Interview: Craig Robinson of “Peeples”

Posted on May 8, 2013 at 8:00 am

Craig Robinson is one of the funniest people alive and his performances have been the highlights — and sometimes the only bright spots — in films like “Hot Tub Time Machine,” “Miss March,” and “Pineapple Express.” It is a lot of fun to see him in his first leading role in “Peeples,” the story of a music teacher who meets his girlfriend’s very intimidating family for the first time. And it was a lot of fun to get a chance to talk to him when he came to Washington to host a screening of the film.

When did you first know you were funny?

I was a kid, and we would ride in the car. My father is an attorney and his father died when he was 12, so he was the man of the house ever since he was very young, a “my way or the highway” kind of thing. To make him laugh was the — what’s the Monty Python thing? — the holy grail. When we would be in the car and I’d be in my corner and acting silly, there was this natural thing that came out. I never acknowledged that I was funny but there was definitely something that felt good about making my parents laugh.

That’s a lot like what happens in the movie, where your character has to impress a very stern, “my way or the highway” judge.

Exactly! David Alan Grier, who is fearless, amazing, funniest man on the planet it my eyes. Going up against him was one of the best things I’ve done in my career.

You got to bring some of your experience as a music teacher to this role, not just singing a funny toilet training song to kids but performing a 70’s R&B disco number in a headdress. How did you develop those moves?

For the dance number, there’s a musician-singer from back in the day called Sylvester, very flamboyant, a huge gay icon. I watched what he did and was inspired to go with that kind of vibe, to perform and go for it and not care. It was fun to go into that little mindset of dancing and being free and being so hypnotized by the headdress. And they only made one, so when I got little carried away, it went “CRUNCH,” but they were able to salvage it and make it work.

Was it a big challenge to take on a lead role for the first time?

I couldn’t have asked for a better cast or a better director to step out. We all had each other’s back. And I couldn’t have asked for a better role. I had to fall in love with Kerry Washington. Check! I had to learn from David Alan Grier, show him stuff I’ve stolen from him. Check! Tina Gordon Chism, first-time director, so we’re leaning on each other. Check! It was all these wonderful challenges as we all worked together to push that boulder up the mountain called “Peeples.” And we just had a blast doing it. The biggest challenge was not allowing the pressure to get to me. Okay, it’s your first leading man — but not allowing that to get in. It was there every day biting at me but I’m not going to let that pressure come in and mess with me. I’m just going to do the work.

I liked the way your character didn’t go to the easy silly place of insecurity. He knew who he was.

He’s a “kounselor with k,” and he loves his girl. He keeps it real. The family has all these secrets but he keeps it real. He knows he’s lovable, so let’s go meet the family and get this marriage going.

What do you hope audiences will take away from this film?

To laugh and be closer. And to just learn to be yourself, and own that.

How did you and Kerry Washington work out the chemistry of your characters’ relationship?

We went on a couple of “dates” to figure out who this couple was. She’s such a natural in everything she does. And she’s brilliant, an amazing person all around, and the more you know her, the more you love her. She can speak different languages, she can dance, she can sing. You’re just going to be a bigger fan once you meet her. She’s super-fantastic. I could not have picked a better leading lady. I would do anything she says.

What’s the best advice you ever got about acting?

Every scene is a love scene. No matter if you’re fighting or whatever, why else would you be there if you didn’t love each other?

Related Tags:

Actors Interview

Interview: Jay Sullivan of Raising Gentle Men

Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:00 am

Jay Sullivan‘s new book, Raising Gentle Men: Lives at the Orphanage Edge, is the story of his experience as the only man living in a Kingston, Jamaica convent, helping to care for 250 orphan boys. It is a beautifully written and inspiring story. Sullivan generously took time to answer my questions about his experiences.

How did you first come to the orphanage in Jamaica?

I got there one step at a time. My first year in Kingston, I walked by the orphanage grounds each day on my way to St. George’s College, the Jesuit high school where I taught English. When I was asked to help run the school’s ministry program, I needed a place to take my students where they could work with less-privileged people. What better than the orphanage around the corner? From that initial interaction, my involvement with the place grew, and I eventually moved in.

