Interview: Dianna Agron of ‘I Am Number Four’ and ‘Glee’

Posted on May 22, 2011 at 1:50 pm

Disney shared this interview with Dianna Agron of I Am Number Four, out May 24 on DVD and Blu-Ray.

Was it fun to leave the Glee gang behind for some big-screen action with your new movie, I Am Number Four?

It was a lot of fun to try something new, but I knew I was going back to Glee after we finished filming I Am Number Four. It was only a brief change for me, but it was great to step into a whole new world.

When did you discover that you clicked so well with your co-star, Alex Pettyfer?

When I was cast on I Am Number Four, I hadn’t met Alex. I had dinner with the movie’s director, D.J. Caruso, a couple of nights before our first table read with the big studio executives and that’s when D.J. said to me, “Perhaps you should meet Alex before the table read?” I thought that was a really good idea.

Alex has described you as an actress with an old-school movie star quality. How does that make you feel?

That’s very nice of him. It’s pretty hard to accept that compliment because I grew up watching and loving old-school actresses like Audrey Hepburn, Sophia Loren and Katharine Hepburn. They were always effortless to watch, but I’m growing and trying to challenge myself to get to that place. If I do get to where they are it would be amazing. That’s my goal.

Your character in the new movie is very romantic. Are you similar in real life?

I think so. I really love the character of Sarah because there are a lot of similarities to how I was at school. Sarah loves photography, and so do I. I really started to get into it at school. I have about 10 cameras now and they all have different purposes.

What else do you like to get up to in your spare time?

I love cooking. In fact, my favorite thing to do on a weekend is to have friends over and cook dinner. We’ll sit around, talk and play board games. I love doing things like that, although I also love to be outside and travel. I have such wanderlust. I try to go somewhere new for every vacation and there are so many places that I have yet to visit.

Are you into Twitter and the internet?

Computers are not a huge part of my life. I write, so I use a computer daily for that – but I’m not a big web surfer. I surf the internet every now and then, but it’s not like a two-hour a day, three-hour a day obsession of mine.

Are you a fan of fashion?

I love clothes. I like all the classic designers, but then I also love new, youthful and creative styles. I love it all.

How would you describe your personal sense of style?

It’s very eclectic. When I go to award shows and things like that, I think it’s okay to take risks – but I don’t like to go too crazy with it. On a day-to-day basis, I love vintage clothes, but I also love dressing however I feel that day. One day, I might want to dress like a boy. Another day I might want to put on a pretty, vintage, girly teacup dress. I think you can express so much of yourself through the way you dress and I am very much a girl in that sense.

What kind of girl were you at school?

At school, I was a nerd in some ways and pretty average in other ways. I was always the nice girl, so I had friends in many different areas. That worked well for me.

Did you enjoy school?

I loved school. That doesn’t mean I never fell asleep in a class, but it interested me and at the same time, I knew where I wanted to end up. Towards the end of school I was always thinking, ‘Oh, I’m so close to being able to move out of the house and go to the next step.’ But you have to try and enjoy everything you can while you’re there because you’re never going to have that lack of responsibility again. At school, you don’t have to pay bills and you don’t have to think about things like that. You can just be a kid.

Did you fall in love at school?

I think love is pretty non-existent in high school. I was busy, so I didn’t care. I had one boyfriend and he cheated on me, so I gave up hope for a while and I just focused on everything else.

Wait a minute… He cheated on you?

It’s never good to find out that your boyfriend is cheating on you with the girl in his Math class and then you have to look at them walking down the hallway every day. I just focused on my friends instead.

So what do you look for in a guy?

I look for people that are open and honest. Those are the kind of people that I want to be close to in my life because it’s never fun to wear a mask.

Related Tags:

Actors

Interview: Paula Patton and Laz Alonso of ‘Jumping the Broom’

Posted on May 4, 2011 at 8:00 am

Movies have some magical moments, but some things only happen when everyone is really in the room together. There were both the night I saw “Jumping the Broom” with an audience mostly made up of students from DC’s Howard University. The movie, from Reverend T.D. Jakes, is about the wedding of a lawyer from a wealthy family and an investment banker from a working class family, raises universal questions, with clashes on race, class, and money, insecurity, doubt, betrayal, and lies — but also faith, romance, forgiveness, commitment, honor, and love. When stars Paula Patton and Laz Alonso (a Howard University alum and DC hometown hero) greeted the crowd, the excitement level exploded. Even after they left, the audience’s appreciation of the film was palpable — this is a movie you want to see with other people to enjoy its masterful mix of comedy, drama, and the resilience of families both well-established and just beginning.

