HomeHome
 
Movie Reviews Cast & Credits VideoHound Lists News Award Winners Blog Store My VideoHound
Home
Interviews
Interviews
Interviews 
August 5, 2010
Interview with Todd Solondz, director of Life During Wartime
Posted by CoolerKing in Interviews
If you’ve seen any of his films – Welcome to the Dollhouse, Happiness, Palindromes, Storytelling, or the new Life During Wartime – then you have probably formed an opinion about writer/director Todd Solondz. You may think he’s a deeply intellectual filmmaker and you’d be right. In person, he is one of the most in-depth interview subjects I’ve spoken to in years. You might think he’s “weird” and he’s certainly admittedly left-of-center. His speech pattern and mannerisms are unlike most people you know and it almost feels like a personality trait taken to distinguish himself even further from the rest of the world. You may think he’s a misanthrope and, well, we’ll get to that. Solondz’s newest film Life During Wartime is a quasi-sequel to Happiness with an entirely new cast exploring the themes of the first film with a new emotional depth. Shot almost entirely as a series of two-person scenes of emotional revelation, stars Allison Janney, Shirley Henderson, Ally Sheedy, Ciaran Hinds, Chris Marquette, and Paul Reubens (yes, Pee-Wee Herman) rise to the challenge of Solondz’s least ironic work to date. The auteur recently sat down with us on a trip through Chicago and our only regret was that we didn’t have twice as long. Maybe even three times.

- by Brian Tallerico

**********


MovieRetriever: How do you think the passage of time impacted the film? How different would it have been if you had made it immediately after Happiness?

TODD SOLONDZ: Well, I wouldn’t have because I wasn’t interested. When I finished Happiness, I never imagined that I would ever revisit these characters or stories. Obviously, my imagination isn’t fertile enough. In fact, ten years later, that’s exactly what I did. It just never would have occurred to me.

MovieRetriever: Do you think you’re a different filmmaker now than you were then?

SOLONDZ: I leave that to others to tell me. Look, I’m changed by my times. This movie is certainly a more politically overt film. When Happiness came out, the big story was Monica Lewinsky. I think this is a post-9/11, post-traumatic-stress-disorder genre movie. This is a film that is more politically overt and I think that that infused the spirit of the writing of it as well. So if I had made it directly after Happiness, you wouldn’t have found any of that.

MovieRetriever: And that was my next question – how much was this being a post-9/11 film consciously approached in the writing or was it merely a background element as it is for so many of us?

SOLONDZ: I was aware. Yes, yes. I remember…I think it was infused with the spirit of remembering the twin towers collapse. I remember there was this beautiful moment when everyone said “How can I help? What can I do?” And I’ll never forget [Rudy] Giuliani said, “Go shopping.” And I thought that was an obscenity, a slap in the face to the dignity of so many. Of course, what he was saying was that it was a way of insulating ourselves from reality as so much…Look, it’s no different now. It doesn’t matter who the President is. We don’t have a draft and so who goes to war but a very discreet segment of society – the disenfranchised. And they wage war. So, it’s such an abstraction for us. Taxes are lowered. Everything is so backwards that it’s not a felt experience in the ways wars traditionally are. I think that if you have a movie that is infused with that spirit in some way – with Joy and all of her good intentions, the son who tells the father he should have cut and run – it’s there but obviously it’s all very oblique.

MovieRetriever: It’s thematically interesting to me that you mention “insulating yourselves” because don’t you think that’s what these characters are doing from reality?

SOLONDZ: I don’t know. I think there’s a self-absorption at play here that the characters are plagued by their own battles. Yes, it’s “life during wartime” at large but it’s also the wars within ourselves as Charlotte Rampling’s character talks about the enemies within…I think that’s more fundamental.

MovieRetriever: When you write, do you do so with the actors in mind? Did you know Charlotte or Paul would play those roles?

