Sam Mendes Talks AWAY WE GO With Mr. Beaks!

And now, the lighter side of Sam Mendes... After composing an emotionally exhausting symphony of marital discord in last year's REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, the Academy Award-winning director of AMERICAN BEAUTY has toned down the acrimony and, with screenwriters Dave Eggers and Vendela Vida, tapped out the filmic equivalent of a pleasing little pop ballad about a man and a woman darting around North America in search of an ideal city in which to raise their soon-to-be-born first child. The movie, AWAY WE GO, is a welcome change of pace for Mendes. There's nothing or no one disintegrating here - just a couple of offbeat thirtysomethings trying to find happiness on their own reasonable terms. Sure, there's disappointment lurking on the periphery, but it's the kind people endure, not succumb to. The difference in tone is noticeable right away. Unlike Alan Ball's spiteful Burnhams or Richard Yates's trapped-and-desperate Wheelers, Burt (John Krasinski) and Verona (Maya Rudolph) aren't adversaries. They're partners. And while they're confused and uncertain as they set out on their adventure (which is spurred on by a remarkably thoughtless gesture on the part of Burt's parents), no matter what goes wrong or how out of whack the world seems, they know they've got each other. As Mendes says in the below interview, he found the Eggers/Vida screenplay to be something of an "answer" to REVOLUTIONARY ROAD. Though Burt and Verona couldn't be more unlike the couple in that unsettling film, the journey they undertake is the Wheelers' scuttled trip to France. As they bounce around from Denver to Phoenix to Madison to Montreal and so on, their preconceived notions of child-rearing are consistently challenged by friends and family. Sure, some of these new ideas - particularly those offered up by Verona's brassy former co-worker Lily (played to the someone-strangle-her hilt by Allison Janney) - are utterly useless, but Burt and Verona are still getting a valuable (if frightening) glimpse into the madness of parenthood. They're also learning not only what it's going to take to raise a child in this strange new world, but what it's going to take to stay together as life does its unpredictable, sometimes heartbreaking thing. This could've been heavy stuff, but Eggers and Vida come at the material like a latter-day (if slightly more introspective) Henry and Phoebe Ephron. And while Mendes may still traffic in meticulously-staged shots, he's a little less precious with how he packs the frame. This allows his actors to feel a little more comfortable in the environment, which results in his all-around best-performed film to date - and that's saying something considering Mendes's facility with directing actors. Aside from Krasinski, Rudolph and Janney, Mendes elicits top-notch work from his entire ensemble, which includes Maggie Gyllenhaal, Catherine O'Hara, Jeff Daniels, Carmen Ejogo, Josh Hamilton, Paul Schneider, Jim Gaffigan and Melanie Lynskey. I've been an admirer or Mendes's ever since I saw David Leveaux's Broadway production of Tom Stoppard's THE REAL THING (which Mendes revived as the Artistic Director of the Donmar Warehouse), starring Steven Dillane and Jennifer Ehle, in 2000, so I was thrilled to get the opportunity to talk with him during the press junket a few weeks ago. Though he was having a rough morning when he called (his beloved football club, Arsenal, had just lost 3-1 to Chelsea), we actually had a rather lively conversation about the similarities between AWAY WE GO and REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, his perceived lack of an "auteur" identity, his love of Kubrick and Ashby, the brilliance of Ellen Kuras, and much more. Here's our back-and-forth in its unexpurgated glory...

Mr. Beaks: Is it just a coincidence that you followed up REVOLUTIONARY ROAD with AWAY WE GO, or did you feel like you had to do a film about a healthy marriage after that?

Sam Mendes: It's not a coincidence at all. I didn't feel I had to do a film about a healthy marriage. But the movie, when I read it, seemed almost like an answer to REVOLUTIONARY ROAD. It was just so wonderful to read something about a loving relationship in which all the cliches of romantic comedy were avoided. This was a totally different kind of -- it's not really a romantic comedy in the sense that it treats the two central characters almost as one person. It establishes that they love each other very early on, and instead of turning them to face each other, it turns them outward to face the world. So it's more of a road movie, in a way, than it is about their relationship. They are just a happy couple. But the parallels to REVOLUTIONARY ROAD are kind of obvious if you look at it. It's a couple who want to take control of their lives and change their lives - and they do! It's a couple that wants to stay in love, and instead of being torn apart, they become more in love. It is the flip-side of the same coin in a way. A journalist pointed this out to me the other day, and I hadn't even noticed it. He said, "All your movies are about a central character or characters who want to change their lives in some way; they're lost, and they're trying to find a way through." That is actually true, and I was very struck by that. It's not just [REVOLUTIONARY ROAD and AWAY WE GO]; in a way, all of the movies are about people who are lost and want to take control of their lives. JARHEAD even. With Swofford... he's lost, and the Marines give him a sense of direction, and he tries to find his way through.

