Saturday, September 08, 2012

Commentary Tracks - The Conversation




The Conversation (1974) with director/writer Francis Ford Coppola

Comments on the Film

On his concept for the film
In those days as a young man, maybe still now, I was always interested in knowing what the film would tackle, what would be the theme or technique I wanted to explore. One area of film I thought was very fascinating and could be used to great advantage was the concept of repetition, that repetition itself could be both hypnotic and could make points or clarify ideas in very subtle ways. The idea was that film, which is so elastic in a sense of time, was capable of exploring repetition just as those painters we all admired explored multiple perspectives, and I wanted to write a story that made use of repetition as a point of investigation.

On camera techniques
I also had an idea while making the movie that the camera would be an eavesdropper. In most modern movies, if you watch the lower corner or upper corner of any movie you'll see that it's constantly adjusting, that the cameraman is constantly trying to make a good picture. In The Conversation I wanted the camera just to be dead, just to be there as if it was an eavesdropping device. If an actor walked out of the frame and something important happened outside the field of view, it would not show it unless it stayed off long enough and the camera realised it wasn't really getting the scene, so it would quite mechanically pan over to the left later as if it was an automated eavesdropping device.

On John Cazale
We knew that Harry would have required one associate or assistant to help him with such elaborate technical work, and of course I had just made the first Godfather film and had a wonderful friendship and association with John Cazale, who played Fredo. He was a wonderful actor, a gentle soul and a good friend, and I was happy that he could come and play the part of the assistant. Johnny Cazale passed away a few years after this, a terrible loss to those who knew him personally as he was really a nice person. Certainly, when you think of the roles he could have played and how he was enlarging possibilities with leading roles in theatre as well as film. He was also in Dog Day Afternoon very effectively. He was a wonderful, wonderful person, Johnny Cazale.

On naming his main character
An interesting note about the name Harry Caul. I dictated much of this script into a tape recorder and a young woman who I didn't really know at all typed it for me. Part of the fun of dictating it was that I would send the tapes to her – it was a very Conversation-type relationship – and she was very beautiful, I remember she looked like Dominique Sanda in those days. So when I was dictating I was trying to make as good an impression as I could and in an odd way impress her with the story I was dictating. I was intending to call him Harry Call – C-A-L-L – but in the course of typing she typed it as C-A-U-L. Of course, knowing a little bit about the meaning of a caul, this structure on the head almost blinding or enveloping its bearer, I decided to keep it with that spelling, but it was really a typo.

On Harry's female companion
This is an interesting scene to me because throughout my life – as I speak to you now I'm 61 years old and when I wrote this I was probably 26 or 27 – I've had this recurring dream of going to some house or some apartment somewhere, usually of a run-down nature or very low-class, inexpensive. No one realised that I actually owned this place, almost as though they were personal parts of myself that no one knew about. In those days, I used to dream that there was a girl in the apartment who waited for me and was always there when I went there, but there was something sad about her, something heartbreaking. Obviously she was sad with good reason, because this was a secret. No one knew that this woman or this place existed, and in fact I was not there very often. Having once had this dream in a very vivid and touching way, I wrote a scene in The Conversation that was almost verbatim how the dream had been, and it was interesting that after I made the film and had photographed that scene I never dreamed of a girl being in that place ever again. Now when I go to these places I own that no one knows about, there is no woman waiting for me.

On Walter Murch
Of course, the most profound collaboration on this picture was with Walter Murch, who not only edited the picture but created the complicated and interesting sound design and mixed the sound and music, ultimately finishing this picture in the form that it is now. The interesting thing about working with Walter in those days, San Francisco in the early 70s, was that many of the young people who came with me from Los Angeles to set up American Zoetrope were not in the union.  When we said these people were the ones making the films, one of the requests was that Walter could have a credit but he couldn't have the word 'editor' attached to it. So we tossed that around and Walter said, "Well, what I really do is sound design" so that's what we gave Walter as a credit on The Rain People and this film. Interestingly enough, along with lots of things we did in the early days of Zoetrope, this became a legitimate title that's used to this day.

On Gene Hackman
Gene Hackman was a very interesting actor to work with. He so turned into Harry Caul it really started to bug him, I think. At that time he was a nice-looking guy and here he is having to get into a suit, cut his hair, wear these glasses and be what would later come to be known as a nerd or geek, and this really wasn't his nature. He had come to work in stylish, casual clothes, and I think the transformation, both the way he looked in this film and being this uptight guy, started to play with his head and it would make him very grumpy and impatient with what we were doing. He really liked working on the movie, he liked the character, and I've heard subsequently that he thinks it was really good work on his part, which I certainly agree with. But during that time I think this anal personality felt very uncomfortable on his shoulders and was not pleasant. I've seen that happen with actors, where playing a certain role is not fun, and having to look that way or inhabit that kind of personality can get to you.