What kind of training did you have in religion or education before your arrival?

I majored in English at Boston College, but hadn’t had any formal training as a teacher. In fact, only one of the dozen BC teachers sent to Kingston in 1984 came from the School of Education. The week before we landed in Kingston we went on a retreat to talk about our faith and our role at our schools. Two nuns, veteran teachers themselves, spent a day giving us pointers on lesson plans and maintaining discipline. The only line that stuck with me was, “Don’t smile until Christmas.” It’s a classic line for teachers. It means if you are strict for the first few months, you can loosen up after that. But if the kids think you are a pushover at the start, they will walk all over you. I wish I had heeded the nuns’ advice. My first year I was a disaster when it came to discipline. But I learned my lesson by the second year.

What was the biggest surprise of your time there?

Like everyone my age, I had just finished 16 years in a classroom, but had experienced that room from only one perspective. Becoming a teacher, looking at the class from the front instead of the back of the room, changed my perspective on what had been going on for the last 16 years. That alone was a huge learning curve.

How were the nuns different from what outsiders might expect?

I think most people assume nuns are serious and austere. My Aunt Dolores was a Sister of Charity. I grew up knowing her and some of her nun friends, who were the friendliest, happiest, most jovial people, always laughing and teasing each other. The nuns at Alpha were of the same ilk. There were certainly one or two that wore a dour face, and clearly, they all knew how to keep order, but their cheerfulness might have surprised people.

What did the boys want to know about you?

The boys were used to people coming and going at the orphanage, so their questions were simple. My freckles and red hair piqued their interest more than anything else.

Were the boys supportive of each other?

I was always amazed at their generosity with each other. If one of them got a special treat of some sort, he always wound up sharing it among whatever boy put out a hand. I don’t know if that’s because they each knew hunger all too well, or because they were relatively well fed at Alpha and didn’t need to worry about their next meal. They also supported each other emotionally. When one scored a goal on the field, won at a game of cards, or was praised by a staff member for a good deed, the others would cheer him on. Of course, they also teased each other, just like any other group of boys.

Do you have a favorite Bible passage or prayer?

I love the Prayer of St. Francis. Its call to action is a theme throughout the book.

What was the best advice you got while you were in Jamaica?

Sister Magdalen talked a lot, but she wasn’t into dispensing advice. Everything I learned from her and the other sisters was from watching their actions. The way Magdalen took each day as it came, controlled only what she could, and let God handle the rest was the biggest lesson I learned.

What made you decide it was time to write the book?

I thought that 20 years was enough time to “think about” writing a book. My wife and kids also let me know it was time to either write it or stop talking about it. I’m sure many men accomplish their goals in life simply because their wives tell them, “Enough talk already. Get it done.”

How does the understanding you gained in Jamaica influence your life today?

In Jamaica, I talked with the boys each evening about their lives. I gained an appreciation for how diverse the human experience can be, and yet how similar we all are in seeking the essential human needs of camaraderie, companionship and knowing that we are part of something larger than ourselves. That experience has helped me challenge my assumptions about others, and stay focused on the basics about human nature when I deal with people. Both have helped me a great deal in my role as a communication skills coach. I still have a lot more to learn in this area.

What advice would you give someone who is about to begin the kind of work you describe in the book?

Stay open to the ideas you see and hear in others with more experience. Approach the work knowing you can accomplish a great deal, but step carefully, and with great humility.

Related Tags:

Interview: Arnon Goldfinger of “The Flat”

Posted on November 1, 2012 at 8:00 am

After documentary filmmaker Arnon Goldfinger’s grandmother died at age 97 in Israel, he brought a film crew to her apartment where she and his grandfather lived from the time they immigrated to what was then called Palestine just before World War II. He was fascinated by their home, which seventy years later looked as though it had been transplanted from their birthplace in Germany. The books on the shelves were in German. They always spoke German in their home. Most of their lives were lived in Israel, but they lived as though they were still in Berlin.