SOLONDZ: When I write, I never want to assume anyone would be available or want to do it. Some actors I knew immediately that I wanted and some I figured out later. I do I wanted Allison [Janney] and I knew I wanted Ally Sheedy at the get-go. Those two, I knew I wanted at the beginning. The rest I figured out. I had met Charlotte Rampling at some festival in ’01 and I love her. She’s iconic although not so much in American films. Paul [Reubens] had auditioned for me years ago. With Paul…it’s interesting that sometimes when you cast, you get new meanings. Like Jon Lovitz [who played Paul’s role in Happiness], he’s a wonderful, funny, character actor but he has a whole history that everyone’s aware of. I think it lends an extra layer of pathos and poignancy to what he does. The idea that he can even do this is a revelatory thing to an audience who never imagined this was in him. And, of course, there’s the playful part of me that’s always thinking, well, he’s playing a character who probably even has a Pee-Wee Herman doll at home.


MovieRetriever: So casting to you is a part of, if not direct storytelling, at least thematic importance?

SOLONDZ: Your cast is everything. It really is. I figured out and discovered…Michael Kenneth Williams [who plays Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s role from Happiness] – I hadn’t seen The Wire. I just saw the name Michael Kenneth Williams and he came in and read and “Oooh. He’s very powerful.” He’s not what I was looking for at all but I retooled it and made it fit. And he said, “I just want you to know, I am not funny.” I said, “Don’t worry. I’ll take care of it.”

MovieRetriever: How is the setting change important from New Jersey to Florida?

SOLONDZ: Well, to me, Florida is a mythical place in a sense what California used to be –a place where you can reinvent and escape the past. It’s very flat with big sky. The colors lop off the past. It’s where O.J. went after the trial. That seemed fresh and fertile to me. That said, it’s a fake Florida. We shot in Puerto Rico. I had to find bits and pieces. But I think we did a good job.

MovieRetriever: You did. As someone who’s been to Florida a lot, I had no idea.

SOLONDZ: Got you there. (Laughs.)

MovieRetriever: It feels like Florida.

SOLONDZ: That was the idea.

MovieRetriever: Very flat.

SOLONDZ: The flat, the colors, the open.

MovieRetriever: Which is very different from the first film which feels much more claustrophobic.

SOLONDZ: Yes. The idea is not replicate. A movie finds its own life. If you’re looking for the same experience as Happiness, you’ll be disappointed. It has its own aspirations. It takes on its own life and you have to be open to that. If you haven’t seen any of my work, you don’t need to to see this movie. You can follow the narrative on its own terms and you’ll get out of it what you get out of it. You don’t NEED to know anything. In fact, if you do know my prior work – there’s a plus and a minus to it. The plus is that you can take pleasure in the way I play with certain characters with actor and story changes. But there is a minus in that in can make people more self-conscious – “Oh, who’s that supposed to be?” – instead of just going along for the ride.

MovieRetriever: I’ll admit to having that response.

SOLONDZ: I anticipated that. (Laughs.) That’s why the first scene of the movie is like “Happiness Redux”. It’s just a replication, as if you’re watching the same movie. And the point there was to show, “Look, I know you think you’re watching the same movie although the two actors are different. In fact, one of the characters is not the character you think it is.” So, I can pull the rug and throw you a curveball. And you go, “Oh, OK.” And maybe you can relax now.


MovieRetriever: Why the title change? Was it ever officially called Forgiveness?

SOLONDZ: It was for one week. When I shot it was called Life During Wartime. I wanted it called that but there was a point during post-production when I thought the movie actually wasn’t going to be completed. I thought there wouldn’t be enough money so I changed the title because I didn’t want people to know the real title because I don’t want people to know what they will never see. I just wanted to pretend. I didn’t want to call it. They talk about forgiveness enough. I don’t need to call it that. They get the point.

MovieRetriever: It’s interesting that you don’t want people to know what they will never see because there’s a “theme” of actors being cut out of your movies.

SOLONDZ: Theme!?!? It’s like it’s a failure. That’s a generous way of putting it. Every one of my movies, I cut out…this included…there’s at least one actor that is removed.

