Alan Rickman Interview 1992 (Toronto)
Interviewer: How are you?
AR: Very well, thank you. How are you?
Interviewer: Well, I am delighted to talk to you. I have to say that I made a few quite shameless attempts to get you into the studio in London when I was there a couple of months ago. I begged Thelma Holt, I begged everybody and yet STILL you refused me, but now I've got you, I'm glad.
AR: It was tough doing that play and uh...
Interviewer: Tango At The End Of Winter, I saw it
AR: And?
Interviewer: I thought it was uh... hmmm, well , you worked very hard.
AR: (laughs) Shall I leave now?
Interviewer: No, no, no, you shouldn't. But I have to say that a friend of mine just had a movie at the Vancouver Film Festival and he said to me before we went in, he said to me... "If you tell me this film is interesting, I'll kill ya!" Anyway, let's talk about the new one.
AR: No, let's talk about Tango for a minute.
Interviewer: Oh, all right.
AR: I want to know why you didn't have a good time.
Interviewer: I didn't say that I didn't have a good time.
AR: Yes, you did.
Interviewer: No I didn’t say that. I said that I thought you worked very hard. But, umm, maybe I have a problem with acting students crawling all over the stage, you see? I thought you were splendid, of course, but then as I've already said to Thelma Holt--that you could thread a needle and you would be interesting on the screen or on the stage, which is a bit gushy-- but there you are!
AR: It required the audience to come with a very open frame of mind and I think the trouble is a lot of people who--see, a lot of people really loved it and came back 4 or 5 times. I was just always interested in what anybody's reaction was because they were always so different and I think it was to do with the level at which people came in with expectations of what the word "play" means.
Interviewer: Yes
AR: And I wish there had been a sign outside saying "think how you would respond to a song or a picture and then come in"
Interviewer: Do you think it had a particularly--well, it does have a particularly Japanese sensibility and wonder if in the translation that the English-speaking public or the western audience doesn't get it in the same way, and if you do come a few times to see such a production that you're much more sensitized to it.
AR: I'm not sure about this thing about particularly Japanese sensibilities. It's the first modern Japanese play that I think has ever been done in England or the west so something new is happening there. I daresay all sorts of strange things happened the first time Chekhov was done in England, or anywhere else.
Interviewer: I daresay...
AR: So, um, no, I don't think you can draw any general rule. I think it depends on what frame of mind you go to the theatre in and whether you're open or not and how much baggage you're carrying around.
Interviewer: Oh dear! (laughs) I do feel rested now. It must have been grueling to do this, especially the rehearsal process. Was it?
AR: Yes, it was, but it was also wonderful because he's such a wonderful director and I haven't been on stage for 4 years. In the play, I said the line I hadn't been on stage in 3 years, but in my case it was 4, so it was pretty scary and so it was great to be in the hands of someone that allowed you as much freedom as he did.
Interviewer: It's quite a physical play too and you're quite a physical actor and in fact, the two pictures I've seen you in the last two days, TMD and the other one which I'll get to later, you move all the time and you're not a static actor. And if you're 4 years off the stage then the necessity of so much physical movement is not really there.
AR: I suppose I attempt to not just act from my neck up. I figure the rest of me is part of the equipment and it's there for the director, who I suppose might as well be called the ringmaster, to crack the whip and make me sit still... I don't know.
Interviewer: Do you take direction well? Are you an actor that usually loves the director and is willing to give in, so to speak, to the will of the director?
AR: There was a conversation--giving in to the will of a director sounds horrible to me--but ...(laughs)
Interviewer: Oh, let me reword that...
AR: No, I'd much rather there's a conversation going on, although it has to be said that with it depends on the experience, you know, it depends on the director. With ?, who you know directed Tango At The End Of Winter, who has a very, very strong visual sense and a very strong vision of what he hopes to have up on stage. So, a part of you goes along with that, however, he's very open to what you bring. Umm, Anthony Minghella, who directed TMD and also ? was unbelievably generous and open to everybody's suggestions. I mean, he was one of those sensible directors who has two weeks rehearsal before starting and you're not immediately placed under pressure to act now on day one, you know. We had time to just talk about it and get it wrong a lot and find out where we should be going. So that was a conversation. Stephen P. is somebody I've worked with, the director of CME, I've worked with him in theatre before and he gives wonderful, wonderful notes to actors that you really can use and they're very subtle but they're very direct. And--but he's quite stubborn about his own text, he won't have it changed.