Goldfinger thought he would learn something about his grandparents as the family sorted through their belongings. But he could never have imagined what he would find or where it would take him. His grandmother had saved issues of one of the most virulently anti-Semitic newspapers distributed in Nazi Germany. This discovery led to a journey that illuminated one of the strangest friendships imaginable, represented by an artifact that is almost unthinkable — a coin with a Jewish star on one side and a Nazi swastika on the other. The movie also focuses on the strain this inquiry put on Goldfinger’s relationship with his mother, who was almost as passionate about not finding out the answers to his questions as Goldfinger was about seeking them.

I spoke to Goldfinger when he was in Washington, D.C. to show the film, which opens tomorrow.

What did you think you were going to film?

To be honest, I just wanted to be there with the camera and document the world I knew was going to disappear very quickly. I thought it would be an even quicker process. I knew this flat all my life and I had an ambivalent feeling toward it. On the one hand, I had an attraction to this world, to this culture, to those books, to the secrets, the mystery. On the other hand, as an Israeli it was so foreign, so German, so connected to the tragic happenings in the Holocaust. It was only later I had an idea to make a film, but even then the idea was just something very short. People would ask, “What can you learn about someone from what they leave behind?” This shows you can learn a lot.

What does your mother think about the movie?

I was very afraid of course. Our relationship was close before and if it would stay like that, it would be fine. But I was surprised. It brought us closer. She was very supportive of the film. After the first screening, when she first saw it, she said she saw it was important for her, too. When her friends saw the film, they said to her, “We didn’t know, either. We didn’t ask.” She felt that she was not alone.

Why was your mother reluctant to know more?

She was really raised in a German house. I remember as a kid, hearing her argue with her parents in German. But when she went out of the flat, she was in Tel Aviv, the Mediterranean combined with bohemian, a place of vibrance. She lived two lives. But like all of the people of her age, she wanted to leave the past behind her, as you see when you look at her flat, not even any dust from the past. Your house is the place you want to live in. And she wanted to live with with barriers to all the historical items. Before I made the film I thought it was her character. But now I understand it’s a barrier from all the pain and sorrow.

You met with Edda, the daughter of the Nazi couple who were your grandparents’ friends. Tell me something about your impressions.

They were lovely people, very friendly, welcoming, warm. That made it harder. If they were nasty it would have been easier for me. During my research I would think, “Maybe it’s not possible, maybe it’s not right” that this friendship existed between my grandparents and the Nazis. If I called someone out of the blue and said “My grandparents knew your parents, I would not recognize one name.” But the way she recognized it so immediately, the way she knew and was so glad to hear from me in such an open way and with such memories — I don’t remember even one gift my parents’ friends gave me — but for her, she remembered so much.

What about her father, the man who was your grandparents’ friend while having an important role in the Nazi party?

I found much more about him than what is in the film. It was important to say that he did not live the Nazi party. He was involved in anti-Semitic propaganda. But he wanted to stay in contact with Jews. I found all kinds of other things about him, nothing that would change your mind, no smoking gun, but you could ask yourself, “Did he have an alternative?” The way to describe what happened was this. Nobody knew what Hitler wanted, but everybody knew if they did something Hitler did not want, it’s the end. It was a classic regime of terror. There’s a book called Alone in Berlin that described life in the war. It’s horrible. I am a Jew; I don’t so much identify with them, but still I can understand and ask the question, “Could he do something?” If you look at his career, you won’t find him in the concentration camps. He is in the headquarters, spying, thinking. For me, it’s enough.

One of the most shocking moments for me was when Edda told me that she knew my family had lost someone in the concentration camps. She did not have the details right. She thought it was my grandfather’s mother, not my grandmother’s mother. She’s a little mistaken with the details but it shows that she and therefore her parents knew some of what happened. That means my grandparents were sitting over there in the garden where we were, discussing the death of someone from their family with a man who was a Nazi. Did they ask him if he received their letter asking for help? Did he tell them he could not help them? There were a lot of lies over there.

