Matt's Blog
Blog
Interview - Tom Hooper Tackles Les Misérables
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Les Misérables has been touted as one of this year’s awards season contenders – something that director Tom Hooper knows all about. Two years ago, he took home the best director Oscar for The King’s Speech.
Hooper was recently in Sydney to promote Les Misérables (along with star Hugh Jackman). I was lucky to get 10 minutes on the phone with him to talk about the Oscars and the mountain of work behind the film.
You can listen to a 4 minute extract from the interview by clicking here.
Matt: I need to start off by thanking you. Two years ago, I put $200 on you to win the Oscar for best director for The King’s Speech. This is the first time I’ve had the chance to thank someone that I’ve actually backed at the Oscars, so thank you Tom!
Tom: So what odds did you get?
Matt: I got $3.50.
Tom: Oh wow.
Matt: Yeah, it was early on. When everyone thought The Social Network was going to win but I had a hunch that The King’s Speech would come through and so I’m very grateful for that.
Tom: I’m very glad to have made you money. It was obviously the thing that was driving me. (laughs)
Matt: We’re about to go into another awards season and I wanted to ask one question about the Oscars. What’s it like there when you sitting in your seat, they’re reading out the nominees and envelope is about to opened? What goes through your mind?
Tom: The thing that would probably surprise people is that no one knows the results. Some people think that everyone knows but it’s actually the best kept secret in Hollywood.
What becomes really stressful over that weekend is the fact that if you win, you have to stand up and make a speech live in front of half a billion people. That fact becomes more significant than whether you win or not. Particularly for someone who is not an actor, it’s hard to do that.
I remember Ricky Gervais gave me some great advice. He said if you’re lucky enough to win, concentrate on getting to the microphone without falling flat on your face. If you can manage that, congratulate yourself and then think “well I’ve done that, how bad can it be?”
Matt: Well let’s talk about Les Misérables which is your follow up to The King’s Speech. It’s hard to think of a project that would carry more in terms of public expectation. So many people have seen this around the world with different actors in various formats. It’s such a wonderful musical. What convinced you to take it on?
Tom: There was something very special about being given the chance to do this. It’s a worldwide phenomenon that’s been going for 26 years and 60 million people have seen it. So many people hold it very close to their heart.
I just thought it was an amazing privilege to get to tell a story that so many people hold dear in this way. I felt that I had a double duty (1) to really work out what people love so much about the show and try to nurture that and protect that, and (2) to think about all the people who haven’t seen the show or don’t think that musicals are for them and somehow bring them into this experience so that they can also enjoy this great story.
Matt: Can you remember when you first saw the musical yourself?
Tom: I was one of the few people on the planet not to see it as a kid. I saw it two and a half years ago. I’d heard a rumour that they were thinking about making it into a movie and I thought that maybe I should go and see it.
I had this extraordinary experience in the theatre, particularly at the end. There’s this scene where Jean Valjean in sort of passing to the side and the crowd starts singing “The People’s Song” like an echo and I got a complete shiver up my spine and was moved to tears by that moment.
It got me thinking about my dad and the thought that one day he’s going to pass away and how am I going to feel about it. The power of the musical is the way that you connect it to the themes or worries that you have in your own life. You cry for the characters but also for things that you’re thinking about.
Matt: Many would already know that you made the decision for the actors to sing the songs as they’re performing – as opposed to them miming stuff that was recorded in the studio. It’s a great idea but how hard was that in reality? Especially in the action packed scenes where people are running all over the place and there are guns going off?
Tom: It was all about preparing. Filmmakers have experimented with this in the past. Alan Parker in The Commitments did the band songs live. What’s not been done is a sung-through musical live and so there was a great deal of preparation to make this dream come true. There was an amazing collaboration between the people on the crew to make it work.
Matt: I’m thrilled to see two Aussies in leading roles – Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe. Did that take some convincing with the studio? Russell isn’t exactly known for his singing skills.
Tom: I’m half Australian in that my mum is from Adelaide. I cast an Australian playing the English King Edward VIII in The King’s Speech so I’m very open. I don’t need any persuading about how brilliant Australian actors are.
