Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here.
To know the films of Mike Leigh is to awaken a part of your cinematic soul. For me, it was a realization of just how emotionally charged film could be, especially British film, which I've always loved deeply, but never gotten quite the same emotional response to as I have from the films of Sweden or Denmark or Russia. When I say "emotionally charged," I don't mean the kind of films that will make you cry. Getting an audience to cry is easy. I'm talking about taking characters into you heart and identifying with them so completely that they are like a member of your family (that you actually like) or one of your truest friends.
Leigh's films can be oppressively heavy (NAKED, SECRETS & LIES, ALL OR NOTHING, VERA DRAKE), but he and his inspired stable of actors have also made me laugh a great deal, perhaps no more so than with his latest work, HAPPY-GO-LUCKY, featuring a rousingly fine performance by Sally Hawkins, who has worked with Leigh on two previous films. HAPPY-GO-LUCKY is certainly lighter fare from Leigh, although it's by no means fluff, as Leigh finds all sorts of ways to inject a great deal of real-life drama into the lives of his characters.
Leigh's creative process is a bit of a mystery, as he doesn't put together traditional scripts, but instead spends months with his actors working out each scene and all of the dialogue. Some have called it improvisation, but it's far more fine tuned than that. It's almost like working on a play, getting each word and pause down before the cameras roll. It sounds haphazard, I know, but the results are perfection. There are few filmmakers I have more respect for than Mike Leigh, and you owe yourself a crash course in his works as soon as humanly possible.
As for meeting Leigh, I was doubly nervous because I'd read some previous interviews he's given over the years in which he seemed less than enthused to be interviewed. Or he seemed to be the consummate contrarian. But when actually sitting down to talk with him during the Chicago International Film Festival, I found him far more personable than I'd be led to believe he would be. He's very aware that he's a fine filmmakers; there's little modesty in the room when he's in it. But he's earned that right as a gifted artist. And when he did outright contradict something I said, he still managed to spend five minutes telling me why I was wrong with a conclusion I'd come to. I think that if he feels the question is coming from a place of knowledge, he'll treat it with respect. It was a true honor to meet this man, and I hope those of you who are familiar with his works enjoy this, and those of you who aren't are inspired to check out his films.
Capone: I was actually just in London about three weeks ago. And on plane ride over, they had the movie [HAPPY-GO-LUCKY] as one of the inflight selections. I could have watched it on the plane, and I said, ‘No way.’
Mike Leigh: No, it’s mutilated. And, we had to dump the “fuck”s out and all that stuff. You have to for planes. It’s ridiculous.
Capone: Right. So, I get to London, and I feel strong, I resisted seeing the movie on the plane. And then I step foot in a record store in London, and I see the DVD is already out, and I’m thinking I should just buy it and watch it. But, then, I saw Sally’s [Hawkins] face on the cover, and I said, ‘No, I need to see her big smiling face on the big screen when I see it for the first time.’
ML: Yeah, so you saw it here?
Capone: Yes, I saw it properly. Speaking of big faces, I was going to say that not only do you have a gift for finding these great actors, but they all have these remarkable faces.
ML: Well, I suppose apart from anything else, my natural sense of the real world in which people that look like you and me are real, I’ve got a resistance to conventionally gorgeous people. I think Sally Hawkins is entirely gorgeous, in an unconventional way, you know. So, yeah, that draws me to people that…I mean, I’m mainly concerned with having people that not only can, but enjoy and are brilliant at doing characters like the people out there on the street.
Capone: Yeah. Your films always have a real-life quality to them, which sounds silly when you say it, because movies have real people in them, and…
ML: …are supposed to do that.
Capone: Yeah, but very few people actually try to make it feel like the real world. The actor who plays Tim [Samuel Roukin] is maybe one of the best-looking guys you’ve ever had in one of your movies, conventionally good looking.
ML: Yeah, and he’s got a good chest as well, which she likes. [Laughs] Yeah, I know, that is true.
Capone: And, speaking of that--not his chest--but the real-like aspects of your work, you tend to make--with the exception of the Gilbert & Sullivan film [TOPSY-TURVY]--you tend to make films about people that don’t have films made about them, ever.
ML: Yes. And actually, to tell you the truth, the whole point of that film was indeed to make a film about the likes of Gilbert and Sullivan in a way that they wouldn’t normally have a film made about them.