My favorite character in the movie was your grandmother’s friend. What a beautiful face. I felt I knew your grandmother by seeing her friend.

She was my grandmother’s closest friend and like an aunt to me. When I first approached her, she did not want to be filmed. She was the only one, and I could not understand why. It took me almost a year to persuade her. But she said, “I will give you half an hour, but you come alone.” I told her I had to bring a cameraman and a sound man, and she said, “No, no, no.” In the end, it was only me and the cameraman. I figured she would see it is not threatening and she would let me stay longer. The cameraman said, “Be careful. Remember who you are dealing with. Ask the questions you want in the beginning not as usual at the end.” After 32 minutes she told me it is enough. Three months later she passed away. Her daughter was so happy that I captured her in her beauty. There’s such elegance in those characters.

Why did your grandmother keep the Der Angriff newspapers even though they were filled with anti-Semitic propaganda?

There was something emotional about it, a memory from a very, very important event in their life. The idea was to keep an eye on the Nazi and push him to include more Zionist material in his story. There may be a possibility my grandfather even edited the article. It was something very vivid at the time and maybe she forgot about it. She never opened it again. Maybe she forgot about it.

What are you going to do with them?

I think maybe give them to the Zionist archive in Jerusalem or to Yad Vashem.

Why does this movie touch people so deeply?

The film is telling an amazing story about a Nazi and a Jew, but really it is a movie about family, what you know about your family, what you want to know, what you can know. Those questions anyone can identify with, especially in America, a place of immigrants. Some people who see the movie tell me, “I want to ask my parents more about our history.” And some say, “I need to get rid of a lot of the things in my house!”

Related Tags:

Directors Documentary Interview

Interview: Ben Affleck, Director and Star of “Argo” (Part 1)

Posted on October 14, 2012 at 3:11 pm

Ben Affleck directed “Argo,” the incredible story of a real-life 1980 CIA rescue mission, and he plays Tony Mendez, the “exfiltration” expert who came up with the idea to create a fake Hollywood film production company and get the six American out of Iran by convincing the people who had captured 52 other State Department employees that these six were members of a Canadian film crew, scouting locations for a big sci-fi/fantasy film. I spoke to him about the movie with a small group of journalists, the day after a screening attended by some of the real people rescued by Mendez.

You did something really remarkable in combining what is really two movies with two completely different tones in this film. How did you put that together so skillfully?

Well, I wish I could say it was my own skill, I don’t think it was. They’re really smart actors, they kind of looked at the material on the page and did me a favor of playing it honestly. Because it was played realistically it kind of blended anyway. If it hadn’t, I suppose I would’ve had a bunch of conversations about how we were going to get the jigsaw puzzles to fit, but all the parties, Bryan Cranston, John Goodman, and Alan Arkin were really pretty adept. They knew how to play it real, and that kind of saved my bacon.

Did you anticipate that there would be so much connection to current events and what do you think the movie can say about where we are now?

I was kind of stunned, naturally, just to see that the material that I looked at for research from 30 plus years ago all of a sudden was looking exactly like what was on the evening news. That surprised me and it surprised everybody and obviously, it was just a terrible thing for everyone. I expected the movie to be resonant to the sense of what happens when the United States gets involved with the government of another country and overlooks some of the negative things they may be doing because they’re pro-Western, the unintended consequences of revolution, those are the kinds of things I was anticipating. What it ended up being more about, in some ways, was an homage to our clandestine service and our foreign service folks, who, as illustrated by these tragic events do a lot, sacrifice a lot, put themselves in harm’s way, give up a lot to go overseas. Our Foreign Service folks are doing a lot and making a lot of sacrifices for us, and sometimes it’s even the ultimate sacrifice.

It really seems like you shot it as if it was a film made in the 70s, starting from the old Warner Bros. logo.