Interviewer: That was not the case with--how do you say his name? Minghella, because there could be a mispronunciation of that name, which would be unfortunate.
AR: Minghella, his name is.
Interviewer: He's a wonderful writer. It must have been quite thrilling when you saw that script.
AR: Well, it was. It was a kind of luxury on all sorts of levels, a) because it was wonderfully written, b) it was a really um... I don't know what the word is... but the part was interesting anyway, but it was in areas that maybe I haven't inhabited too often but--
Interviewer: You play the part of a dead guy, you mean? There's that...
AR: Kind of gentle and loving and those things, you know one doesn't necessarily do so much on film and also because Juliet Stevenson and I have worked so much in the theatre together and it was great to take a close friendship and put it up on the screen in a sense.
Interviewer: I find it hard to believe that this was going to be restricted to television viewing only.
AR: Well, I mean it's one of the strengths of British television, being hacked away at as we speak. But it is still just about one of it's strengths but areas of a season called screen 2, BBC2, and week after week during the season when that goes on there are interesting pieces of work being done by young directors and young writers and great actors. On this one, I think somehow they smelled something from the word "go." Because I know that like a week in, one discovers later, there were conversations about well maybe we should start again and put it on 35mm. As it happens, it's been blown up from 16. But I don't know, I think they were talking about it fairly early on because there was something that had maybe a wider audience.
Interviewer: This character of Jamie in this film-- he's a nice guy! And you haven't had a lot of parts--I think it's one of the reasons I was a little nervous about talking to you because your reputation seems to have developed along the lines of being kind of a scary guy.
AR: Well, only because of a couple of movies that made a lot of money, which if you set two movies that made a lot of money against however many years it is in the British theatre, it's kind of imbalanced to me. But there you go. But that's what happens when two films get a lot of publicity.
Interviewer: Fair enough. I have to say though, reading clippings of interviews that were done with you where the interviewer refers to you as being "barely audible," didn't exactly make me full of anticipation.
AR: Well, I don’t know. Maybe the deafness is THEIR problem?
Interviewer: (laughs) We have a clip from Truly Madly Deeply, can you stand to listen to it? This is the bathtub scene. Do you want to set it up? I'll let you do it.
AR: Well, basically the story is of Nina, whose lover had died two years ago, and she can't get her life to move again, I guess. She misses him so much that she just can't get her life moving and he comes back. He comes back with an ulterior motive and this scene takes place after she thinks he's disappeared. 'Cause she's the only person who can see or hear him.
Interviewer: I have to say, Alan, that she really looked a sight in that bathtub with that stuff all over her face.
AR: She's not an actress drowning in ego.
Interviewer: No, she isn't, and she is just so good. Now, did you get a cello lesson?
AR: I had many cello lessons, yes. I cannot imagine why anybody chooses to play the cello, because it may have the most beautiful sound, but you also have to carry the damn thing around London from your home to the person who's teaching you and it's heavy and awkward. So why choose that when you could choose the flute? Which is what I say.
Interviewer: Or the piccolo? Even better! Now if Pablo Casals were to have seen this movie, which is unlikely, considering he's...
AR: He would see me playing or he would THINK he sees me playing the right music, but Pablo Casals may well be down there watching videos with the other guys...
Interviewer: I was just thinking maybe he was really in the move! Okay, let's move on to the next picture in which you don't have the biggest part, but you are the movie really. I mean, without you they ain't got no story. It's really the last taboo--it's about incest but a curious kind of incest.
AR: Again, it's picking up on a relationship that one had in the past in that I worked in a couple of Stephen P.'s plays in the theatre. It's picking up a conversation really. He writes in a very particular way so I'm always, always, interested to read whatever he's written. I thought many things--it was an odd thing to read because he said he'd written the part for me so that's a strange experience to pick up a script and say, "Well, he's written this part for me."
Interviewer: He sees you in this way?
AR: No, no, no, no, no... he just wants me to say those lines or find that character, which is a different thing. There's none of Sinclair in me, umm.. I certainly don't have his spent balance, but--
Interviewer: Certainly not. Too bad, eh? But you might yet...
AR: I'll try, yes.
Interviewer: You've just come from Pennsylvania, from Pittsburgh. You're shooting there, are you?