MovieRetriever: And you don’t like to reveal them.

SOLONDZ: No. It wouldn’t be fair or nice to the actor. James Van Der Beek [who was notoriously cut from Storytelling] – obviously everyone knows but I’m not even sure he’s the most famous. I’ll leave it at that.


MovieRetriever: It happens all the time but you hinted at something interesting in that I think you want people to focus on what’s THERE.

SOLONDZ: Well, yeah. People submit manuscripts for publication and it’s 1000 pages and when it’s published it’s 350. Does every reader need to read the other 600 pages? That’s part of the process. Some people love to see that stuff on the DVD but [those scenes] are gone. They’re done. THIS is the movie. You write a book. That’s the book. You don’t say “Here’s my first draft, my second…” It’s interesting academically but I’m not interested in that.

MovieRetriever: You’re not interested in being dissected by the academics?

SOLONDZ: Look, they can do what they want but I’m not interested in giving them extra fuel.

MovieRetriever: Aren’t you interested in responses to your films?

SOLONDZ: Of course. But my ideal response is one that is two-pronged. On the one hand, there’s an emotional response to what I put out there and I’ve taken you someplace that’s provoked you in some way and made you feel alive. And it doesn’t mean there’s not an intellectual component but all of these interpretations are interesting because I can learn something – “Ooh, I didn’t think of that.” And that’s all fine and dandy but it’s the immediate visceral response…I go for the cojones. That’s what I want.


MovieRetriever: Do you ever find yourself strongly disagreeing with reactions to your films? How do you answer the critics who think you’re misanthropic?

SOLONDZ: Well, look, if you react and you hate the movie, what’s to quarrel? I’m not there to try and convince you or to change your mind. I accept that. You can hate it. I’m sorry you sat through the whole thing. If I hated it, I would have walked out. I can’t control how people are going to respond. My movies are a very fine line that I navigate between the comedy and the pathos. They’re not for everyone. That’s OK. What movie is? But misanthropic? Let’s say for argument’s sake, all right, I’m a misanthrope. How illuminating is that? It’s reductive. It lets you off the hook. It’s facile and disengages you from some of the moral issues put out there. Look, pedophilia in and of itself I have no interest in. But as a metaphor for that which is most demonized and most ostracized, I don’t think you could top it. I think if you ask any American, they’d much rather have Osama Bin Laden at their dinner table than a pedophile. Even though they may already have had pedophiles at the table and just not known it. It becomes a kind of test, a crucible. People say, “I love humanity,” but what does that mean? Humanity’s abstract. It has no real substance. We are all defined by our limitations. To what extent can we open ourselves up to that which is most-demonized; that which is most-“other.” Can we embrace everyone “except”? Except what? What are those lines? And what does it say about us?  It’s complicated. Some may point to a director and say “This guy’s a humanist director,” but in real life you’d never know it.

MovieRetriever: If anything, what you just described could be seen as the opposite of misanthropy as you’re investigating how much we’re willing to forgive.

SOLONDZ: Bill Maplewood [the child molester played by Dylan Baker in the first film and Ciaran Hinds in this one] – I have no sympathy for him. I couldn’t for someone who’s done what he’s done. But he is a tragic figure in so far that he loved his son. That’s what makes him tragic. To acknowledge that even HE has a human pulse – that’s a hard thing. Nobody wants to know.

**********

Life During Wartime is playing in some markets now and opening more tomorrow, August 6th, 2010.

**********

Bookmark/Search this post with:
Posted by CoolerKing in Interviews - August 5, 2010 at 10:08 AM
 
 
 
 
 
Tell a Friend about MovieRetriever.com
Email your friends, Invite them to join the MovieRetriever.com community to create and share movie lists and review them.
 
MovieRetriever.com members can:
  • Rate movies
  • Write your own reviews
  • Create your movie watch lists
  • Share lists with the community
 
Community Favorites