ViewLondon (VL): What's the film about and who do you play?

Jason Isaacs (JI): It's about a man called John Halder, who Viggo Mortensen plays, who is a perfectly ordinary individual in the 1930s, in Germany. His best friend is Maurice, a psychiatrist, who I play, whose Jewish. John's a very good, decent, righteous individual, who's horrified by the party that's come to power, as all decent, righteous individuals were. So it's about John Halder, who's a good man – which is why it's called Good – and his relationships with his wife, his best friend and his new lover and how difficult it is in the face of feeling so powerless, to do the right thing. It's an ethical thriller in many ways and the hope is that if we've told the story right then you'll see yourself in all of the characters and all of the choices you'll recognise from your daily life.

VL: How did you get involved with the film? What stage did you come on board?

JI: Well, I was on from when it was just an idea. The producer – the real producer, Miriam Segal - asked me to lunch about eight years ago and said, 'I've got the rights to this play, it's the best play I've ever seen, do you want to get involved?' and I said, 'No, you ought to be ashamed of yourself, it's an apology for Nazism, how dare you? And as a Jewish woman particularly, you should run in the other direction'. And she said, 'Why are you being such an idiot? Have you seen it or read it?' and I said, 'Course I have' and I was lying, I'd neither seen it nor read it. So she gave me the play, I took it home, I phoned up and I said, 'I'm really sorry, I was wrong. I am an idiot and how can I help?' So then it was a very, very long process of her trying to raise the money to make a film that is so morally challenging and with such contemporary resonance that it was disturbing.

VL: How so?

JI: Well, during the course of the time we were raising the money, we watched, you know, the Geneva Convention being thrown aside, we watched the right to silence done away with, we watched people detained without trial, we watched extraordinary rendition. And a war was started, a pre-emptive war, based on lies told to the public. So all this stuff happened while we were raising the money but then the whole thing collapsed for a couple of years because of funding. And then, finally, when we had all the money, the second incarnation of this film, and then I wasn't available because I was doing a TV series. And the producer said, 'Well, we're not making it without you'. And I managed to get Viggo, through a friend of a friend, to read the script and say he would do it and he also said, 'I'm not doing it without Jason', having met me, and so I managed to get a break from the TV series, twice, for ten days at a time and come and make it. So it's been a long, long, long, long road.

VL: What was it like, working with Viggo?

JI: Well, first of all we had to play best friends and we didn't really know each other. Well, we didn't know each other at all, we had a mutual friend. And when the film was finally up and running, I couldn't be there for rehearsals, so he flew himself out, at his own expense, to come and hang out with me and my wife and children in Rhode Island for a few days and get to know me and build a shared history of the characters and of us. Which was the first sign of what kind of generous actor he would turn out to be. He likes to explore human nature, which is why he's an actor and a painter and a photographer and a poet and a writer and a publisher and a musician and all these things. So he's really interested in the human condition and there's no part of him that engages in that status game that so many stars do. He wants there to be a level playing field – he did away with his trailer when he got there, it was too big, he wanted one the same size as everyone else. He did away with an assistant that the film provided for him. And you know all that when you start working – you're working with a collaborator, you're working with a dance partner who wants to dance with you and it was a real joy. And surprisingly so – I hadn't expected that of him. I always thought that on screen he radiated this fundamental decency, which is why we had always wanted him to play this part, but it was a joy to find out that he did the same thing off screen as well. Oh, and he brings chocolate, proper, haute cuisine chocolate to the set, to hand out to everybody.

VL: How much research did you do?

JI: I think we all did different things, depending on who we were playing and what we were doing. And so I thought I was familiar with the period but actually, in order to bring this to life, it was really important for me -and I know for Viggo - to read only contemporary accounts, nothing with the wisdom of hindsight, so we read a lot of diaries, we found contemporary footage and archive stuff, listened to contemporary music and so on. And once you wipe away all the stuff you know with the benefit of hindsight and try and place yourself specifically in Germany in the 1930s, it's a rather magical time, the country is blossoming and exciting and if you put it in historical context and find out about the depression it was just emerging from, you can see why everything was so seductive and also why people felt so powerless when there was really only one party and the Reichstag burned down and stuff. So I did a lot of reading diaries and a lot of clearing stuff away from my head as much as putting things in there.

VL: What are your next projects?

JI: Well, I was filming Green Zone for a lot of last year, which will be coming out at the end of the year and I've got some Harry Potters coming up. And also, [co-star Jodie Whittaker] and I are possibly about to start a film together called The Great Ghost Rescue. And I'm hoping to do a play in the West End – Bergman's Scenes From A Marriage.