‘WE ARE NOT THERE’

Interview with Todd Haynes

by

Jessie Emkic

Dressed in a short-sleeved 50’s style collar shirt and gray pants, Todd Haynes smiles a big smile as he shakes my hand. Known as one of the most established filmmakers of the New Queer Cinema movement, this congenial director visited Vienna for the Viennale 07 film festival to promote his latest film I’m Not There, which took him seven years to complete. With a cup of cappuccino on a table next to him, he sits relaxed in an fauteuil rolling his cigarette with Drum Light shag.

BLITZ: How did the idea for I’m Not There come into existence?

Todd Haynes: I took a break after Velvet Goldmine for about a year and a half. I had an idea to do this film, a melodrama called Far From Heaven and it was going to be a nice opportunity to work with Julianne Moore, but I wasn’t thrilled. All of sudden I wanted to hear Bob Dylan music again and was planning to get away from New York City and go to Portland, Oregon where my sister lives and write the script. But I just kept listening to Dylan and I started to plan my trip, a drive across the country. I made a whole collection of Dylan songs on cassette tapes based on the records I still had. In the year 2000 I got in my car and drove cross country. I bought the anthology of the American folk music half way across the trip in Kansas City and started listening to that. When I arrived in Portland I bought the bootleg series, the first Columbia release, and was astounded by that stuff.

BLITZ: When did it occur to you to take a woman - specifically Cate Blanchett - to play Dylan?

Haynes: Both halves of that idea were fairly apparent to me once when I was really looking at Dylan in 1966, the way he looked, moved and gesticulated, how genuine that creature was from that moment. It wasn’t the Dylan of Don’t Look Back a year before, it wasn’t gonna be the Dylan of a year later in 1967 in Woodstock when he kinda threw it all away. This was this absolutely rare creature that nobody had seen the likes of before in popular culture. And he was androgynous, but in a way that was not like Bowie. It’s almost like Patti Smith would do 10 years later, you know. So, I wanted to reinject it with the sense of that original shock value and that uniqueness and I thought a woman should play the role. Once I really started to look around at the best actors who could handle something like that it wasn’t hard to settle on Cate. I also was in the process of taking pictures of a lot of these different actresses and Tanya, my sister, would send them to me black and white on a fax machine, and I would draw them into Jude, the character. I changed them all into Dylan basically of ’66 to see which one looked the best. And a lot of them looked pretty good. After that I’ve sent Cate the script and we made her an offer. She sort of said “yes” right away and we started to use her name. It was a whole year later in Brooklyn when she came for the theater play Hedda Gabler that the final decision was taken. She was walking on the stage with her husband Andrew when she finally turned to him and said “So, Andrew I finally decided I’m going to do it!”, and I was like “What??” (laughs). It was amazing! All these actors were just incredible to work with and they all gave so much of themselves. They took it all so seriously and they all were up for the adventure and challenge. But they were terrified too, you know.

BLITZ: Was your decision to choose her based on what was best for the project or were you also interested in exploring the female vs. male?

Haynes: I don’t really consider Dylan very female, but I do think he was rejecting all kinds of masculine models and I think that was a part of the blurring there. Everybody in New York at that time had a kind of cool look and everybody was doing speed and getting real skinny. And there was a kind of underground coolness at looking a little bit gay like coming from the Warhol’s Factory scene, which was less prevalent in the Dylan camp. But I think Dylan understood that himself and things he said and things he was quoted by saying in 1966 were somewhat boastful about how he saw through the man and woman thing. He was cool about all that kinda stuff. He also loved Allen Ginsberg and was completely unthreatened by Ginsberg’s homosexuality, and probably had a huge crush on him. And there are stories, you know. You’ll hear stories about Dylan making a pass at some cute male musician. Who knows, there are so many different things. Dylan himself admitted that he had hustled when he first came to New York in 1961 and he said this in ’66 in amidst of this period. But he also said some most homophobic things in the world when he was born-again Christian in 1980. So, he fully occupied each of these mentalities and was committed to them totally at the time, but he would also discard them.