The next morning, they sat down with four critics to talk about the film, starting with what initially drew them to the project. A script is always a work in progress, but if the blueprint is good then you’ve got something,” said Patton. She liked the concept of the families from two worlds and playing a character who is flawed and learns to change her ways. “These movies are not rocket science. They’re meant to be feel-good and funny and make you happy, and I think it did a wonderful job of that.”

Alonso said he could tell right away the script had the bones of a really good story. “And then as actors, it is our job to put the meat on the bones.” He talked about what he learned from the other actors. “Paula has a work ethic that surpasses even my workaholic work ethic. And Loretta Devine is a method actress who would yell at me when she would see me in town if I would dare have breakfast and not include my mother. To this day, I still have to call my mom! And then you have someone like Salim Akil, who I actually modeled my character after. He directed “The Game,” “Girlfriends,” “Soul Food,” back in the day. He is such a classy, strong man. He is not going to let this film be anything but a classic depiction of these two families, especially my family. He took my family as his personal responsibility, to show that just because you may not necessarily be wealthy doesn’t mean that you don’t have dignity and you don’t have class. He didn’t play the stereotypes.”

In the first scene of the movie, Patton’s character realizes that she has not been honoring herself in her relationships with men. She makes a promise that if God will help her find a good man she will not have sex before marriage. She and Alonso spoke to us about what that brought to the story. “For my character, some of the backstory that might not have shown up in the final version of the movie is that he did not grow up very traditional, going to church, but because he fell in love with Sabrina, and she was going to try this approach, he realized that love was more important than any previous beliefs that he had and he was going to put her first,’ said Alonso. “A lot of times we see very sexualized images with sex coming before romance. This is kind of a throwback, with romance coming first.”

Patton talked about how her own parents’ marriage brought two very different families together. “There’s so much drama that goes into bringing two families together. My mom and dad could not have come from more different families. My dad was from Mississippi, his parents were sharecroppers; my mom was from Connecticut and her father was an executive at GE. So I definitely understand two different families coming together and all the drama that ensues — and all the love, and getting past all those things, and realizing your likenesses and through all the struggle that you are family, that you will support each other and count on each other and be this bond in front of God and everyone that you’re going to be together for the rest of your lives, hopefully.”

Related Tags:

Actors Interview

Interview: Jodie Foster, director and star of The Beaver

Posted on May 3, 2011 at 10:00 am

Jodie Foster directed and co-stars in “The Beaver,” a movie notorious already for two reasons. First, its script by newcomer Kyle Killen was on top of the famous “black list” of outstanding unproduced screenplays. Everyone knew how smart and distinctive it was and everyone know it would be very tough to film and very tough to find an audience for a story about a severely depressed man who finds that he is able to communicate through a beaver puppet he finds in a dumpster. Second, the lead role of Walter is played by Mel Gibson, whose behavior in the past few years has ranged from volatile to profoundly offensive. But one of Foster’s many outstanding characteristics is her commitment to her work and to her friends. It was a deeply rewarding pleasure to speak with her about the challenges of making this film and what she has learned from the movies and the people she has worked with in making them since she was a child.

Unlike ventriloquists (seen most recently in the documentary, Dumbstruck), Mel Gibson continues to act even when he is “speaking” through the beaver puppet on his hand. Do you as a director intend the other characters on screen and the audience to look at him rather than the puppet?

I was surprised that people didn’t watch the puppet more. I liked that about it. I never wanted the audience to forget that there was a man behind the puppet. It was a widescreen format. We used an anamorphic lens, and that allows you to do two things. First, it lets you keep two people in the frame almost all the time, even in close-up. And with depth of field you can switch the focus very quickly from the front of the frame, where the puppet is, to where he is, so there’s a real distinction to the field that allows you to keep them in the same frame at all times in the beginning of the film and yet separate them emotionally. We’re always, always following Walter’s path. Then, as time goes on, we change that and allow the beaver to start taking over about halfway through the movie.

It seems to me that making a film is a little bit like having a puppet on your hand. Instead of telling your story through one imaginary character, you’ve got many.

Yes, that’s pretty accurate. It’s not just the director’s and the actor’s voice but the writer’s, the costume designer’s, the props, production design. They’re all different languages and each one contributes to telling this one story. There are other experts and you make decisions.

Tell me about how you worked with the costume designer to tell the story.