I thought it would be a trick of the brain, where, if you’re looking at a movie that looks like the kind of movie that was made in the 1970’s, it’s easier for the brain to subconsciously accept this notion that the events they’re watching are taking place during that period. Now, you can’t do that if you’re doing a movie about the Revolutionary War, but that’s why we had this interesting advantage. Even better, that era that I was trying to replicate, to sort of fool the brain, was a really great era for film-making, so I got to copy these great films and great film-makers, Lumet, Pakula, Scorsese.

How does it complicate things when you’re making what is basically a living history film, knowing that the people who were really there will see it?

It’s about a whole story, you know, and you have to maintain the integrity and the honesty of the spine of the story. That’s one profound responsibility because. I want them to look at it and say, “Yeah, that’s basically it.” Now, the real takeover was four hours long, and we have five minutes. That’s the kind of thing that we need to do to sort of compromise. It was raining in the real takeover, it’s not raining there. There are some details that are naturally changed. But the essential spirit of it, that has to be preserved. You know somebody did find a picture of Khomeini with the darts in it and say, “Who did this?” They really did blindfold people and things like that. I also have a responsibility to make a good movie, to tell a good story, because that’s what I do, and so those two things are constantly intentioned with one another, because I want to make it true, but I gotta make it good, you know?

How much was changed for dramatic purposes?

The main change, really, is the cars in the runway. They got to the third checkpoint, they got through, that was all the same, and they got there and sat there and they said, “Well, your plane has been delayed.” I thought, “Well, we’ve all been through that!” And then they got on the plane and left, and so in an effort to sort of externalize that and make the third act work, I added the sort of, them just barely getting away, when in fact they got away a little bit more ahead of the wire. But that really, fundamentally, in my view, doesn’t change the story. The same things happened, you know? It was a close-call in terms of trying to get out in terms of their own deadline. Most of the sins, really, in terms of story-telling, are sins of omission, you know? Not being able to include the fact that Pat Taylor got money from her co-workers or that in Ottawa they approved this special session to make these passports that had never been done before. You have people who are all alive, there’s a natural tendency to feel like, “Well, this is my story.” So you have to sort of do everyone’s story justice, and also take into account the sort of Rashomon phenomenon where you hear slightly different accounts from different people, and definitely maintain the realism of it while not sacrificing what’s really interesting about it.

What movies of the period ended up inspiring elements of this film?

There were a lot of them that I had seen and I still watched again, and I liked “The Thing” for my hair, and I liked Killing of a Chinese Bookie, the Cassavetes movie, for the sort of seedy LA, I just loved the look, the feel, the way they use zooms, the way it felt kind of raw but you also realized it was choreographed—and I didn’t expect to see that coming. There’s a movie called Let Me In that I watched, that’s really good, a guy named Matt Reeves directed it, the remake of the original one, and I thought it was really well directed and watched it with my DP, and we were looking at stuff that they did with focus in that movie, you know, keeping things in the foreground, focus, and maybe soft the background—that was something that I didn’t expect to influence me and it really did.

Related Tags:

Actors Directors Interview

Interview: Lorene Scafaria of “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World”

Posted on June 21, 2012 at 8:00 am

Lorene Scafaria wrote the screenplay for one of my favorite romances of the last several years, Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist. And now she has written and directed another romance, “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World,” with Steve Carell and Kiera Knightley as neighbors who meet just as life on earth is about to be wiped out. I spoke to her about the role that music plays in both films (she is also a musician), and how contemplating the end of the world clarifies your priorities.

I want to begin by asking you about the music, because I know you, yourself, create music and music seems to be important in both this film and “Nick and Nora.”