Bits and Pieces

I wanted Harry to be a would-be jazz musician, an amateur who liked to play a great record and jam along with it. I think of the saxophone as a beautiful solo instrument that approximates the human voice and almost wails, which kind of gives us a little glimpse into the lonely soul. A soul that, although he chooses to live in solitude, there is a certain ache or angst about the state he has condemned himself to.

This young assistant, played by Harrison Ford, was so much his own invention. It was written as just a normal assistant, but Harrison chose the wardrobe, he chose the Christmas cookies he made, and really through his own imagination he created a much more interesting character than it was written as.

The film was begun with Haskell Wexler as the director of photography, but after the completion of the opening sequence, which involved the elaborate multi-camera setup in Union Square and the long lens shooting of the conversation, we had a difference of opinion and the two of us decided that we saw it very differently. I saw it in the style it eventually became and Haskell saw it in a romantic style more like, in his words, The Thomas Crown Affair. I saw it more as Medium Cool.

I was very influenced as a young writer by novels, and especially in this case by the novel Steppenwolf by Hermann Hesse. I thought I wanted to make a film somewhat in that genre, which was focused on an intriguing solitary character, and to try and use that style and perspective. Just as I was inspired by Blow Up as something to try and imitate, I also had Steppenwolf rolling around in my head, and even the character is named Harry.

By now you may notice that the building across Harry's street that had the wrecking ball on it is already partially wrecked, so you can see right into the walls, which is another level of surveillance.

One of the questions I'm most frequently asked is if it's a different reading of "He'd kill us if he had the chance" and of course the answer is yes, they are two slightly different readings. Although, I can tell you that I almost wish I hadn't used two different readings, because I think the implication would be there with one reading. When you're making a film that hasn't come out yet and you don't know if people are going to like it, you tend to not want to take any chances, but now I think back and wonder if the audience would provide that slight inflection change.

One of the very interesting things about The Conversation is that just while we were shooting the film, the newspapers were suddenly covered with front page headlines about the Watergate scandal. I remember reading it with the actors and it was chillingly so much like the movie we were shooting, obviously without knowing any of that was going on at that high level of government. I might have surmised that this was going on from doing a little research about eavesdropping, but to see it of front page importance was a very strange effect for us.

The old fantasy of the toilet bowl you flush and it just doesn't stop coming, and will it go onto the floor? This one's worse, of course, because it's blood.

Final Thoughts

However romantic it may seem to make films, filmmaking is an extremely tedious and difficult process, one that requires a lot of physical endurance and tremendous personal sacrifice. You wake up very early in the morning and go to bed very late at night, and pretty much work seven days a week one way or the other. I think filmmaking is something that is wonderful when you're looking forward to making a dream picture or when you're looking back at something, but I have to be honest that even my own personal favourite films – and The Conversation is no.1 on that list, or Rumble Fish – if I look back at the process of making them, I was not often too happy or enjoying what you think would be a great opportunity to make a personal film. I think the films I was the most happy working on were films like Tucker, or even The Rainmaker recently. I don't know if it's because I'm older or because I start to think of it as time spent working with people I like, my friends and collaborators, laughing and thinking we were doing something beautiful. But the films that I think are my best – The Conversation, and I guess The Godfather and Apocalypse Now – they were not at all pleasant day-to-day experiences for me.

Wednesday, September 05, 2012

The BFI London Film Festival 2012

The 2012 London Film Festival marks the start of a new era. Sandra Hebron's hugely successful nine-year reign as the festival's artistic director came to an end in 2011, and the daunting task of replacing her has fallen to Clare Stewart, former director of the Sydney Film Festival. With a fresh face comes fresh ideas, and the festival has undergone a major revamp for this year's event. Running from October 10-21, the LFF is shorter this year, but its films will be spread across a greater number of venues, which may make any attempt to cover it comprehensively something of a logistical nightmare. The strands that the films are divided into are new as well, with each of them being built around a single theme and named according to their content – Love, Laugh, Thrill, etc. – although some of these headings seem rather dubious (Cult? Dare?).

Ultimately, however, all that really matters are the films themselves, so after browsing through its new categories, here is my guide to pictures worth looking out for in this year's London Film Festival lineup.