I’ve made many movies with Susan Lyall. I love her stuff because it’s really real. She spends a lot of time combing through vintage stores and looking through bins. She didn’t come up through theater, so she doesn’t do draping and all that stuff. She has a little bit of a different bent and I think it is more authentic. The idea that there is this perfect icon, valedictorian and a cheerleader — that’s just a delusion. Not only do they not exist, but when it appears they do, there’s a whole other side to them. So for the character played by Jennifer Lawrence, at first she has a lot of make-up and that perfect WASP-y cheerleader outfit. But as you get to know her — as Porter gets to know her, she changes and becomes a deeper and truer person and becomes more informal.

Your cast is one of the movie’s great strengths, including Jennifer Lawrence, nominated last year for an Oscar for her role in “Winter’s Bone” and soon to star in the big budget film of “The Hunger Games” and the brilliant theater actress Cherry Jones. How did you select them?

I’m always trying to get Cherry in movies. I love her. Anton Yelchin is also amazing and really shares the screen with Mel. Casting is a long process for me. I take a lot of time. Some people you know right away. Anton I knew right away. I met with some other actors but I was never serious about anyone but him. I’d seen a lot of his work. I knew that he could handle the wit, the lightness of the character but also had the dramatic side. Plus, he looks like a combination of Mel and me so I was pleased about that! I knew he could hold the screen with Mel even though they don’t have many scenes together, just one at the end of the movie. The rest of the time they are fighting each other from opposite corners. I spend a lot of time just making sure that it’s true. There’s really nothing else you can ask.

Everybody reads for me. I was never weird about that. I never minded coming in and reading. They should know if I’m the right person and I should know if I want to do a movie. Some of it is just to hear it. When I’m casting I’m still in the process of figuring out what the movie’s about, making decisions about locations, photography, and all that. When I can hear it, either around a table or at an audition, then I can really see how things are going to work. If I don’t get that process with the actors I’m walking into a mystery and I don’t want to do it.

You have quite a challenge in having a clinically depressed person as your main character. Even more than other illnesses, depression makes a person inaccessible and disturbing.

The world is littered with movies about people that are depressed that either did not come out or are not successful. I read this article in the New York Times that I thought was so smart about obsessive ruminators. It’s a real phenomenon. I thought, “I do that!” People who are good artists don’t just type it into the typewriter and win the Pulitzer Prize. It takes a lot of rumination and thought, a lot of time thinking, “Why did that happen that way?” “How do those two things fit together?” and waking up at 3 in the morning to think about it. It’s a very depressive process. You go over and over and over drama and it can be depressing and isolating. But you come out the other side. And people who don’t, who just go to the beach and play volleyball to cope with their problems don’t get to the other side of their issues. So I see it as a gift, and essential for being an excellent artist. But it does make you alienated from the rest of the population.

There’s a very delicate structure to the film. We start out inside Walter’s head. He’s so lost at that point he’s not even speaking. The beaver is speaking for him. It’s a light, witty, but removed voice. It’s remote. And that gets you through the first part of the movie. And then when he starts to want to live again, you get that burst of vitality. It really isn’t until the second half when reality sets in and the drama begins.

Is the puppet’s accent another way for him to be separate from Walter?

Yes. Walter wants the beaver to be everything that he’s not — charming, quick-witted, blue-collar, decisive. The beaver is somebody who is a leader.

There’s a fairy tale quality to the movie — the narration and the quick turn-around in Walter’s business.

It’s a fable. It’s a dark fable at times. I don’t see anyone walking around with a puppet on his hand in real life. Puppet therapy is very common for children. It’s not something that adults take on. It should be seen as a fable, carrying through to the ending as well.

It’s a fable in its facts but the underlying theme of finding a way to take a break from your negative elements is psychologically valid and dramatically compelling.

He adopts a survival tool. People who go through tragic circumstances where they don’t have another option adopt a survival tool and any therapist will tell you it’s a good thing. But you adopt and adapt these survival tools as a child — at a certain point, when you grow up, they can start to kill you. You have to amputate them. You have to get rid of your survival tool or it will take you over and destroy you.

Related Tags:

Actors Directors Interview

Interview: Carl Christman of ‘Selling God’

Posted on April 27, 2011 at 3:59 pm

Carl Christman, writer/director of the documentary Selling God, answered my questions about his film, an exploration of the way that fundamentalists market their religion.

How did you come to this project?