Capone: Yeah, it’s not a career biopic. It’s just this one production, during which they could barely stand the sight of the other one.
ML: It also looks at them in a real way. I love…I don’t know if you’ve ever done it, but it’s great fun to actually, pound for pound, take it and compare it with THE STORY OF GILBERT AND SULLIVAN by [producer Frank] Launder and [director/writer Sidney] Gilliat from 1953…It’s just hilarious.
Capone: Can you start at the beginning of the process of creating Poppy and her story.
ML: Well, I mean, apart from the fact that I just had a sense of the spirit of the film…that was my starting point, in a way. And I, of course, decided along with that that it was about time I worked with Sally, who was in both the previous films. I just gave her center stage. I knew she’s got to do it. And then, we set about doing what I always do with actors, which is to collaborate with them, working just very one on one. I can’t--and won’t--tell you how we go about the art of what we do, but the job is to just create this. So, I’m not quite sure how to answer the question.
Capone: I guess I wonder was there an idea, for example, something as simple as wanting to talk about a teacher?
ML: No, not at all. We came to that as we got to the stage of her life as it developed, when we were deciding what direction she was going. And then, that connected up with some ongoing preoccupations I have about teaching and education and learning and stuff.
But, no, you see, I remind you that I do discover what my films are by embarking on the journey of life with them. It’s an ongoing thing. So, I can’t really answer the question you’re asking me, because, in the end, what it adds up to and boils down to is that for six months I was closeted away with a whole pile of actors and talking to the cinematographer and the designers while that was going on, so that at the end of that time, we’d get out there on location, and I could make a film up as I went along. And, that is what happens, basically.
Capone: You say you make it up as you go along, but it is in its own way a very finely tuned instrument.
ML: There’s nothing about the statement ‘I make it up as I go along’ that suggests it isn’t all of that. I mean, you know, every painting, every novel, every play, every piece of sculpture, every piece of music comes as a result of consideration and preparation and also making it up as you go along.
I mean, all art is a sense of improvisation and order. That’s how art works. I mean, on a particular Wednesday at 25 to three, after a heavy lunch, Leonardo DaVinci put a particular dot on the eye of a well-known painting of a young lady, which just gave her that special smile. But, if he’d had a different lunch, or it had happened in the morning at a quarter to eight, it would have been different.
Capone: I guess that’s true.
ML: No, it’s not, really. Don’t believe it, it’s bullshit. [Laughs]
Capone: It’s interesting, seeing Eddie Marsan in the film. Americans probably don’t realize it, but they have seen him in more things than…
ML: …they realize.
Capone: I just saw him in SIXTY SIX a couple of months ago. And, he was very good in that.
ML: Yes, he’s not quite as good in that as he is in [HAPPY-GO-LUCKY]. It’s not a very good film.
Capone: The driving lesson sequences felt like they could almost have been in their own film. I would have watched that film.
ML: You say that, but really, I have to say--I know what you mean--but the reason why they have any meaning…if you took them, if you only saw them, then you would misread Poppy completely. It’s only because you know that she’s actually a focused and responsible, intelligent and mature person, only in that context of how she really is that you can understand and decode the way she particularly behaves in the earlier driving lessons.
Capone: Sometimes her personality and her charm and her laughter…
ML:…and her sense of humor
Capone:…are as much a boundary as they are a warm aspect to her. Sometimes, I even think that it makes us uncomfortable, watching her laugh at everything. But, you can’t help but be charmed by her in the end. But about the driving lesson sequence was that anyone who goes into the film thinking this is some sort of lighthearted fare is in for a real shock when they get to those scenes.
ML: I agree and, indeed, other scenes, too. There are plenty. The idea that it’s a jolly old film about happiness is a piece of PR crap. Actually, it’s called HAPPY-GO-LUCKY because you’ve got to call the film something, and it evokes an atmosphere. But, the truth of the matter is that it’s not about a woman who is happy. It’s about a woman who is concerned with being fulfilled. And, that comes out of a commitment to life and an empathy, the ability to be sympathetic and nonjudgmental, and all of those things, you know.
Capone: The scene in the film where she thinks that the one child is being abused somehow, that’s Poppy as a professional. We see her as a professional there, maybe for the first time. She’s good with the kids, and it’s a different Poppy than we see with her friends. But, that scene adds a dimension to her that I am glad is there.