LOVE


The standout in this field is undoubtedly Michael Haneke's Amour, but as that's due for a UK release in November anyway, let's look beyond it to try and discover some smaller gems. I've enjoyed Stéphane Brizé's previous films a great deal, so I'm pleased to see him back at the festival with his Miss Chambon leading man Vincent Lindon for A Few Hours of Spring. The great Abbas Kiarostami makes an unexpected detour to Japan for his new film Like Someone in Love, while Gillian Anderson has gone to Switzerland for Ursula Meier's Sister. The erratic young talent of Xavier Dolan will be on display for a full 159 minutes in his transgender melodrama Laurence Anyways, and director Ira Sachs draws heavily on his own past for Keep the Lights On. This category also has a strong international flavour, with The Great Kilapy from Portugal, Epilogue from Israel, With You, Without You from Sri Lanka and Memories look at Me from China. There's also a couple of documentaries among these fictional love stories: Liz Garbus' Love, Marilyn is a tribute to the iconic star while Love in the Grave looks at romance among the homeless.

DEBATE


I'm not sure what it is about these films in particular that inspires debate – surely all good films can do that – but I'm guessing that a lot of the pictures in this category will focus on provocative, hot-button issues. Thomas Vinterberg's The Hunt, which is about a man wrongly accused of paedophilia, certainly fits that description, as does Marco Bellocchio's Dormant Beauty, which explores a real-life euthanasia case from Italy's recent history. The other pictures that immediately stand out here come from directors whose work I admire, Lenny Abrahamson's What Richard Did, Matteo Garrone's Reality and Pablo Trapero's White Elephant. I'm also keen to check out a couple of the debut films in this collection, notably the Irish film Pilgrim Hill and the Iranian film A Respectable Family.

DARE


This collection of films consists of the most challenging pictures in the festival, but the definition is vague enough to cover both young provocateur Carlos Reygadas, here with Post Tenebras Lux, and the 90 year-old French legend Alain Resnais, whose new film is intriguingly entitled You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet. After seeing a creepy clip at this morning's press launch, I'm very intrigued by the Japanese film Helter Skelter, starring supermodel Erika Sawajiri, while I have heard very good things about the Danish thriller A Hijacking and Joachim Lafosse's Our Children. Given the recent run of remarkable films coming out of Greece, I'm inevitably keen to catch Ektoras Lygizos' debut film Boy Eating the Bird's Food, particularly as it is screening along with a new short from Attenberg director Athina Rachel Tsangari, and Ulrich Seidl brings Paradise: Love to the festival, although it's a shame we won't also get Faith, which premiered recently at Venice.

LAUGH


As any LFF veterans will attest, film festivals tend to be light on films willing to tickle the funny bone, so the creation of a category for more light-hearted fare is a very positive move. The risk with an international line-up of comedy films, of course, is that humour doesn't always travel, and the programme notes for Hong Sangsoo's In Another Country suggest that his films receive a rapturous reception from Korean audiences that doesn't resonate elsewhere. There are a few relatively safe bets for UK audiences here – Ben Wheatley's Sightseers and American indie Celeste and Jesse Forever, for example – but I'm keen to hear some gags from further afield. I'll be checking out Everybody in Our Family, the new film from Romanian filmmaker Radu Jude, Kenji Uchida's Key of Life, South African Muslim comedy Material and the Spanish black comedy Happy Birthday, Grandma!

THRILL


From this apparently exciting bunch, I like the look of the Korean gangster hit Nameless Gangster and I'll also be checking out the other offerings from that country, Helpless and the low-budget 3D film Fish. A couple of pictures in this group have already made waves elsewhere; Compliance has become one of the most talked-about American films of the year since its Sundance debut, and Caesar Must Die took the Golden Bear at the Berlin Film Festival. There are opportunities for some fine actors to shine in lead roles – Blood stars Paul Bettany, I, Anna has the pairing of Gabriel Byrne and Charlotte Rampling, Everybody Has a Plan stars Viggo Mortensen and Joel Edgerton takes the lead in Wish You Were Here.

CULT


Here's where the categorisations get a little odd. You can't really label a new film as a 'cult' film and you can't anticipate which films will develop a cult following over time. Anyway, it's a very eclectic mix, ranging from modern silent movie Blancanieves to Room 237, a documentary about The Shining. Of course Takashi Miike has a new film – For Love's Sake, which is described in the programme as "Romeo & Juliet as a 60s pop musical" – and Bubba Ho-Tep director Don Coscarelli returns with John Dies at the End. Juan Carlos Medina's Painless has an intriguing premise, while  Kim Jee-woon and Yim Pil-sung are together again with their new film Doomsday Book