Once you’ve cast Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean and you’re looking for an actor who the audience might believe could crush this guy and getter the better of this guy, it’s a pretty short list. If you’re going to say “who could get the better of Wolverine?” then you can’t help be thinking of Gladiator.
Matt: Yes! That’s well put. How did you come across Eddie Redmayne? I know he’s done theatre before but I didn’t realise he had such a beautiful voice.
Tom: I worked with Eddie about seven years ago making a mini-series called Elizabeth I which starred Helen Mirren and Jeremy Irons. I cast Eddie as a young rebellious aristocrat and it was one of his first screen roles. He was utterly brilliant in this film and I’ve been quite good mates with him ever since. I’ve seen a couple of these plays that he’s done where he’s won a Tony Award and an Olivier Award.
He heard that I was doing Les Misérables and so he recorded himself on an iPhone from a trailer in Texas. He sang “Empty Chairs At Empty Tables” a cappella and sent it in. That’s when I discovered he had this extraordinary voice. I was so thrilled because he’s one of the nicest guys going around and he’s a great actor.
Matt: One of the things that struck me about the film was the cinematography and the close-ups when these actors are performing their solo numbers. We’re are right there in their face and really do feel the emotions that they’re going through. Was that always your intention with that style? The solo with Anne Hathaway was particularly good.
Tom: It’s interesting that you ask that. I didn’t say to Anne “this is one camera, it’s a big close up, there are no cuts, do it one take, action.” From the auditions onwards, I felt I was casting actors were able to “hold the camera” in this way and were able to tell the story and sing these songs using close ups.
When you’re doing a musical the old fashioned way where you’re lip-syncing to playback, I don’t think that any actor would be able to lip-sync perfectly unbroken for 3 minutes. So the way you get around that is to shoot them wider and you keep cutting. Because if you cut then you can slip the sync of the shot and you make the illusion of the sync better. It forces you down a heavily edited route.
When you’re live, there’s no reason to disguise a sync problem because there isn’t one. You can let the camera meditate on the actor and put them right in the centre of it.
Matt: The challenges of adapting a novel into a movie have been well documented and it takes a lot of condensing. How does it work with a musical because Les Misérables the musical is three hours which is similar in length to this film…
Tom: The film is 2 hours, 29 and a half minutes long. I need to say that because I can’t tell you how much I worked to get it down under 2 and a half hours. Some people say it’s almost 3 hours and I go “noooooo, I spent weeks in the cutting room getting it under 2 and a half hours.”
Matt: Was that part of the deal? Did it have to come in under a certain length?
Tom: No. I just felt like I didn’t want it to be a marathon. I wanted it to be something that you’ll go back to again and again. I think 2 and a half hours is a good length for this kind of story. It’s a huge story with a huge number of characters and there’s a lot to pack in but I wanted to make it at a pace that’s entertaining and never drops the ball.
Matt: Did you have to do a bit of trimming from the musical? Cut a few songs and scenes?
Tom: We ended up only having to cut one song from the show which is called “Dog Eat Dog”. As I got to know the musical well, I realised that there were little ways of doing cuts inside songs that were quite stealthy. We managed to save and protect almost all of the music which is fantastic because the music is so great and so loved.
Matt: I’ll finish up by asking one last question - where to from here in the career of Tom Hooper? Have you got another mammoth challenge lined up?
Tom: I think the best thing for me to do would be to sleep. I’ve never worked so hard making a film. I cut my sleep right back to get it done and I worked every, every hour while I was awake. It was a massive, complex film and it’d be nice to stop and rest for a few days.
You can check out my review of the film by clicking here.
Interview - Kodi Smit-McPhee Goes ParaNorman
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Kodi Smit-McPhee is Australian, he’s 16 years old, and he’s worked alongside the likes of Eric Bana, Viggo Mortensen and Chloe Grace Moretz. Once I got over my initial jealously, I had a phone chat with Kodi (who was calling in from Los Angeles) about his life in Hollywood and his role in ParaNorman, a new animated feature that is soon to be released in Australia cinemas (on 10 January 2013).