ML: Well, you’re glad it’s there, but actually, it’s inevitably there, because it is dealing with the whole…The objective of the film is to induct you to the complete Poppy file. That’s a central part of what and how she is. It’s inevitable.
Capone: There have been films in the last couple of years from Romania. I know you’re a filmmaker who likes to watch films, too. Are you following those, because there are some more recent ones that remind me of your work.
ML: The one that I particularly liked, which I’m sure is what you’re talking about, is THE DEATH OF MR. LAZARESCU.
Capone: That is one of them, yes.
ML: That’s a great film.
Capone: Yeah, and even 4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS AND 2 DAYS that came out last year.
ML: Yeah, obviously.
Capone:…I know that people were drawing comparisons to VERA DRAKE.
ML: Sure, but that’s an obvious comparison they would draw--a comparison, even if it were a different kind of film, just because of the abortionist.
Capone: Sure, but, I was curious if you had been following them, because they’re some of the best films I’ve seen lately.
ML: Oh, yeah, for sure, yeah, yeah. But that film, THE DEATH OF MR. LAZARESCU, which I’ve seen several times. In fact, when it was running in London at the screening at the Institute of Contemporary Arts, I actually took several people including Sally Hawkins to see it, because I thought it was such a great movie.
Capone: Poppy is also one of the hardest-to-read characters that I’ve seen you portray before. I think a lot of the characters I’ve seen in your films before are more emotional beings--not that she isn’t--but whatever emotion she is feeling is often masked in her laughter and her sense of humor. It’s wonderful, because it forces you to pay attention to the nuances in the performance and spot those moments when she might just crack a little.
ML: Yes, it’s interesting you say that. Maybe, that’s right. Whatever else you can say about her, the character Poppy, she’s not hiding anything. I’ve been asked by various people about whether there are dark secrets or whether she’s in denial. All I can say is that if that were the case, then the responsibility of the film, being what it is, is you would know that, because there would be no point in its being there, if you didn’t know about it. And, there isn’t. I think she’s very, very upfront and very connected with herself and connects with her feelings. But, she has a sense of humor, you know. She is a funny woman. She has a great sense of irony. I think what is defeating some American critics is that she’s too ironical for them.
Capone: It takes a while to get used to, but I actually loved it. I thought it was terrific. Speaking of hidden secrets, though, I was curious whether the level of rage that Scott eventually reaches by the end of the film…Did you leave that to the actor to see how far he wanted to take that?
ML: No, you can’t make up this kind of film, where you just leave it to the actor to see how far he wants to take it. That’s a ridiculous question.
Capone: [Laughs]
ML: No, I mean, it’s a very, very sophisticated and highly modulated operation. It’s the storytelling, and my responsibility is to get that right. Of course, it’s all about creating situations for the actor to explore, and first, then, to work with it and to arrive at it with me, of course.
But, in terms of the guy, the character we’ve created, I mean, the guy is in a state! I mean, he’s a very angry person, because he’s so isolated. He’s frustrated. He’s got all this bullshit going around inside his head, which he doesn’t understand. And, then, he’s got this obsession with this woman--obviously, that’s very clear, he’s obviously fallen in love with her. He goes and starts stalking her, and then, he’s in denial about it. He’s persuaded himself that she did not see him following her, but obviously, he was there. She knows he was there, she saw him, we saw him there. And, when he says, “You had no intention of learning to drive. You took these lessons with one object in mind, and that was to rein me in.” Only a deranged, paranoid person could have such a ridiculous assumption. Then, he’s saying to her, “You have to be adored.” It’s rubbish, it’s not her thing at all. But, he’s in a wry old state, and he’s frustrated. So, we really explored that and modulated it.
Capone: He’s great. It’s one of the best things I’ve ever seen him do.
ML: Yeah, I know, it is the best thing he’s done. And, he would tell you himself. He felt very stretched by it. He’s a tremendous actor, he’s great.
Capone: I’ve talked with a few actors, British actors, who have come over here are mostly during American films now. They told me that the state of the British film industry is almost nonexistent, but you obviously have entrenched yourself in it and don’t seem to have any interest in doing anything but making these movies in the UK Is what they say partly true, or is it exactly true?
ML: Yeah, it’s partly true.
Capone: Frustratingly so?