My films are a form of catharsis. I have many opinions about the major issues in life and feel the overwhelming desire to share my ideas. In past films I have dealt with War and Patriotism (Freedom Fries) as well as Terrorism and Fear (Culture of Fear.) The topic of religion seemed to be worthy of discussion.

How do evangelicals differ from other religious groups in spreading their religion?

Most religions movements work to spread their message. What sets the evangelical movement apart, and prompted me to focus on it in this film, is the skill with which they do it. They have very effectively used all forms of media and marketing to get their message out.

Are evangelicals successful in converting outsiders? In retaining those who grew up in the faith?

Judging by the continued growth and increased power of the evangelical movement I would say they are very effective at converting outsiders.

What do they consider the biggest threat to their way of belief?

There seems to be a feeling among many evangelicals that they are under attack from secularism. Since secularism is basically defined as being non-religious this means that religion is under attack from non-religion. Since three quarters of Americans identify themselves as Christian, however, I do not see Christianity as being in any danger.

Are they a political force?

The evangelical movement is definitely a political force. Evangelicals make up roughly a quarter of all Americans. This is a highly prized demographic for politicians and has tipped the balance in many elections.

How are some evangelicals like people who market books or music or other consumer goods?

My point in this film is to show how the marketing of religion is very similar to the marketing of anything else. The same techniques are used whether one is selling clothing or cars, soda or salvation.

Who do you think is the audience for this film?

Selling God has different audiences that watch the film for different reasons. Those that are not religious are likely to view it from the outside as a critique on the evangelical movement. Evangelicals are likely to watch the film and relate to the examples I offer, often on a personal level. In talking to people that grew up in the various denominations I dealt with in the film I found that they were amused by my unique take on the religious customs they had often taken for granted.

Did the evangelical community respond?

Most of my evangelical friends thought this was a thought-provoking critique. They did not necessarily agree with all of my conclusions, but they certainly enjoyed the process of exploration.

Do you see hypocrisy in the way that Christianity is marketed?

I do not see the marketing of Christianity as hypocritical. There is nothing that I am aware of in the tenets of Christianity that opposes marketing. Many people will not like talking about Christianity in terms of marketing, because they view it as being above such earthly techniques. I, however, have enjoyed applying the well-known consumer paradigm to the world’s largest religion. Hopefully this film offers a unique perspective on religion.

What good works do the members of this community support (other than trying to make converts)?

The Christian community has established many important institutions that improve all of our lives. I went to Christian schools from pre-school through college and I now teach at a Christian university.

What was the biggest challenge you faced in making the movie? What surprised you?

The biggest challenge in making this movie was trying to get access. Much of the footage I wanted to use was not easily available and many of the people I wanted to interview were not willing to speak with me. When I did have people welcome me with open arms it really stood out. I remember being outside the local Unitarian Church getting some shots from the street. When some of the parishioners saw my camera operator and myself outside, they invited us into their church, allowed us to film inside and spoke with us about their faith. I found their openness very refreshing.

Related Tags:

Directors Documentary Interview

Interview: Tom Shadyac of ‘I Am’

Posted on March 30, 2011 at 8:00 am

Tom Shadyac was one of the most successful directors in Hollywood. He had wealth and fame. He worked with superstars like Eddie Murphy and Jim Carrey. But a bicycle accident left him in terrible pain, physical and spiritual. He realized he was not happy or satisfied. And so he made a small documentary about two questions: what’s wrong with our world, and what can we do to make it better? The movie is filled with fascinating encounters with people who are questioning some of our most fundamental assumptions about the way we interact with each other and the universe, from cutting-edge scientists to people who study history, culture, and theology. It was a great pleasure to speak with him about his literal and spiritual journey.

How are you feeling now?

I feel so much better. I’m 95 percent and if this is as good as I get, I’m beaming. I didn’t think I’d come out of it, so even getting to 70 percent, I’m blessed. The mind-body-spirit is definitely connected for me. Not only did I call in the accident into my life because I didn’t have the courage to get out of my head and speak to my heart. So what better accident than one where I had to leave my head to feel my heart. I had been living this way in the closet and my head said you should not do a film about this or talk about it. and I didn’t have the courage to see outside the box. I believe that when I finally said I would start this conversation and share this story the tension was released in my healing and it improved by leaps and bounds.

The most profound moment for me in the film was when you said that after you had the dream house you realized it didn’t make you happy.

I had that message and I went on my merry way suppressing it, ignoring it. So I accumulated more — I bought a bigger house. I was being pulled along by the way we do things. Maybe the thought was there that this situation will be better, but it was a sleepwalk. That bell or this whistle will fill that emptiness.