You canlisten to an extract from the interview by downloading it here.
Anyway, here’s how it went down…
Matt: I remember first seeing you in Romulus, My Father and since then you’ve gone on to do some bigger films like The Road and Let Me In. Where are you based these days – here in Australia or over in the United States?
Kodi: After about three years, it set in that Los Angeles was my second home. I’m here more than in Australia now. I try to get back every few of years and visit for a couple of months to see my friends and family.
Matt: So what’s it like as a 16-year-old living within the hustle and bustle of Hollywood? Is it something you like or is it a bit crazy?
Kodi: It can be crazy sometimes. My family is here which is really good and they give me a lot of support. But I love it here. I’m just doing what I love and as long as I get back to Australia every now and again, it’s all going good.
Matt: Do you hang out with a lot of other actors in Hollywood or do you prefer to stay away from that scene when not making movies?
Kodi: To tell the truth, as a down-to-earth Australian, I try to stay out of that world when I’m not making films. I have some friends who are totally out of the business and that helps keep me grounded.
Matt: Is your schooling finished or are you still trying to balance that up in between movies?
Kodi: No. I’m still trying to do that. I have to do home schooling here because I do quite a bit of travelling. I have to do a few hours every day and juggle that alongside by work.
Matt: Let’s talk about ParaNorman. How’d you get approached about this film and your leading role as the voice of Norman Babcock?
Kodi: I was actually in Australia when they approached me about it. I didn’t know much about the project because it was kind of secretive. I just recorded it, sent it off and found out that I got the job.
I then came over to America and read the script. The company had done films like Coraline so I was blown away by how big this film was going to be. It was such a really good script and I was excited to get to work on it.
Matt: Of course, with an animated film, I realise that a lot of time is spent in the recording studio where you don’t often get to interact with other actors. Was that the case here? Did you see a lot of the other actors in the film?
Kodi: I did. I saw more than I thought I would. When I get to work with people in the recording booth, it’s a lot of fun because the scene becomes alive and you get to interact with someone as opposed to sitting in a dark booth all day by yourself.
Matt: Do you get any say in the look of your character and how he appears on screen or is that all in the hands of the animators?
Kodi: Thankfully, that’s all up to the animators and they do an amazing job. I actually got to go to Oregon one day to see them all working and it’s just insane. It’s something that I could never do and so I thank God that I’m an actor and am not having to compete against those guys.
Matt: Because you spent so much time within a recording studio, what was it like seeing it on the big screen for the first time?
Kodi: I was working on it for 2 years and everyone else was working on it for 4 years. It was really attached to me and so finally seeing it come out and seeing everyone relax was great.
Matt: It’s largely an American film and you have to take on a generic American-type accent. Is that easy for you to do or does it take a lot of practice to get the accent just right?
Kodi: The American accent is actually pretty easy. I learned it when I was 8 years old with the help of a dialect coach when I started to get into acting. Learning it so young, it’s stuck with me now and it’s easy to turn on and off.
Matt: Are you a fan of animated features in general? Did you watch a lot of them growing up?
Kodi: Yeah! I love animation. When they told me I was going to be in a stop-motion animated film, which is one of the rarest forms of animation, it was an awesome feeling.
Growing up, I really liked The Nightmare Before Christmas and James And The Giant Peach. They were two films that I watched repeatedly.
Matt: I’ll finish up by asking about the new version of Romeo & Juliet that is being released in 2013. What can you tell us about that and your role in the film?
Kodi: Yes, I play Benvolio who is Romeo’s cousin. The reason that they are making another Romeo & Juliet is so that there’s something for this generation. It was a lot of fun and I got to shoot it in Rome. I also got to learn horse riding and sword fighting. It was cool experience.
Interview - Christopher McQuarrie On Jack Reacher
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
The first big action release of 2013 is Jack Reacher, based on the novel by Lee Child. You can check out my review by clicking here. Director Christopher McQuarrie was recently in Australia to talk about the film and I was fortunate to speak with him for 10 minutes. It was a very interesting conversation…
You can download the full audio from the interview by clicking here.