BLITZ: Your film is an eclectic odyssey into Dylan’s life and personality, constructing and deconstructing everything that evolved around his life – his music, marriage, career, religion. In the face of over saturation with mainstream Hollywood productions, a rather unusual artistic approach. Can you talk a little bit about your fears and doubts regarding the project?

Haynes: It’s been super scary and hard. The hardest thing I’ve ever done, the hardest thing Christine Vachon and John Sloss, our producers ever did. John said it nearly killed him. The financial strategies and pursuits were the hardest. The creative ones were actually always fairly graced starting with Dylan’s blessing and getting the actors so easily. The European pre-sales at Cannes 05 were incredibly robust and we thought “Wow, we got the wind on our sails and we’re moving forward!”. Then we were back to the States to start shopping for domestic financing and that’s when doors started just closing left and right. It’s not like I was so surprised you know, I was just disappointed. But I knew what the problem was, it was the script, it was always the script. The script was incomprehensible even for the actors. The hard part for me personally was that when it all started at that first rush of emotion and obsession over the music it felt completely fine. And then I went and did Far From Heaven and came back and I was really gonna thoroughly do it and do the research and the writing. But the infatuation either had gone away or it had turned into labour. This is what really always happens with anything I do, and I always forget it, every time - the love turns into labour. You trade in something purely amorous for something that’s about work. You give yourself a job, you know. And what you hope is that you’ll make something with which you can provide the same possible love or amorousness for the viewer. I always feel like I lost something intuitive and organic... that now I really lost all my instincts as a director and I’m just gonna (whispers) fucking fake it and I’m just gonna work extra hard and be even more meticulous, because I really don’t know what else. All I can do is just do extra work to make it happen and that’s what I sort of do, every single time.

BLITZ: Due to Dylan’s complex idiosyncrasies the actors were under a great deal of pressure too. How did they cope with it?

Haynes: One of Heath Ledger’s favorite stories is about the lunch scene with Charlotte Gainsbourg where he says all those sexist things. Me and he totally clicked and we were having such a great time together, but the night before the shooting he had a total panic attack. I mean, the guy who stared in Brokeback Mountain and was nominated for an Oscar was having a total panic attack! He couldn’t fall asleep, he was just traumatized about going to work the next day and fucking it up or something. Michelle Williams had to talk him through a relaxation process on the phone from New York. And Cate says on other movies she can just leave at the end of the day and she’s done with her work, she can separate. She said on this one she’d wake up in the middle of the night and go “Fuck! I should have done that!” So, everybody I think, forgets their own skill, their own abilities when they’re really committed or really care or when they’re good at what they do, when they’re conscientious. And then you push yourself harder and you overcome, you know.

BLITZ: With I’m Not There I had an impression as if through all these different characters that you’ve chosen to play Dylan, you were actually wanting to say that Bob Dylan is an energy that encompasses everything, that there’s a person alike Bob Dylan inside us all. Is this what you intended or was it a coincidence?

Haynes: Well, that’s an interesting way of taking it. Obviously there must be something really hugely available in him to many different kinds of people for him to be and become Bob Dylan. Something he makes available to you even if he doesn’t cater to any audience or minimize his thoughts or follow a trend. He doesn’t do the normal thing people do to make themselves available – he does, if anything, the opposite. But there must be something there that so many people in different cultures, languages and generations can respond to. So, in that way, there is something weirdly universal about him and his work, and I’m so glad that that’s something that can be felt in this film, for sure. But if I achieved it, it was only through this kind of not looking that way, but looking as specifically as possible at what he did do and the choices he did make and the denials he did execute and the mysteries, and the weirdness. I hope people can somehow accept the eccentricities of the movie, because of the Billy the Kid part which doesn’t fit into a normal part, and because he is so elusive, he is so unclear. I still don’t get how he became so popular. He didn’t do it easily, he didn’t do it obviously.

BLITZ: Dylan’s dramatic changes over the years make it somewhat understandable why you use six different actors to play different characters portraying Dylan.