Your late father appears in the film and he seems to have happiness figured out. He did meaningful work as the co-founder of St. Jude’s hospital in providing free medical care for sick children.

There was a sadness, though, in my father. I don’t think he saw what he did or how capable we are of creating societies based on compassion. At the end of the interview, he says he doesn’t think mankind can build businesses based on compassion because of who we are. People behave one way on Sunday and then forget about it the rest of the week. But I believe we behave that way, but that is not who we are. We’ve deluded ourselves that those ideas have to stay inside those churches and cannot walk in our daily lives. He didn’t see what he had done. He thought of the world outside St. Jude’s as competitive, angry, always at odds with each other.

The indigenous peoples you describe in the movie are very peaceful but there are others who are very violent, just like more developed societies.

That wasn’t the overriding indigenous way. They had conflicts and no one would suggest that a new society wouldn’t have conflict. But the conflicts were limited. If a person was hurt or a piece of land was taken payment had to be made for that, a warrior against a warrior. But not genocide. Not what’s happening today. There’s an ideology underlying that about our disconnection that’s run amok and it allows us to do all kinds of insane things.

You mention in the film how important it is to you to know your neighbors. That really requires a smaller community like indigenous tribes or small towns, doesn’t it?

It isn’t just the idea of small, the size of it, though that is important. But there are no barriers, no one was isolating themselves, taking all the land. A Native American had a tent; he didn’t get to own a peninsula. What we’ve built out of our society exacerbates the gap between us, between what are called the rich and the poor, though I don’t subscribe to those terms because the rich can be very poor and the poor can be very rich.

There were spiritual elements in some of your big-budget films, like “Bruce Almighty,” in which Jim Carrey gets to exercise God’s powers and learns that sacrificing for others is the most powerful thing he could do.

With my left hand I may have been helping to heal the world but with my own life I was fighting that message. “I want a more just world but not so just I can’t have everything.”

Do you think that there is a way in the context of a blockbuster film to convey the message you want to get across more effectively than with this small documentary?

That’s the kind of linear thinking that is not where I want to live. It’s important for me to do what’s on my heart and if I am called on to make a film that may touch a handful of people, I’ll do that. I do not want to be a servant of what Emerson called “the idolatry of magnitude,” that it has to be big to be important. The only giving mentioned in the Bible is the widow’s mite. She gave a penny but it was all she had and it was important. It was all she had. If a narrative film comes to me and it demands to be served, I will do it. It’s not that I wouldn’t make “Ace Ventura 3.” I would make another comedy because I believe it is sacred, a beautiful experience to bring people together to share laughter. But I would hope to behave differently as the director, not how I treat people — I always treated people respectfully. But in how I do the economy of my life. I don’t want to stand on top of a movie and say, “I am more valuable than you.” I want to say, “I want to be your brother, your sister, and I want you to be my sister, my brother,” and to have that reflected in the way I do the economic drawer of my life. If additional profits come, I want to distribute them to others. It was never mind in the first place.

How did you pick the people who appeared in this movie?

They changed me. Through the course of reading their work, seeing them interviewed, learning about their lives. “The People’s History of the United States” is a beautiful, brilliant work. The poetry of Rumi. The life of Desmond Tutu.

What was it like to meet them?

I walked into Howard’s office and it was as modest an office as I have ever been in. It spoke volumes about his modesty and humility. That is what I call integrity. Emerson says, “If you look in any drawer of a person’s life you know what a person is.” When I saw how he greeted me, when I saw his office, I saw he was open, compassionate, humble. But my economic drawer was taught to me by my society, not by my heart.

What was it like to go from a big budget film to a four-person crew?

Remember when Mel Gibson yelled out “Freedom!” in “Braveheart!?” It was very freeing to be able to see a shot and get the camera out and get the shot and not have to get a permit and a license and get the lighting and bring 240 people out there and the craft services truck. I like traveling light, an artistic extension of what is going on in my life.

Tell me more of what you have learned.

I’m much happier in this walk than I was in the isolated walk. I don’t think it’s about changing who we are; it’s about waking up to who we are. We know external things bring us joy to a certain point, but beyond that it doesn’t. How about competition bringing us together instead of separating us. Ignorance comes from the word “ignore.” We experience heaven when we serve each other. I felt that power with my father. When we feed others, we feed ourselves.

Related Tags:

Directors Interview Spiritual films