Matt: Whenever I hear the name Christopher McQuarrie, the first thing I think about is The Usual Suspects – one of your first ever writing credits. It’s regarded today as one of the best ever movies with a “twist”. When you were writing that script, did you always think it was something special?
Christopher: Not like that, no. There were no expectations whatsoever. Bryan Singer and I made that movie more as an inside joke to ourselves and I don’t think we ever anticipated what it would be today.
Matt: Wow. But it won you an Oscar back in 1996. Was that a big boost to your filmaking career?
Christopher: That was a big boost to my bank account. I got paid more to write movies that I didn’t really want to write about.
Matt: Out of curiosity, where do you keep your Oscar statue?
Christopher: Now I keep it at home but for years my parents had joint custody.
Matt: Trying to break into the film industry, did you always see writing as a transition into directing?
Christopher: Not always. There came a point shortly after The Usual Suspects where there were movies that I wanted to make and I saw them so specifically and I wanted to make them myself. The Way Of The Gun was meant to be the foray into that but unfortunately it didn’t work out that way.
Matt: I was reading that you helped out the script of last year’s Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol but you weren’t listed as one of the film’s final writers. Does that often happen in Hollywood? Are you helping friends out on the side with some of their projects?
Christopher: Yes, all the time. It’s a very strange and cryptic process. Strangely, there’s more of my work in Ghost Protocol than there is in The Tourist and yet I ended up with credit on The Tourist which I didn't pursue credit on and I didn’t end up with credit on Mission: Impossible where I did pursue credit.
Matt: Tom Cruise was involved with Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol and he was also in Valkyrie which you co-wrote the script for back in 2008. You guys must know each other fairly well so how did you first meet?
Christopher: We first met just prior to Valkyrie. It was around the time he’d gone off to reboot United Artists and I had never had a meeting with his company. I suggested on a lark to my manager that we have a meeting with Don Granger who is now the producer on Reacher. A meeting with Don Granger led to a meeting with Paula Wagner which led to a meeting with Tom Cruise.
Matt: Tom Cruise is the star of this film but he’s also one of the producers. How does that relationship work? You’re telling him what to do in front of the camera but then he’s overseeing the whole filmmaking process itself?
Christopher: Yeah, it’s not anything that’s cut and dry. Those are official titles that don’t really explain what the collaborative relationship is between myself, Don and Tom where we all seem to be functioning together as a team.
Matt: And with Cruise being the producer here was he always the man lined up for the role of Jack Reacher or were there other actors in mind?
Christopher: No and in fact, it was quite the opposite. I never expected that to be the case. When the project came to me, I simply assumed that Tom wasn’t going to be in the movie. Given my track record as a director, I really wasn’t expecting to be put on a list with the other directors that he’d worked with. I was actually surprised when he read it in his capacity as a producer and then hear him say that he wanted to do it.
Matt: The most curious casting decision for me was Werner Herzog as the villain. I know him as an Oscar-nominated documentary filmmaker as opposed to an action bad guy. How did he come across your radar?
Christopher: I told Mindy Marin, the casting director, that I wanted someone lesser known to a wider audience. I wanted someone European. I felt that the essence of what would make the character threatening is that he was someone with whom we are not familiar. The first name that she suggested was Werner.
Matt: I love the film’s dialogue-free introduction as we see the crime take place but I was curious about the decision to reveal the identity of the killer early on. Is that how it played out in the book? Or was there thought to keeping it hidden and more of a surprise later on?
Christopher: That’s a great question and you’re the first person who has asked me that. In the book, the identity of the killer is kept secret throughout and it’s ultimately a mystery that Reacher uncovers. The challenge is that Lee Child shows you the crime and of course because he’s writing a book, he doesn’t have to show you the killer’s face. When you’re trying to shoot that same scene, you would have to so clearly hide the killer’s face that it would be obvious that you’re concealing his identity.
We knew very early on that taking that as an element of the book and putting that literally into the movie was going to put a burden on the film. The audience was going to be way ahead of you. They were going to know right from the very beginning that it was a set up. I said to Don Granger that I believe I can only sustain this for about 10 minutes. I don’t think I can sustain this mystery for the whole movie.