Beaks: That's interesting, because in an interview earlier this year, you resisted any kind of auteur identity being applied to your work. You said there would be no identifiable "Mendes-ian" style. But I also know that you're a big fan of Kubrick, and that you like to watch his films because it reminds you how few shots you need to make a great movie. Your movies bear this out. So that sounds almost auteurist to me, like someone who's very aware of his aesthetic.

Mendes: Well, when I was talking about the Auteur Theory, I was talking about it as a stylistic unity. And I don't believe that I try to pull everything I do towards a very particular style that unifies my work. If anything, I feel like the five movies are stylistically all very different. ROAD TO PERDITION is very operatic, JARHEAD is all hand-held, and [AWAY WE GO] is very loose and soft around the edges and has a level of simplicity that those other films don't aspire to. I feel like I'm trying to test myself with different styles in making films. I feel that the great danger of filmmaking is once you find something that works, you stick to it; it's like a safety zone, and you get into habits. On [AWAY WE GO], I worked with a whole new set of people: a new cinematographer, a new production designer, editor... everybody. I didn't even work with my usual composer. There wasn't a single person who worked on this movie that had worked on my previous film. I just wanted to shock myself out of any habits I might be falling into. Thematically, there are lots of things that link my films. I'm obviously drawn to some of the same issues. But I don't think that's what's being referred to when you talk about a filmmaker being an "auteur". And loving and respecting and admiring Kubrick's work doesn't make me want to make a movie like Kubrick. Otherwise, I would try to. And probably fail. (Laughs) It's just that what Kubrick always shows you - and there are other people, like, particularly in the case of this movie, Hal Ashby - is an economy of means. How to tell stories with great simplicity and yet achieve genuine power. I think the default position of a lot of directors - and this is a danger that you can fall into - is to do twenty setups per scene, and then make it in the cutting room. I don't adhere to that as a filmmaking technique: it takes too long, and it doesn't demand enough of you before you make the film. It's an easy, sloppy way of making a film. And I think what Kubrick reminds you is that you should think harder what your shot is; you should try to create a frame that can sustain an audience's interest without having to cut. And there are contemporary filmmakers who do this. I bow down to Paul Thomas Anderson or David Fincher, for example. They do think about the way they compose shots, and they compose them with an incredible beauty, simplicity and grace. I mean, it's not like I have to just look at Kubrick; I look around at my contemporaries and peers. Spike Jonze does it, too. And Steven Soderbergh when he chooses to - though he's not always working in that mode. It's possible to find it these days.

Beaks: That's great. I'm always thrilled when a director reminds us that a single shot has such great value.

Mendes: Exactly.

Beaks: And since you brought up Ashby, there's a mood evoked in AWAY WE GO that is very Ashby-esque. You use a singer-songwriter [Alexi Murdoch] to score your film, and the tone of it is just familiar enough. Did you make a conscious decision to infuse this film with Ashby's spirit?

Mendes: Well, you know, I should be so lucky. (Laughs) If we could all just take a little bit of that Ashby spirit, put it in a syringe and inject it into our movies, the world would be a better place. He makes it look insanely easy, and the truth is it's the absolute opposite. To make a movie that is as sweet and dark simultaneously as HAROLD AND MAUDE, or a road movie that so effortlessly creeps up on you as THE LAST DETAIL, and to never seem to be reaching for anything: that's a genuine gift. I watch his movies for pleasure, but I did watch a couple [before AWAY WE GO] just to remind me... how well he uses music. But I'd always wanted to do a movie in which the songs were a character in it, and the obvious ones - from HAROLD AND MAUDE to THE GRADUATE to MAGNOLIA - were influences. I had tried to do it a little bit on AMERICAN BEAUTY, but then realized I needed a score. I half-expected to go the same route on this movie, but it turned out the songs were enough. Once I talked to Alexi and got him in, he wrote three other songs for the movie and changed the instrumentation on a couple of numbers so they would fit under scenes; when it became possible to get him involved on a composer level as well as a songwriter level, then it all started to work.