Haynes: That became quite clear to me. What’s funny is that if you ask someone in the street “What do you know about Bob Dylan?”, they’ll be like “Oh, didn’t he like plug in electric and everybody freaked out?” or “Didn’t he turn Christian?” Yeah, those are two examples of radical change and the shockwaves those changes sent. If anything, people wonder why everybody freaked out. It’s more like people want to know why the changes mattered so much, which is almost more the description of his times and the events surrounding him. But it is true that somehow and at some level, because of the reactions Bob Dylan has been getting, I have to think that the concept isn’t that crazy. It isn’t that intellectual.

BLITZ: Do you see your film as a cinematic version of Dylan’s music from the 60’s period? You also include some cinematic references to that period, like to Fellini’s 8 1/2 in the scenes where the character Jude played by Cate Blanchett, portrays Dylan in his ‘66 phase.

Haynes: I tried to find cinematic references from the 60’s and did use that as primary background for his most fertile period. That period formed him and I feel all these core identities that reside there came from the 60’s era, even if that sort of spills into the 70’s. I’ve tried to find cinematic and visuals motifs and stylistic language that got to the core of the music, including the musical themes and genres he was doing, which is why for instance when people say the Jude section is like Don’t Look Back, I’m like “No! It’s Fellini!” (laughs). I don’t expect them to get that it’s Fellini necessarily, but the music of Dylan’s albums Blonde On Blonde and Highway 61 Revisited is not social realist music at all or cinema varieté music, which is what Don’t Look Back is, you know. It’s this baroque, distorted, highly stylized and yet witty, urbane, ironic music and language and that’s what you see in 8 1/2 played out perfectly. And then it also happens to be about an artist being besieged by the press and asked to answer for himself and explain who he is and why he’s doing what he does, so it made sense in so many levels. But I found all kind of visual, cinematic things that I thought really did illustrate his music for their little moments.

BLITZ: You say you lost that initial love you had for the project and I believe you also refer to the love you had for Dylan’s music. Did you regain that love after you finished the film?

Haynes: It’s never the same as it was at the beginning. It never is. I mean, it’s just different. It’s something that’s actually gone through your entire system and come out again.

BLITZ: So, you no longer listen to Bob Dylan’s music?

Haynes: Not in that way. I mean, I’ll still feel a kind of flutter of love, but it’s just different. I don’t know how to explain it. It’s sort of like you feel almost self-conscious. It’s like something you made, as if your handprints are on it in some weird way. Of course, I don’t feel like it’s my music, but I just don’t know what it is.