Nor do I want to make another movie, having worked on films like The Tourist, where you have to hide someone’s identity the whole time. It’s exhausting and it limits your ability to move from scene to scene. So I decided early on that I was going to reveal that to the audience and conceal it from Reacher.
Interestingly enough, when the film was finished, we cut a version like that. We had the material so I could hide the shooter’s identity and reveal that Barr wasn’t the shooter until late in the movie. With test audiences, that film scored much lower.
Matt: Wow. There’s a great car chase sequence in the film and from the point of view of the guy sitting in the director’s chair, how easy is that to pull off? Does a lot of planning go into a scene like that?
Christopher: Yes, endless planning. There was endless planning on storyboarding and designing and working it out. There was a huge amount because we shot it at night and there were huge lighting concerns. The whole bridge had to be lit, the alleys had to be lit, a helicopter had to be co-ordinated for that sequence.
There’s also the driving and the time that Tom spent on his own, on the days that he wasn’t working, practicing over and over again. He drove every stunt in that car chase.
Matt: The title of the book is One Shot but then the title of the film has been changed to the name of the leading character – Jack Reacher. Is that sort of decision that you as a director get involved with or is more the studio trying to market the film?
Christopher: Yeah, that’s a marketing decision. It’s an alchemy that I don’t really understand and so I leave that up to them.
Matt: I’ll finish up by noting that the Internet Movie Database lists you as a possible writer for Top Gun 2. Is there any truth in that and any chance the film will get off the ground?
Christopher: Whether or not you’ll see the film get off the ground is anyone’s guess. I’m not involved with it though. I was involved in the very early discussions of it and there was some talk that I was going to write it but then Reacher happened and so I went one way and that movie went another.
Matt's Top & Bottom 10 Films Of 2012
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Putting together a “best of the year” list together is always fun. This is the 17th time I’ve done it (first starting back in 1996) and it’s a neat way of summing up the 12 month period. You can check out all my old lists by clicking here.
It’s been another solid year of film-going and I’ve reviewed 191 films in total. That's a little down on prior years but it's due to a smaller number of films being released in Brisbane.
We discussed the lists below on my show on 612ABC and we took feedback from listeners on their own favourites. If you'd like to listen to the podcast, just click here.
WORST FILMS OF 2012
I do need to take care of one chore first. That is, I need to name and shame the worst 10 films of the year. Here they are in reverse order...
10. Taken 2 (released Oct 4) is yeah, um, not good. It should be classed as science-fiction given that Liam Neeson is some kind of clairvoyant. The way in which he reads every situation and eliminates the bad guys (who come complete with foreign accents) is laughable. The Austin Powers movies were more believable. Don't get me started on the dialogue.
9. Alex Cross (released Nov 8) is rubbish. A group of cops try to stop a psycho killer guy and nothing really makes any sense. It contains more holes than a donut shop.
8. The Lucky One (released Apr 19) is a dreadful movie. You should know what to expect from a Nicholas Sparks adaptation (The Notebook, Dear John, The Last Song) but this gives new meaning to the words "contrived" and "manipulative". I'm sorry but I didn't buy it for a second. Zac Efron has talent but someone needs to help him land better roles
7. One For The Money (released Feb 16) is a dreadful action-comedy-whatever starring Katherine Heigl as an unemployed woman who takes a job as a bounty hunter and goes after an ex-cop who skipped bail... and who just so happens to be her first boyfriend. The script is all over the place and I almost fell asleep due to the lack of laughs.
6. Kath & Kimderella (released Sep 6) is for people who have a sense of humour that is the opposite of my own. I based this on the fact that there were plenty of laughs from those around me in the cinema. Sadly, I thought the story was terrible and the jokes dismal.
5. Resident Evil: Retribution (released Sep 13) sucked the life out of me. It features tedious, FX-laden action and god-awful dialogue. This series is going nowhere and needs to be put to death.