ML: It is. It is true. The number of movies that…(a) The number of movies made out of the UK are way too few and far between, apart from anything else, given the existence of the infrastructure in the industry. There are too many unemployed industry workers at any given moment, and I’m not just talking about actors. Actors can always in the end go do plays and television and radio plays. But, (b) what compounds that situation is the endemic disease of genuflecting towards Hollywood, which is not so much a matter of working with studios and whatever. In the end, even HAPPY-GO-LUCKY was funded by Summit Entertainment in L.A., without any interference, which was great.
But, it’s that the form of so-called producing invented by the founding fathers, by Louis B. Mayer and David O. Selznick and whoever, which is hands-on producing, i.e., interfering producing, i.e., messing-things-up producing, is a disease in the British cinema. So that young filmmakers, particularly, can’t explore freely. They’re constantly being inhibited by committees of people that have no idea what they’re talking about, basically. I speak as someone who has managed to avoid that, by definition, by walking away from any situation that threatened to be that situation, which meant turning down money on occasion.
So, you talk to actors who make it 'across the pond,' as they would call it, to work in Hollywood. It’s a natural enough and fair enough thing for people to do, and, indeed, some artists that I’ve worked with have done that and continue to do so. It’s kind of inevitable. But, the fact is, some of us, I, Ken Loach, Stephen Frears, though he’s very successful--he made some films, particularly THE GRIFTERS, this side of the water--are committed to a British industry and films not only of the industry, but films that come out of our world. And, that’s very important.
Capone: I’ve heard similar things said about the current American independent scene, that it’s shrinking.
ML: Yeah, well, I think that’s right. I’m sure that’s right, I know it’s right. In the end, it’s about not compromising and about sticking to what you believe in. I would say this, and I’m out of order in saying this, I suppose, but I think there’s not a British actor who’s come to Hollywood who could not have made the choice to stay in the UK and to work in the UK, if they wanted to.
Capone: They could not?
ML: Sorry, let me put that less ambiguously. Every actor who has gone to Hollywood from the UK had the choice and could have stayed in the UK to do theater, film, television, or radio work. But, people say they want to be in the movies. Fine, that’s cool.
If what went on in Hollywood was rich and profound and wonderful and brilliant and commensurate with the intelligence of some of these people and the sort of thing they should be doing, then I’d say ‘Fine! Great!’, but it never is. I mean, it’s Hollywood movies, basically. And so, what I’m saying, is for all that they may say that, when they get gigs in Hollywood and it’s not happening in the UK, the question is whether it’s happening in Hollywood either, really.
Capone: True enough. Current movie landscape: What have you seen in the last year or so that you’ve really admired?
ML: I hate these questions.
Capone: I’m sorry! [Laughs]
ML: No, it's only because I break out in instant amnesia. Well, missing out other films from elsewhere…The new film I’ve seen most recently, which is a masterpiece and a ‘must,’ if you haven’t actually seen it, is [writer/director] Jan Troell’s latest film, EVERLASTING MOMENTS. Do you know what I’m talking about?
Capone: No.
ML: Jan Troell is a 78-year-old Swedish filmmaker, whose work I’m sure you’re familiar with. He made that pair of films, THE EMIGRANTS and THE NEW LAND with Max von Sydow and Liv Ullmann. Anyway, it’s a masterpiece. It’s a great, great, great movie. But, you’re asking me about Hollywood films…
Capone: Well, not necessarily. I was actually going to say, ‘Anything off the beaten path would also be fair game.'
ML: Well, I suppose ‘that’ is that. Look, I was a great fan of both THERE WILL BE BLOOD and NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, I have to say. Great stuff, you know. I kept seeing the trailer for JUNO, and I kept thinking, This is terrible, I do not want to see this film. And, someone said to me, “Ignore the trailer. Go see the film.” And, I have to say, I thought it was great.
Capone: Good.
ML: But, I didn’t agree with a lot of stuff about…that it was immoral that she gave the baby away. That’s what kids have to do. It was healthy.
I can’t remember. The trouble is, I’ve seen lots of films, I just can’t think what I’ve seen. I’ve spent four weeks traipsing around here and, apart from anything else, Wednesday night this week was the first night of the London Film Festival. And, I am unprecedentedly missing the first few days of the London Film Festival, where they give me a free ticket, and I go see massive movies. I will resume this annual movie fest the middle of next week.
Capone: Okay, then you’ll have more to forget the next time we meet. Thank you very much for talking to us.
ML: Sure. Thank you very much. Good to talk to you.
-- Capone
capone@aintitcoolmail.com
