Original interview with thanks to Angelika.
Translation with thanks to Colinfever and Carola.
In our interview Colin Firth speaks , with a twinkle in his eye, about his relationship with children, the curse of Mr. Darcy and he lets on why he would sometimes rather occupy the director’s chair.
CF: I’m dealing with them, nothing more. I do like working with children. But I usually like it best if they are someone else’s children. (laughs) It can even be fun to be with them, because I can make myself scarce any time they start getting on my nerves. And I can return as soon as the storm calms down.
T: You are a father yourself. Where do you get parenting tips?
CF: In spite of the scores of books on parenting , that can be found on mile high shelves in bookstores ,we haven’t improved as parents. Even an armada of guide books doesn’t help. Everyone has to find their own way- there is no easy solution, even if the books suggest otherwise.
T: Why is it that you appear to be playing a brusque character most of the time?
CF: I am not interested in characters who are sociable. Indeed I find them most unpleasant. People who don’t have any problems and don’t search for them and have everything just fall into their laps, aren’t interesting in real life or in a movie. Even action heroes, whom we love best, follow the Harrison Ford principal: You never know how he’ll master any given challenge.
T: Your greatest success was as a romantic hero- your favorite role?
CF: To be honest I have always been fascinated by Indiana Jones. The concept is pretty easy; ordinary man against destiny. Nobody knows if he will make it. He has obstacles to overcome he has to be honest with himself in order to make it. Inadequacy. Failure, it doesn’t matter which. That is what I’m interested in.
T: Do you feel haunted by Mr. Darcy?
CF; Not really. Darcy is someone who is mostly mentioned when I am sitting among journalists. I do know that I will be connected to this character for my whole life. But he’s no ghost always hovering around me. Sometimes I even forget about him, especially when I am at work. Then suddenly he is here again, when I am sitting in front of a microphone and I know that I have to talk about him once again.
T: Sounds like torture.
CF: To be labeled or categorized means to an actor to have a recognizable name, an identity which makes you well-known to the masses. That can be useful.
T: Do you think you could have achieved a similar popularity with another role?
CF: Who could have foreseen this? An archetype comes into being when people are ready for that character it has to be the right time. They recognize in it their hidden wishes and fears. A hundred years ago it was Dracula, a lascivious figure, that stole people’s souls and sucked their blood. Frankenstein became an icon because the, then still young, industrial society had waited for a character like that, who showed people that he could surpass himself. That he could bring creatures to life, but wasn’t able to control them.
On a much less unspectacular level I also hit the right nerve at the right time with Mr. Darcy. But to this day I can’t really explain why. He was pretty unfriendly, distant , and ignorant.
T: Are you more attracted to amiable or ambivalent characters?
CF: I think all actors have an inclination to the dark side. And I try to help my characters get a certain kind of ambivalence even if they are amiable. I am always searching for particular features that make the role more versatile.
T: Where lies the appeal of obscure characters?
CF: As actors we shouldn‘t judge our characters, but justify them and their actions, even if it might appear strange to the audience. After all we hope to get them on our side in the end. You can’t immerse yourself into an identity and leave out what you don’t like. It’s all or nothing. Mr. Darcy is an appalling patron in the beginning and I really tried hard to increase the distrust of the audience. In the end it’s a much better experience if the audience likes one or more traits of the character and doesn’t begrudge Darcy his success in capturing the girl’s heart.
That’s an enormously long journey taken in an incredibly short time for an actor, but the sympathies of the audience is much more sincere because they thought differently of the character before.
T: Is this the reason why you often portray a character who is actually deeply kindhearted underneath it all?
CF: Even roles of criminals have potential. The most favorite villains of movie history are the ones that can get the audience on their side. Take Hannibal Lecter for example, a nearly ideal model of a criminal icon in movie history: reason for its popularity is Anthony Hopkins’ charisma. It’s simply incredible that a worldwide audience will favor a cannibal! But ever since then we can’t get enough of his movies, no matter what topic, as long as Anthony Hopkins is in it.