4. This Means War (released Feb 16) is terrible. Two CIA agents fall in love with the same girl and use any means necessary to win her affections. Ok, I realise rom-coms aren't my favourite genre but this story is dumb and the characters are morons
3. StreetDance 2 (released Apr 19) was abominable. I've had dental appointments that were more entertaining. The acting was poor, the story was non-existent and the dance sequences do nothing to get the blood pumping
2. Housos Vs Authority (released Nov 1) is a movie spin off of the SBS TV show. I can't remember seeing a film with more F-bombs. Fans of the TV series (whoever you are) can check it out but everyone else can steer clear. Watching the two-minute trailer is bad enough.
1. The Door (released Jul 19) was awful. It stars Helen Mirren as a grumpy maid who lives a secretive, reclusive life. This is a boring story with horrendous supporting performances and bizarre flashback sequences. The year's worst!
BEST FILMS OF 2012
In terms of the best, honourable mentions go to The Perks Of Being A Wallflower, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, The Artist, Tinker Tailor Solider Spy, Young Adult, Moonrise Kingdom, Looper, The Master, Skyfall, Argo and The Intouchables.
However, my top 10 films of 2012 in reverse order are…
10. Beasts Of The Southern Wild (released Sep 13) takes a little while to warm up (such a strange setting) but it develops in a moving story that explores the relationship between father and daughter in a remote community near New Orleans. In her first acting role, 8-year-old Quvenzhané Wallis is simply extraordinary.
9. Jiro Dreams Of Sushi (released May 10) is a scrumptious documentary about an 85-year-old sushi maker from Japan and his unmatched dedication to the craft of sushi making. His restaurant has just 10 seats but has been awarded 3 Michelin stars. If this film doesn't make you hungry, nothing will.
8. The Avengers (released Apr 25) can be simply described as awesome! I don’t know how writer-director Joss Whedon squeezed so much material into the two and a half hour running time. Put simply, it’s one of the best superhero movies ever and excels in terms of three key genres – action, comedy and suspense.
7. The Descendants (released Jan 12) is a beautiful film. Director Alexander Payne (Sideways, Election) again proves his wizardry of mixing both comedy and drama to maximum effect. This is a touching story of a work-a-holic father who reconnects with his two daughters after their mother is badly injured in a boating accident.
6. Take This Waltz (released Jun 14) is a funny, sweet, emotional and real experience. We've seen many films about people cheating on their spouses and whether it's the right thing but I love this level headed perspective from director Sarah Polley. It features yet another amazing performance from Michelle Williams.
5. The King Of Devil's Island (released May 3) is a powerful, affecting film that left me wishing I could jump from my seat and help its suffering characters. It is set in the early 20th Century on a remote island in Norway where a group of troubled boys are subjected a brutal disciplinary regime before being allowed to re-enter society. It's amazing.
4. Searching For Sugar Man (released Oct 4) is a wonderful documentary that looks at the way in which a unknown American musician became a huge star in South Africa in the 1970s. This is superbly told with a strong narrative. It teases you with mystery and then when all is revealed, you'll feel amazed, inspired.
3. Margin Call (released Mar 15) looks at 24 hours in the life of a major investment bank that is on the brink of collapse. Thankfully, the film does not demonise these characters - it portrays them as level-headed human beings who must decide whether to put their own interests ahead of others. The dialogue is superb and writer-director J.C. Chandor deserved his Oscar nomination for best original screenplay.
2. A Separation (released Mar 1) won the Oscar for best foreign language film and now I know why. An outsider could see these characters as deeply flawed. That’s not the reality however. Writer-director Asghar Farhadi slips us into their shoes and we appreciate each of their perspectives. Life is rarely clear-cut and you can’t always rely on a textbook when faced when a tough ethical dilemma.
1. Shame (released Feb 9) is the year’s best film. The story is fascinating in itself but it’s Steve McQueen’s careful direction that gives it a seductive, hypnotic edge. He takes us into the life of a sex addict and there’s very little respite. The lack of editing, curious camera angles and odd choice of music will leave many feeling uncomfortable. It's brilliant filmaking.
If you haven't seen any of the above films (well, excluding the "worst of" list) then make sure you check them out.
That closes the book on 2012 and I look forward to doing it again at this time next year!