It’s true, yes. I’ve got a pattern going, I think. But music is just so important to me, personally, obviously, and so I liked the idea that we’d have this sort of soundtrack for humanity in there What it really came down to in crafting the characters and everything, I just thought—what do you really want to consume at the end of the world? You know, besides as much food as humanly possible? And I feel like you know, really people dip back into music, that just is sort of a universal love for people, whatever the music may be. And so I did love the idea that certainly this girl is carrying around a bunch of records that, unless she finds the player for it, she’s just holding onto these possessions, but that this music has meant so much for her and her life that she will hold on to them. I’ve just always thought of music as a sort of collection of memories so that’s how I decided that it should be a major part of the movie. I knew I wanted it to be kind of classic rock, the kind I grew up with. I feel like friends’ older brothers got us into the Dead and Doors, really, so we were listening to that version of classic rock. I wanted to have that sense of nostalgia and feel like these could be songs that Dodge could be listening to or should be or would have if he were the kind of guy who really absorbed culture like that. They’re actually part of Penny’s collection, and so in a way I was using it as sort of dedications between the characters in a way.

The names of the characters seem very meaningful: Dodge and Penny.

Dodge, certainly, to me, is a man trying to outrun something and a guy who’s been sort of avoiding life his entire life—so Dodge felt very appropriate for him. I also loved that it was a very American name. And Penny — it’s like when you find a lucky penny. She was that little shiny copper thing for him to find. And Pen also means swan, so there’s something in there for both of them. Ridiculously, if you looked at all the names, you would find embarrassing things like that throughout. There was the character Roache that Patton Oswalt plays. He’s the kind of guy who’d survive the apocalypse, you know? The roaches of the world, they’re going to be fine.

Tell me a little bit about moving from being the writer to being the director and what you as a writer learned about writing from directing?

It’s now so much harder to write because I feel like I have this newfound perspective on it where I actually don’t feel as much of a free writer, now. I’m thinking of things a little too much from the director’s chair.

More logistically?

Yes, I’m sort of skipping ahead to, “Well, if I’m filming this…” That’s probably a good thing in the long run, to hone in on it. It’s definitely making me think so much more as a writer, now. When I started, I always wanted to direct. I directed a lot of theater when I was younger and always loved working with actors and then I made a short film a few years ago that I call the longest short, because it was like a 30 minutes. It was not something I was ever going to enter into festivals, I just wanted to prove to myself that I could maybe tackle a feature someday. With this one, I just was desperate to do it. From the very beginning I always wanted to be able to tell the story through to fruition and I can’t believe how satisfying it was. I’m a list-maker so I love to make lists and cross-things off. I’m not very organized, I just like to make lists. When we are filming something like the trucker’s scene and we get to cross something off a list. It’s been in my head for three years and it’s just so rewarding to see it through all the way. I’ve always enjoyed having a vision for the big picture and with this, so much was specific on the page. It was really fun to be able to do it all, actually.

One of the great things about your concept is that it’s tremendously clarifying; everything else drops away and you have to think about what your priorities are. I loved the way that, on their journey, Dodge and Penny meet people who deal with the end of the world in so many ways—mostly different forms of denial.

I try not to judge too harshly what it is that everybody would want to do in that situation, especially because everyone is dealing with their own mortality at the same time. I sort of loved that the two of them have these “higher callings” in a way—you know, at least they’re about human contacts and relationships and regrets and closure and all of that, and those always seem like the truest pursuits. I did so much research on what people would do, talking with as many people as possible about what would you do, what would you take with you, what would you want to hold in your hand? And you know, there were some very interesting answers across the board, but the most common was to be with family, to be with friends, to be with your loved one. I really liked exploring what happens if one person doesn’t really have that loved one, where do they go? And I do think someone like Dodge certainly would chase the past. I think most people would, I’m not sure everybody would be like, “I’m going to meet somebody new!” She’s lived her life much more to the fullest than he has, but has maybe her own regrets, like seeing her family.

One of the things that’s nice about it is that Dodge would not have done his some-day thing if not for Penny. She gave him a reason.

Yes, and through something so tragic. I don’t think any of this would’ve happened without the end of the world. That’s the kind of thing that is interesting. Sometimes the most tragic moments in your life, you’re like—“Why is this happening to me?” and it takes a little while, but then you think, “that might’ve been the best thing that’s ever happened to me.”

If you’re a writer, that’s where you get your material.

It’s all therapy for me. You’re just seeing my glorified therapy session.

Related Tags:

Directors Writers