T: Anthony Hopkins is a famous representative of the English Method Acting.. How different are Hollywood and British cinema?
CF: I’ve worked with innumerable American actors and by now it is quite unusual to me to be in a British movie that doesn’t have an American actress in its cast. The difference between Hollywood and British productions isn’t that big. It’s mostly the audience that assumes an entirely different philosophy.
T: why is that?
CF: It might be cultural differences, which don’t have anything to do with quality. While Americans prefer to film a drama that takes place in a trailer park, the British might decide to make a movie portraying a conservative Prime-minister. I’d love to see Eminem in the role of the British conservative.
He might even pull it off. The cliché of the pompous British actor is no longer valid.: Daniel Day-Lewis, Tim Roth, Gary Oldman are all very versatile and have been featured in more US productions than European ones. My schooling in London was based on Stanislawski and Strasberg, which was also Method Acting , yet I have developed an American way of approaching acting. It all got mixed up quite fast.
T: How do you prepare for a role?
CF: Nowadays I no longer prepare myself as intensively as I did in the past. I used to research for weeks and tried to adapt myself to my character’s situation in advance. When I was in my twenties all young actors trained for boxing rolls, because we were all fascinated by Robert De Niro’s “Raging Bull”. We no longer had the desire to be the typical British actor. It was a real cult that developed around the Method Acting. A whole generation of drama students was hypnotized by it.
T: Why do you think differently today?
CF: There is a danger that the method will eclipse the performance itself. It can have positive results when an actor doesn’t put his role aside after the filming is done, just so he won’t distance himself from the character, but often that gets more attention than the movie itself. When Renée Zelllweger makes changes to her body in a way that would be out of the question for most actresses ;then you can talk about an amazing achievement. And all of us are impressed by the magic of the change. However everyone involved in the movie was bombarded with questions about her diet. The move itself became unimportant. In my opinion the process shouldn’t become the actual product for the public to become interested in.
T: Are you happy in you occupation?
I experience true happiness, if you can call it that, when we rehearse, best on stage. In the moments when I perform for an audience or when I film the finale scene I simply fulfill my contract. I am nothing but a hard worker.
T: Isn’t it time then to think about alternatives?
For many years I have been traveling from one movie set to another and have worked with very many capable directors. And sometimes they really haven’t got a clue . On such occasion I have often thought to make suggestions, in a way that would sort out the misery within 5 minutes. But I didn’t. Maybe it is just an illusion that I could direct a movie. I’ve even dabbled in scriptwriting. But the greatest difficulty is that success dilutes the will to change. It is much easier to accept the next offer of a role when things go well. And the times are very good at the moment. Until I feel a deep dissatisfaction, my alternative plans are put aside.
T: What does acting mean to you?
CF: One thing I can say for certain is that acting doesn’t help at all when you are having emotional problems, it even makes it worse.
T: What do you mean?
CF: Someone who behaves in real life like an actor, a bank assistant for instance, would quickly end up in a mental institution or prison. A lot of successful actors use bad expressions and have no sense for what kind of behavior is acceptable . You can’t really blame them, since we are permanently encouraged to cultivate such feelings in our line of work. Besides nobody cares if the actors becomes a better person or not when the filming is done. If one works in a mine you might inhale toxic fumes and as a flight attendant you might become dehydrated. Actors just have to struggle with bad social manners.
T: You hear over and over again that actors expect therapeutically consequences from their occupation.
CF: A movie isn’t supposed to heal you, it is supposed to work in itself. I remember a famous colleague at the theater, who was completely mad. I won’t mention his name of course. He was on tour in Europe with a play that used a lot of body paint. Someone discovered that he had bruises under his body make-up, which he never washed off. A doctor talking to him for hours wasn’t concerned about the bruises but his mental health and diagnosed him as mentally ill. This colleague had to work mighty hard so he wouldn’t be admitted to an institution. They thought he had already found his institution on stage. If he weren’t so talented he’ d been already in a mental institution. What we actors do is simply mad.
T: What can be done about that?
CF: We have to pay attention not to lose our sense of reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment