I have to race back downtown to catch Slumdog Millionaire, so this will be posted in two parts. Enjoy.
--------------------------
H-E: One of the things that struck me the most last night in your introduction was about the paternal relationship and how that's something that the two of you connected with, you and Josh. How do you think it is that it comes off to people who aren't really addressing that relationship or have avoided that--
James Cromwell: The father and the son relationship? Very few people I know have not addressed it at some point. For some it's more difficult than others...it depends on what's happened. I still have issues in my life about my father, I've internalized them. Of course it's never the other person. [In the film] it's not so much Poppy [George Sr.]. Poppy is the creation of W., and that creation contains within it the limitations of the child's ability to understand the circumstances the father has found himself in, and interpret the behavior of the father in a way to express the love that the father has for the son rather than his judgment and condemnation. So Poppy represents, it's interesting--
H-E: He's less a person than a construct.
JC: Exactly, that's right. The construct that he, that W. has created inside, so ultimately you begin to jettison that as you get a little older through your empathy and understanding begin to understand that they have lives and they have motivation that maybe you don't understand. As I said last night those three processes of [1] confronting the father when the father makes demands that you can't live up to, basically to stand your ground as a man. Then the second one is to exceed them in whatever you do, you know with gentleness of course but not to hold back. I held back from directing I think even subconsciously, and I've loved to direct, I've always enjoyed directing. It's funny. You know, I see young people, you know, ones who aren't even very good sometimes who are making a living doing it, and I still hold back from doing it and I give myself all these excuses for why I shouldn't be doing it.
It's basically because that was his arena and not mine and I don't wanna go there. Maybe that changes at some point, it's getting a little late, but that's all right.
Then the last one is to be the father to the father, forgive him. We all go through that.
H-E: In terms of the production of the film itself, at what point were you folded into the mix. Who had been put on the film by the time you came on?
JC: I don't think there was anybody attached other than Josh at that point. [Stone] knew there were two thematic lines, and that's the relationship between the father, the formative part of W, and then the political machinations which would involve a variety of people filling smaller parts that would amplify the character of W.
H-E: So you were involved extremely early on.
JC: I was the second one. I think he had offered it to a number of people, you know. Always try to attach somebody ho helps you raise the financing. If it had been Warren Beatty or Harrison Ford, it would have been much easier for him.
H-E: [laughs] I think it would have been a much...more strange movie.
JC: Yeah, and whether he was serious about that or not, Josh chose me and said to him, "you should look at Jamie Cromwell" and [Stone] went "ehhh" and [Josh] said "nonono, see him." I saw him and he wanted to see me again and I refused to go see him again. I thought you saw me the one time, you're not gonna get anything different from me, it's not gonna change--
H-E: You don't get two first dates.
JC: Nah, you don't get two first dates, and you know, I'm glad it worked out the way it did, really.
H-E: Like I said to you before, it's a really fascinating film that if people give it a chance, and I think that they will, they'll be quite pleased. One of the important things I think you brought up last night is that the studios seem to be absolutely convinced that "no one wants to see a movie about politics or world events" these days. I think there's some credence to the idea people don't want to go see them the way they're advertised, the way they're promoting them. This film is the crossover point, I think.
JC: Yeah, there are two dilemmas I think. One is the conservatism and cowardice of the industry as a whole or any industry, which of course, because they're beholden to large multinational corporations to make a return on the product they produce. So, the bean-counters and the analysts look at the marketplace and see what's working and what doesn't and extrapolate what you should and should not invest in. On the other hand, I'm not sure America is really ready to take a very probing look at its responsibility and culpability for what has happened, especially in the War in Iraq. I mean it's fine to blame it on Bush, we don't wanna look at why that war was created as a necessity to maintain the lifestyle that we take for granted...that we would be highly unwilling to give up, that as a people, we may be forced to give up. They're conservative and at the same time, whoever makes the film. Elah, In the Valley of Elah--
H-E: The Tommy Lee Jones film.
JC: Yeah, Josh was in that too. Winderful film, and I thought what's not to like about this film, it's accurate. he took it from actual cases and he combined them together. Horrible things were happening on bases, marital violence, murders, guys cting out, guys who didn't know about Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder...we're now seeing this happening on all over, and it's going to get increasingly worse. It had a wonderful lead performance, got an Academy award nomination, a great script...why didn't it make it? Why didn't they push the film? When you read the review today in the paper, and it says "Josh Brolin gives a credible performance, this film breaks no new ground, those who've come to see--" shit no. Is that a liberal writing about the condemnation he wished he'd seen in the film. Is this a guy on the right who really wants to condemn the film but can't do it with faint praise? Hopefully, that will not dissuade anyone from seeing it.
--------------------------
Part 2 is on its way as we delve into the transforming landscape of distribution, politics, and various other things. Stay tuned.