WIR SIND NOCH NICHT DORT

Ein Gespräch mit Filmemacher Todd Haynes über I’m Not There

von

Jessie Emkic

Nachdem Todd Haynes als Filmemacher mit Velvet Goldmine (1998) und Far From Heaven (2002) internationale Erfolge feierte, waren die Hoffnungen für seinen neuesten Film I’m Not There außergewönlich groß. Dieser Film der an Finanzierungsschwierigkeiten fast scheiterte, erreichte bald nach seiner Premiere in Venedig den Kultstatus. I’m Not There war von Anfang an nicht vorbestimmt ein Mainstream-Film zu werden, sondern eine eklektische Odyssee durch das Leben und die Person von Bob Dylan, einer der kontroversesten Berühmtheiten der jüngsten Vergangenheit. Dylan war Poet, Rebell, Menschenrechtler und wiedergeborener Christ innerhalb der Pfingstgemeinde - ein wahrhafter Chamäleon der amerikanischen Folkmusik. Um solche komplexe menschliche Eigenarten auf Zelluloid darstellen zu können, hob Haynes seinen Film auf ein anderes kinematografisches Niveau: er schuf eine mehrschichtige Konstruktion und Dekonstruktion der Person von Bob Dylan indem er sechs parallellaufende Geschichten aus Dylans Leben verwendete. In jeder dieser Geschichten wird die Hauptfigur von einer anderen SchauspielerIn dargestellt: Neben Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Richard Gere, Marcus Carl Franklin und Ben Whishaw ist Cate Blanchett in der Rolle von Jude zu sehen. Jude ist Dylan im Jahre 1966 – maßlos talentiert, feminin, drogenabhängig und weltberühmt. Zu behaupten Blanchett würde Dylan in seiner ’66 Phase einfach spielen, wäre eine unangemessene Untertreibung: Im I’m Not There hört Blanchett buchstäblich auf sie selbst zu sein und verwandelt sich in Dylan. Sie sieht aus wie Dylan, sie spricht wie Dylan, sie gestikuliert wie Dylan; und sie schafft es die Matarmophose von Schauspielerin Cate Blanchett zum Menschen Bob Dylan Schritt für Schritt vollkommen durchzulaufen. Das Resultat ist eine famose, haarsträubende Leistung wie man sie nur im raren, wahrhaft magischen Momenten des großen Kinos sieht. Für die Rolle von Jude wurde sie bereits für den Golden Globe nominiert; ein Sieg wäre keine Überraschung.
Kontrovers, umstritten und bejubelt – Todd Haynes, der aus seiner Homosexualität nie ein Geheimnis machte, gilt als einer der ersten Regisseure der “New Queer Cinema”-Bewegung.
Er ist bekannt für seine Fähigkeit den Kunstfilm mit Mainstream elegant und geschmeidig zu verbinden. Anschläge sprach mit ihm über I’m Not There und die beste Rollenbesetzung des Jahres 2007.

Anschläge: Was brachte dich auf die Idee die Rolle von Bob Dylan mit einer Frau zu besetzen, insbesondere mit Cate Blanchett?

Haynes: Beide Seiten der Idee waren für mich ziemlich offensichtlich als ich anfing Dylan wie er 1966 war, wirklich zu sehen – die Art wie er aussah und sich bewegte, wie er gestikulierte, und die Art wie authentisch dieses Geschöpf von diesem Augenblick an wirkte. Es war nicht der Dylan aus der Don’t Look Back-Phase ein Jahr zuvor, aber auch nicht der Dylan ein Jahr später 1967 in Woodstock wo er alles hinschmiss. Er war dieses absolut rares Geschöpf welches bis zum diesen Zeitpunkt in der Pop-Kultur gar nicht erblickt wurde. Er war androgyn, aber nicht im Stil von Bowie, wie Bowie sich öffentlich zeigte. Er war fast so wie Patti Smith 10 Jahre später sein würde. Ich wollte daher das Gefühl und die Einzigartigkeit die beim ursprünglichen Schockwert enstanden ist, wieder zum Leben erwecken, und dachte die Rolle sollte von einer Frau gespielt werden. Alsbald ich mich auf die Suche nach den besten Schauspielerinnen gemacht habe, war es nicht schwer mich für Cate zu entscheiden. Ich befand mich gerade im Prozess der Fotoaufnahmen vieler verschiedener Schauspielerinnen und Tanya, meine Schwester faxte mir die schwarz-weißen Aufnahmen die ich dann bemalte und zum Jude, der Figur machte. Ich habe sie alle in den Dylan 1966 umgewandelt um zu sehen welche der Schauspielerinnen am besten aussieht. Viele von ihnen sahen ziemlich gut aus. Und dann, nachdem ich Cate das Drehbuch geschickt habe, machten wir ihr ein Angebot. Sie war sehr interessiert, sagte mir jedoch später, sie verfiehl völlig in Panik. Sie hatte irgendwie halbwegs zugesagt und wir fingen an ihren Namen zu verwenden. Ich sah sie erst ein Jahr später in Brooklyn während sie mit ihrem Ehemann Andrew auf der Bühne von Hedda Gabler herum ging. In einem Moment schaute sie über die Bühne und ich dachte “Oh, mein Gott, das wird unheimlich!” Es war genau dort auf der Bühne von Hedda Gabler als sie sich schließlich zu Andrew drehte und sagte “Also, Andrew, ich habe mich entschieden. Ich werde es machen!” Und ich sagte nur “Was??” (lacht). Und ja, es war unglablich. Es war einfach unglaublich mit all den SchauspielerInnen zu arbeiten, sie gaben so viel von sich. Sie alle haben die Arbeit sehr ernst genommen und waren für das Abenteuer und die Herausforderung offen. Aber sie hatten auch Panik bekommen...

Anschläge: Basierte deine Entscheidung Blanchett auszuwählen nur auf der Überlegung es sei das beste für das Projekt oder warst du auch daran interessiert mit dem Gender zu spielen durch die Erforschung der femininen Maskulinität?

Haynes: Ich halte den Dylan nicht wirklich für feminin, aber ich denke schon, dass er alle Arten von maskulinen Leitbildern ablehnte, und ich glaube das war ein Teil seiner Verwischung. Zu dieser Zeit hatte jeder in New York eine Art von “Cool Look” und alle waren auf Speed und magerten ab. Es gab eine Art von “Underground Coolness” indem man ein wenig Gay aussah als ob man in der Factory-Szene von Warhol unterwegs war, und das war im Dylans Lager weniger gängig. Aber ich glaube Dylan hat das selbst verstanden. Er prahlte damit in seinen Zitaten aus 1966 wie er das Phänomen von männlich-weiblich durchsah. Er war cool damit. Er liebte auch Allen Ginsberg, fühlte sich durch Ginsbergs Homosexualität völlig unbedroht und war wahrscheinlich in ihm verknallt. Man hört auch Geschichten darüber wie Dylan süße Musiker anmachte. Er selbst gab zu 1961 auf den Strich gegangen zu sein als er das erste mal nach New York kam. Als er als Christ 1980 wiedergeboren wurde machte er schockierend homophobe Aussagen. Er lebte jede seiner Geisteshaltungen zur bestimmten Zeit völlig aus, legte sie jedoch auch ab.


I’m Not There Kinostart Deutschland: 28. Februar 2008; Kinostart Österreich: 29. Februar 2008

THE DIXIE CHICKS: SHUT UP & SING

Film review

by Jessie Emkic

With more than 30 million albums sold and 13 Grammy awards won, the Dixie Chicks have written history as the most successful female band of all times. In March 2003, at the peak of their stardom and the onset of Iraq invasion, the Dixie Chicks are touring the world. The lead singer Natalie Maines, deeply disturbed to witness an enormous wave of anti-American sentiment drifting through Europe, makes a spontaneous statement at a London concert: “Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.” Enjoying a vigorous applause by the audience, she doesn’t even anticipate this statement will be abbreviated and manipulated by the US media into a ‘shocking’ symbol of anti-Americanism at home. Keen on silencing national voices of opposition, the American right embarked on one of the most obscene persecutions manifested in younger US history, taking on a character reminiscent of the McCarthy era. Politicizing Chick’s music, thousands of country music radio stations boycott the band, causing their singles to lose major chart positions. Well organized extreme right civil groups, besotted on Bush’s aggressive propaganda, give a crucial helping hand in launching a nation-wide campaign against the Dixie Chicks. The band suffers massive financial losses through meager sales of concert tickets and music. Facing a potential ruination of their careers, and with it their lives as they were, the extensive emotional pressure reaches its peak when Natalie receives death threats and the Dixie Chicks begin wondering which way to go.

Two time Oscar winner Barbara Kopple teams up with Cecilia Peck to direct this exceptional documentary. We watch the band members telling their stories summoning up emotions and experiences, transcending the borders between celebrity and private person. The film avoids narration, but instead tells the story through documenting three years in lives of the band members, their families and everyone involved. The value of “Shut Up & Sing” is not only cinematic, but of a historical document on lack of democratic sentiment in those who praise individual liberties, on politicizing music and the shameful evasion to condemn the violation of basic human right of speech in a democratic country. A remarkable testimony of friendship, dignity, individual strength and determination to stand up.

published in Norwegian in Le Monde diplomatic

here's the official ad for the film...

...and a shorter version TV stations BANNED from being aired