AR: Yeah
Interviewer: Did you watch the election returns?
AR: I did, yes.
Interviewer: And what was your reaction to this election, was it--I don't know how much of a political animal you are...
AR: I'm not quite sure how-- I mean I guess what is means is suddenly the Democrats have won something. Thank God! If you want to know how political I am. But maybe it means a turnaround is happening in America. We live in hope.
Interviewer: We live in hope. You still live in Britain but I would think there are those in Hollywood who are really quite keen on you coming across, so to speak.
AR: I think I live on a trampoline at the moment, which is fine by me. It depends on the script and then say, "Oh I want to do that." Then you just have to pack your bags.
Interviewer: You know one has to notice that male British actors seem to get a better ride from the North American film community than the female.
AR: Well, I think that Hollywood is tough on women. In particular, certain standards of beauty are supposed to be adhered to and as soon as the odd crow's foot appears, you're ditched! And the next, ummm, young... um... (hesitates)
Interviewer: Puppy?
AR: Whatever word springs to mind...
Interviewer: I didn't mean to put words in your mouth.
AR: And if you can string two words together, then you know, that's it--up on the pedestal you go! And not too many are regarded as the Juliet Stevenson's of this world. You know, it's hard for somebody like Juliet to establish herself in Hollywood.
Interviewer: Do you think she'll try? I did read a bit that said she was going to go but she absolutely refuses to sit around the pool.
AR: Yeah, she went. I mean, I pushed her. I said "go" and she SHOULD go. And it would be great if they found some movie stars at the end. Because that kind of honesty and talent on screen is rare. And I think it has enormous appeal, you know, it's not just about seeing some regular features and some nicely capped teeth.
Interviewer: Yeah, we're quite sick of the capped teeth, aren't we?
AR: Well, they're fine in their way, but we need to be more accepting of the insides of people, I think.
Interviewer: Would you say that your life has dramatically changed--your work life, that is--since the Sheriff of Nottingham role? Has it done something to your career that you didn't think would happen?
AR: I don't know... I really don't know. I mean, I was in England and as soon as all of that--whatever THAT was--happened, I was basically into a play and glad of it because it was kind of back to basics and so all of that other stuff was going on when I was trying to come to grips with what this play was about and the kind of "eight times a weekness" of it. You know, Robin Hood is like an explosion going off and the dust will settle. (laughs)
Interviewer: You can only hope, I guess, huh?
AR: It will, yeah, it will, because it does. There will be another explosion in six months.
Interviewer: From what now?
AR: Some other movie. (laughs)
Interviewer: So are you going to get your guard up in any way for the roles that you take?
AR: Well, yes, I'm careful and they have to interest me, or I'll be bad--it's that simple.
Interviewer: When have you ever been bad?
AR: Oh, often.
Interviewer: Tell me when?
AR: Oh God, yes.
Interviewer: Tell me the worst you've ever done.
AR: Well, I think, you see-- I always think the last thing I did had moments of such terribleness in it that you shrivel in embarrassment. Yeah, everything you do actually. I am sure every actor would say the same. I mean, I had to sit here and listen to that excerpt from Truly Madly Deeply and think "How was I allowed to get away with that?"
Interviewer: In particular, what is it that you thought you were allowed to get away with?
AR: Never actually, unfortunately, especially that's why I never go to watch rushes. Because what you see on a screen is never remotely what you think you're doing. Because my voice is not...the voice you hear is not the one I hear. So that always comes as a shock for a start, and umm... seems like really critics saying "he spoke hardly audibly." I think I can be heard clearly, but one can't... So there's a huge gap between your own imagination and what's going across and every time you see yourself onscreen it's a bit shocked to see how far away you are from even what you thought you were doing.
Interviewer: Well, what did you think in Truly Madly Deeply that you were doing that was so completely different from what I saw? Give me just one example.
AR: Your tone of voice. You think, "God, does anybody speak THAT slowly?" (laughs) Is it physically possible? Umm, and I don't hear that. So that always comes as a shock. You're just basically saying, "Hey somebody tell this actor to just get on with it!"
Interviewer: (laughs) Have you ever done any radio? Radio plays, I guess?
AR: Oh yeah, loads. Great fun. You don't have to learn the lines and you don’t have to get dressed up.