Beaks: You've talked about trying to take a looser approach with AWAY WE GO. It is a little softer, as you said, but how loose can you really allow yourself to get? The shots in this film are still very carefully composed, and, overall, it's very... well-wrought.

Mendes: It's not sloppy. "Loose" is my term for letting characters exist in their space, within the frame, and playing around on set; being a little more improvisatory and open to chance, and a little less clinical and detailed. I felt like making REVOLUTIONARY ROAD was like trying to thread a needle everyday; there was a kind of microscopic intensity that was necessary to render the material - because also you were working off a piece of source material that is one of the most detailed portraits of marriage ever written. So you were testing yourself against that everyday. Here, I just wanted it to feel less inflected and less like we were telling the audience what to think or feel at any given time. That's sort of what I mean. But, yes, I'm always going to take care with composing my shots; I'm always going to make sure it looks and feels good for me. But I set a premium on beauty in certain of my movies, and care very much, shot to shot, what everything looks like; I felt a level of beauty and painterliness was necessary in most of my movies. Here, I didn't set such a high premium on it. Also, I wanted to move fast. I wanted to keep the energy going amongst the performers, We didn't have very much money, and I thought I should turn that to my advantage with the movie, and let that lead to a quicker and more fun way of shooting - and less concerned with "Oh, look, there's something in the background at the edge of the frame." On this, I wasn't going to worry about moving it; it was just going to be there. Normally, I would spend hours trying to make sure that everything was exactly as I wanted, and I didn't on this.

Beaks: You just mentioned the back of the frame, so I have to bring this up. There's a shot in this movie that really brought the house down when I saw it. It's the scene when they're in the parking lot at the dog track, and, as John and Maya are talking to Alison Janney in the foreground, Janney's young daughter is in the background talking to these guys who've just pulled up in a pickup truck. It's not stated what's going on there, but there is something truly disconcerting and hilarious about this. Was that in the script? How did that come about?

Mendes: (Laughing) I'm so pleased you mentioned that! It's one of my favorite shots in the movie! It sort of creeps up on you like a cancer, you know what I mean? It spreads out over the screen like some sort of disease. "What's happening over there?" Some people don't notice it, so I'm glad you were with an intelligent audience who spotted it. Basically, Dave and Vendela had written that we cut away to reveal at the end of the scene, after having lectured Burt and Verona about how to be a good parent, that [Janney's] fourteen-year-old daughter was about to be picked up by two incredibly sinister-looking guys in a pickup truck. And I just thought it was more interesting to do it in the same shot, to have those two things running simultaneously if I could. So I set it up and it seemed to work. I'm very pleased with that shot, I'm glad you mentioned it. (Laughs)

Beaks: (Laughing) We're getting a glimpse into her future.

Mendes: Exactly. (Laughs) But it's also a serious point. Throughout the movie, there are different philosophies of parenting, and in the next scene Burt is saying to Verona, "You don't agree with it, do you? That all kids are programmed coming out of the womb predetermined as to what their future is going to be?" And Verona says, "No, I don't. I really hate that idea that everybody is broken, so why don't we just break it again and again and again." The thing about the film is that it creeps up on its serious points. It is making points about parenting. It is making points about what constitutes a family and how you find your true home. But it does it in a way that's not front-and-center, and I admire that about the script. And I felt like that shot is a kind of microcosm of what the movie is doing: in the foreground is a funny scene in which she's saying "Don't have cellphones, your kids will be fine, it's all predetermined, it doesn't matter what kind of parent you are, they're going to turn out how they decide..." and in the background, there's the daughter proving the absolute opposite. If her mother had her eyes open, she'd be rescuing her.

Beaks: So is the shot of Burt and Verona on the mechanical walkway a conscious homage to THE GRADUATE?