JOURNEY


I'm not sure what to make of this category either, as "Journey" is a description that could surely apply to most of the films in the programme. One person who has been on an epic journey over the past 12 months has been Isabelle Huppert, who appears in four LFF films this year, including Brillante Mendoza's Captive. This looks like being the category where I will be going in blind most often and – hopefully – making some great discoveries. Normally I'm sceptical about portmanteau films, but I'll take a punt on 10 + 10, which features contributions from twenty Taiwanese directors. I'm also keen to catch Lines of Wellington, a film completed by Valeria Sarmiento after the death of her husband Raúl Ruiz, which has been described as a companion piece to Ruiz's great final film Mysteries of Lisbon. I'll be seeing The Patience Stone purely on the basis that it stars the brilliant Iranian actress Golshifteh Farahani, whose performance in About Elly was one of the best of recent years, and I'm hoping to see Dreams for Sale as it's the new film from Miwa Nishikawa, whose Dear Doctor was a highlight from LFF 2010.

SONIC + FAMILY


I'm not sure about the wisdom of devoting a whole strand to music-inspired films when  you've only got six of them. Spike Island has the potential to be the breakout hit from this collection, but nothing here is really inspiring me. I won't venture deeply into the Family section either, but I do want to see Ernest and Celestine, the new animation from the team behind A Town Called Panic. Another French/Belgian production, Le Tableau, looks like it will be one of the most conceptually interesting films in this selection.

TREASURES


As ever, the new films at the London Film Festival are only part of the story. Every year the archive strand serves up some of the LFF's most enjoyable and surprising experiences, and this year they have a terrific line-up. Alfred Hitchcock's last silent film The Manxman will be the Archive Gala, with a new score by Stephen Horne, while David Lean's classic Lawrence of Arabia – a must on the big screen – returns to show off the BFI's brand new 4K projector. Wings is another terrific big screen experience and Roberto Rossellini's Journey to Italy is screening with an intriguing new addition, a documentary detailing his relationships with Anna Magnani and Ingrid Bergman called The War of the Volcanoes. I'm going to kick-start my long overdue Satyajit Ray education with his 1963 film Mahanagar and I'm beyond thrilled to see a silent Lubitsch in the programme, his long-lost 1922 film The Lovers of Pharoah, starring Emil Jannings. That summary is barely scratching the surface of a fantastic, diverse and extremely exciting group of films.

Tuesday, September 04, 2012

FilmFest Australia 2012

Here's my take on four of the films that will be screening at FilmFest Australia in London from September 14th-23rd.


Swerve

Although the roads leading in and out of the remote town of Neverest are largely empty, three strangers happen to converge dramatically on one barren stretch in Swerve's opening minutes, kicking off a twist-laden plot that pivots on a briefcase full of cash. Craig Lahiff's first film in a decade has shades of Jim Thompson or perhaps the Coen brothers, with its cynical portrait of selfish, backstabbing characters trying to outsmart each other in the pursuit of money. But such comparisons may suggest a dark wit underpinning the narrative, which is something Swerve distinctly lacks. All we have here are a collection of archetypal characters – an honest drifter, a corrupt cop, a femme fatale – and a story that relies heavily on sudden reversals. It feels very familiar.

Still, maybe we shouldn't demand too much of a thriller that runs for less than 90 minutes, and for most of its skimpy running time, Swerve holds the attention with its snappy pacing and good performances. In particular, Jason Clarke shines as the cop with a hair-trigger temper and murky past, while Emma Booth is as seductive and duplicitous as she needs to be in the film's only female part. Hanging around on the fringes of the narrative, Travis McMahon appears as an implacable killer determined to track down the loot, but his attempt to create a Chigurh-like figure founders on the actor's complete lack of menace. Swerve does deliver jolts of excitement around the film's key set-pieces, most of which Lahiff handles well, but things go awry during a laboured and contrived detour to an abandoned silver mine and the picture never really recovers from this deflating sequence. Ultimately, in a film that values plot over characterisation, we're never given a reason to care which members of this underdeveloped crew will eventually end up with their hands on the prize, and which of them will end up dead.

Goddess

Elspeth Dickens (Laura Michelle Kelly) is the goddess of the title, and she gets a suitably grand entrance, with the camera sweeping towards her in a parody of The Sound of Music's opening shot. However, just as Elspeth is about to break into song, she has to run off and stop her hyperactive twin toddlers from getting into mischief. Thus, the conflicting aspects of Elspeth's life are presented to us immediately – on the one hand, she's a singer and artist desperate to share her voice with the world, but on the other hand she's a permanently harried and stressed mother of two, with a husband who's often absent. That husband is played by Ronan Keating, handling his acting debut with plenty of confidence and humour, but the standout turn here comes from Kelly. In fact, it's hard to imagine the film working as well with anyone else in the central role.

Kelly is empathetic, funny and charming both as the frustrated housewife and as the all-singing, all-dancing "goddess" she transforms into when the decision to broadcast her songs on a webcam turns her into an internet sensation. Director Mark Lamprell handles the frequent shifts between Elspeth's domestic travails and her musical fantasies in a fluid manner, developing an infectiously enjoyable rhythm, and the songs themselves are nicely varied. There's a Busby Berkley-esque number; a couple of slinky, Fosse-style productions; a neatly choreographed dance down the riverbank; and a big, inclusive number at the end. The different styles and tones Lamprell brings to these sequences keep the film feeling fresh throughout, and it makes it easy to forgive some of its minor flaws. The broad comedy doesn't always work – a frying pan to the face here, an accidental clash of heads there – and the film starts to drag a little towards the close as Elspeth and James' mundane marital crisis comes into focus. But for the most part, Goddess is a smart and entertaining picture that clicks together satisfyingly, and it's worth seeking out for Kelly's potentially star-making performance alone.

Any Questions for Ben?

Rob Sitch has written and directed two of the most beloved entries in the recent history of Australian film, The Castle and The Dish, but after a twelve-year absence from cinemas, his new film Any Questions for Ben? is a very different proposition. Gone is the smalltown charm of the earlier pictures, with this one taking place in Sydney and following the high-flying life of re-branding executive Ben (Josh Lawson). This is one of those pictures that gives us a guy who seems to have it all – Ben is young, handsome, wealthy, and he enjoys a spectacular social life, both with his group of firm friends and the conveyer belt of supermodels who share his bed – before it tries to convince us that such a life isn't all it's cracked up to be. Poor old Ben is starting to feel rather dissatisfied with his shallow, rootless existence, and he realises what's missing from his life when old school friend Alex (Rachael Taylor) comes back to town.

The rest of this absurdly bloated film basically consists of Ben foolishly procrastinating over telling Alex how he feels, with his dithering growing increasingly tiresome to watch. Sitch tries to liven proceedings up with an interminable series of rapidly edited montages set to an unimaginatively chosen soundtrack, but this fast and furious style doesn't really suit him, and these sequences only serve to pad out his underwritten narrative. Thankfully, the director's strengths are evident in other areas, most notably when the film settles down and allows the fine ensemble of character actors Sitch has assembled to step into the spotlight. Any Questions for Ben? is saved by some funny lines and a handful of exceptional supporting performances, with David James (Ben's awkwardly jovial boss), Felicity Ward (his straight-talking friend) and Lachy Hulme (his self-appointed mentor) taking the acting honours. There's also an appearance from Daniel Henshall, who is here playing the nicest guy in the world, and anyone who saw him last in the terrifying Snowtown may be as unnerved by his appearance as I was. No matter how jolly he seemed to be on screen, I kept expecting Henshall to reveal his dark side and start murdering his friends. To be fair, if he had ended up strangling Ben, I would have understood.

Toomelah

Following the recent Samson & Delilah, Toomelah is another film exploring the plight of Aboriginal communities in contemporary Australia, but Ivan Sen's film is something else entirely. There is no attempt made to smooth out the rough edges of this picture: the locations are real, the lighting is natural and the cast is made up of non-professionals playing roles not too far removed from their own experiences. Inevitably, this casting decision leads to some awkwardness and stiffness in the performances, with their evident discomfort (they often look directly at the camera) occasionally distracting from the story Sen is trying to tell. Nevertheless, as the film progresses we are gradually drawn into the world that Sen is showing us through the eyes of Daniel (Daniel Connors), a ferocious 10 year-old.

Daniel likes to act tough, beat up his fellow pupils at school and hang out with the local drug dealers, who treat him as an errand boy. His language (heavily accented and subtitled) is littered with "fucks" and "cunts", but that's just what he hears from every single person around him, and we are encouraged to wonder what kind of future lies ahead for Daniel when these adults are the only role models he has. Toomelah is a bleak and authentic portrait of a society where drugs, violence and crushing poverty dominate the lives of its inhabitants, but the director finds some beautifully human moments amid the wreckage, when Daniel stops playing gangster and briefly reverts to being a child. In Connors, he has found a young lead with a natural charisma and attitude that gives the film a fiery presence at its centre, and we do grow attached to him even as we watch him engage in such destructive behaviour. Ultimately, I have to say I admire Toomelah more for what it is attempting to do than I enjoyed the experience of watching it, but it is a commendable and thought-provoking piece of work.