Interviewer: That's the thing, you don’t have to get dressed up. I am sitting here in a bride's suit just to amuse myself (laughs) Do you still draw at all? Because, as I understand it, you were a graphic artist. So are you any good at that?
AR: I don't as much as I should. It's like any other muscle you have or you're blessed with, you should keep it fit and I don't as much as I ought to.
Interviewer: So do you fancy that in your dotage you're going to get out the old watercolours?
AR: Hmmm, I think so.
Interviewer: Wonderful though, isn't it? Well, now you're flogging these pictures for the next couple of days and then you're back to...
AR: Flogging?? (laughs)
Interviewer: Well, you know... I think perhaps we use that expression in a slightly different way than you people.
Now joining
another interview in progress...
Alan the subversive actor
AR: So that's the job, you know, it's to make another bookend. So I was able to influence the character actually to quite a large extent, because I have a logic that I applied, I suppose, and then asked questions and forced logic through. You know, like why have you got him dressed in terrorist gear when he doesn't get his hands dirty and he has all these people around to do the mucky stuff? So eventually, I got a suit and that was the right bookend to Bruce, because he was going to be in a t-shirt and sweat. And once one was in a suit, it became possible to push the notion that they should meet. If I'd have been dressed in terrorist gear, we couldn't have had the scene where we met and I pretend to be on of my own hostages. So that influenced the film quite directly.
Interviewer: Are there different demands that are placed on you as an actor in Hollywood than the demands that are placed upon you as a stage actor in Britain?
AR: Probably externally, although they expect you to come up with the goods. And I guess they’d better be there in rushes because there's an awful lot of money riding on a big Hollywood movie. And I think although people wear very expensive suits and look very confident, they still need to see it in rushes. And whatever "it" is, it's pretty undefinable, I think, this marriage between a script, actors, and a director. It's something that producers in Hollywood and executives like to think they understand but a lot of the time they have their fingers crossed because you get proved wrong so often. They put what they call "box office names" into a project and it bombs. I would like to see far more examples of TMD coming along and being successful in Hollywood. Against all the odds, you know, Bagdad Cafe, pictures like that, because then Hollywood can prove people need to be told stories rather than be manipulated by greedy individuals.
Interviewer: And why do you suppose, Alan, that kind of storytelling happens so seldom in Hollywood?
AR: Well, because in something like Die Hard and Robin Hood, to a certain extent-- they are written to formulas and they're very much about making money back. They cost a lot of money to make so they better make the money back. So there's certain requirements and ingredients they figure should be there. With TMD and CME, they are the complete personal vision of the writer/director. All there was was a blank piece of paper and a typewriter. Somewhere down the line that gets turned into a movie. Nobody got in the way, nobody asked his vision.
Interviewer: How do you imagine those films would have been made differently in Hollywood? Or would they even have been made in Hollywood?
AR: I suppose a lot of people here said oh well, it's the thinking person's Ghost--TMD. And I think they're very different films. It doesn't really help, it doesn't really hurt to compare them. You know, if you enjoyed Ghost, you'll enjoy TMD. If you didn't enjoy Ghost, you will enjoy TMD (laughs). But Hollywood is very different from the miniseries world. It's the thing that always amazes me, what you can do on television and how careful they are. It's got Scorsese and it's got Copolla and it's got some great, great film makers who are very daring. You see a film like Taxi Driver and you think, well, how much more daring do you want? How much on the edge do you want? They're perfectly capable of doing it and keep doing it if... but then again, what you have to have are film makers who are not interfered with. The problem arises from when there are too many opinions from too many people in suits and opinions is all they have and so the film gets diluted. So if you had a film about incest being done by, you know, five or six producers, it's going to be fit for the top of the chocolate box by the time they're finished.
Interviewer: Can you imagine what your future relationship with Hollywood will be?
AR: Well, I hope it continues. I have absolutely no qualms whatsoever about entertaining the public. I think that's fine. People don't need to be lectured at all the time. I hope I tell good stories and even with movies, and a big budget--I'm not sure that I'm going to do anymore of those--but if I were, I hope it's possible to be subversive within them. To just sort of pull the rug out from people's preconceptions and make them just kind of look at the screen from a slightly different angle. You know, it's a huge responsibility and power to do that to millions and millions and millions of people, rather than just in an outhouse cinema. I'm not saying one's better than the other, but that big one exists and so let's put it in the hands of a few subversives.