Mendes: Basically, yeah. Mike [Nichols] is a friend of mine, and... you can't be unaware that there is a very famous moving walkway shot in one of the great movies of the twentieth century. But I also, again, thought of it in a wider sense. The tradition of the road movie is looking out the window of moving cars with all these POV shots of buildings moving past. The world moves, and they're moving through the world. Whereas here, I liked the idea of keeping them still and watching the world move behind them, kind of like one of those old vaudeville things where the landscape moves and people are walking on the spot. We do that again and again in the film; they're sitting still on a train, but the world moves behind them through the window. And again in the plane. And I like that feeling that they weren't moving necessarily; they were held still against the moving world. So there was that idea there, too. It wasn't just an homage to Mike, to a hero and a great movie. But I was aware of it.

Beaks: Your cinematographer, Ellen Kuras, is an incredibly talented artist, but I feel like she hasn't quite gotten her due. And this is probably the most beautifully shot thing she's ever done.

Mendes: Oh, good! I'm so pleased you said that. I agree she hasn't got her due. The reason I know her is because Kate and she worked together on ETERNAL SUNSHINE [OF THE SPOTLESS MIND], which I felt was an amazing piece of cinematography. And watching her work when I visited the set a couple of times was really wonderful. She's very instinctive. It's like having another performer on set - particularly when she's operating hand-held, which she didn't do very much in this movie. She's an amazing operator, but she's also an amazing human being; she's a very warm, very funny, effusive person. The crew adores her, and she'll go anywhere for them. The feeling that she engenders on set - of warmth and fun - really affects the way you make the film. It changes the atmosphere on set, and brings people out of themselves. That was very good for me, and it was very good for everybody there. And on top of that, she's hugely skilled and all the things you expect a great cinematographer to be. She's very aware of light and what emotional effect you get at certain times of the day. There's a lot of exterior cinematography, and we tried to go for something soft and... kind of beige. We also had a wonderful production design by Jess Gonchor, who managed to create different atmospheres; always having people live in real environments and not making it look like the production design for a movie. I was also concerned with characters living in houses they actually could afford to live in as opposed to... houses that are constructed for movies. I wanted to shoot on location in real interiors and not oversize things. And the two of them together created a color palette in Phoenix; we shot at magic hour, and then we go to Madison and it's sort of crisp, fresh spring light. You suddenly have greens and blues, and have this early morning light kind of feeling. We tried to shoot exteriors at different times of the day to give different feelings to the places. It was very important to me that we didn't patronize the locations. In other words, we didn't go, "Who would want to live in Phoenix? Who would want to live in Madison?" We tried to find the beauty as well as the ugliness, to try and find something that expressed those places in two or three simple shots, but that didn't load the dice against any of them. I thought Ellen did that brilliantly, and that Jess found those places with great skill.

Beaks: I know we've gone into overtime here, but I have to say that one of the most amazing nights of theater I ever experienced was your production of Tom Stoppard's THE REAL THING with Stephen Dillane and Jennifer Ehle. Just your understanding of Stoppard, and particularly that play; it had always been considered a tricky play, and very difficult to pull off, and I thought you just nailed it. So I wonder if you've ever considered doing the play as a film, and, if not, just collaborating with Stoppard on a movie in general?

Mendes: I've always been shy of turning plays into movies. I think the reason they're good plays... what makes a good play is the opposite of what makes a good movie. The pivotal scenes in THE REAL THING are all very, very long, static, talky scenes. I think in movie terms it would be very static and kind of uninvolving. And the moment you "open it up" - that dreaded phrase! - and take it outside, it loses some of its contained power. So I never thought about that. Stoppard as a screenwriter is fantastic, and I would absolutely love to collaborate with Tom. He just wrote the translation for the new version of THE CHERRY ORCHARD, which I directed at BAM and is now in London, and that was a lovely experience to have him in the room and around again after that time. I was reminded again, in addition to being one of the great living writers of any sort, let alone a playwright, what a lovely man he is. He loves movies, too. So I would absolutely love to. In fact, you might've encouraged me to pick up the phone and call him. (Laughs)

Beaks: (Laughing) That's all I'm asking!

Mendes: It's a done deal! It's done!

Beaks: Mission accomplished! I think I just need to see that production of THE REAL THING again.

Mendes: Oh, it was a wonderful production and very happy, happy time.

I actually think THE REAL THING would work splendidly as a filmed play. You certainly wouldn't need too many shots to make it great. But any Stoppard collaboration will do. AWAY WE GO opens in limited release this Friday, June 5th. Go see it! Faithfully submitted, Mr. Beaks