the traveler's resource guide to festivals & films
a FestivalTravelNetwork.com site
part of Insider Media llc.
Growing up poor in Madras, India, Srinivasa Ramanujan Iyengar earned admittance to England’s prestigious Cambridge University during WWI, where he becomes a pioneer in mathematical theories thanks to the guidance of his professor, G.H. Hardy. Not exactly the kind of storyline that seems to offer material that would an appealing drama let alone make for award-worthy film with major stars.
Nonetheless, director Matt Brown crafted a screenplay that attracted such established stars as Dev Patel, Jeremy Irons, and Toby Jones who gave his film a shot. It turned into a beautiful portrait of a mentor/student relationship that offered inspiration in a world often devoid of such inspiration.
Not only did the film win critical accolades but it's now being touted as a contender for various awards — especially since executive producer Edward R. Pressman has launched a campaign for Jeremy Irons (as the mentor Hardy) to nominated for a supporting actor Oscar. After its World Premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival and its USA debut at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York last April, it was released during the spring. The film garnered decent box office results and critical acclaim. Besides the dynamic between Irons and Patel, it offered an insider’s look into the seemingly cold, arcane world of mathematics.
But with the right writer/director behind the production such a story can prompt an intriguing narrative. and Matt Brown seems to be that creator.
Thanks to his dogged perseverance, this project finally came to fruition after being 12 years in the making. Especially since the director didn’t have that much experience, having made two features previously and no passion for math ( though he went to an alternative school in Brookline, Massachusetts where arts were the focus he did learn some math). But Brown believed in this. As he has explained in another interview, “It’s a very personal project; I wrote it in an oncology ward taking care of my brother with his wife while he was going through terrible cancer.”
Q: What led you into doing this film - did you have much interest in the mathematics, otherwise what would lead you to do Srinivasa Ramanujan’s story?
MB: I came across Robert Kanigel’s biography, the Man Who Knew Infinity, about 12 years ago. It was never about the mathematics for me, I was fascinated by the human story between Ramanujan and the journey to England and the isolation he was going through and his relationship with GH Hardy and how the two of them had to bridge the gap.
It was never so much about the mathematics in the beginning, but I came to respect pure mathematics as an art form, but I really came to understand the passion mathematicians have for their work, like musicians have for theirs. It’s something that audiences can appreciate because it’s really the human story under the film.
Q: Ramanujan’s mother had a strong influence on him growing up, particularly with regards to his religious education…
MB: Ramanujan’s mother? I know she was strong in Carnatic music. She was a singer, and he was surrounded by Carnatic music his whole life — it has intricate mathematical rhythms to it and that was probably a strong influence on him. She was also very invested in astrology.
Q: When he was in Madras, he got a scholarship to go to the college there, but he dropped out. It was briefly touched on in the film but can you elaborate on this...
MB: He got kicked out of two different colleges, I believe in Madras. He became to involved in his mathematics that he just didn’t concentrate on his other subjects. And at that time if you didn’t have a degree, it was a much bigger deal than it is today, probably, in that you can’t find any form of employment. He really became isolated in his own world with mathematics.
Q: Due to Ramanujan’s lack of a college education, he didn’t know the concept of a mathematical proof. After Ramanujan sent professor Hardy several of his theorems, Hardy didn’t want to push Ramanujan to prove do any mathematical proofs but did he encourage Ramanujan to allow his intuition be appled to his mathematics?
MB: You’re right, it was kind of proof versus intuition in many ways. That’s at the core of the story. If Hardy had known Ramanujan would only be alive for five years, I think there’s a strong argument that suggest he would have encouraged him to go off and write theorem after theorem.
Ramanujan did so much with mathematics that they’re still trying to understand it today. It’s tragic that we don’t have more of his mathematics. Imagine what he could have done? Because Hardy didn’t know that at the time, it was important to him to learn rigor.
Rigor is an important part of mathematics and allows people to understand how they got to certain places. It’s more than proving right or wrong, it provides understanding to a process.
Also, within the education Hardy was trying to provide, Ramanujan was rediscovering entire fields of mathematics he didn’t even know he was rediscovering. He had to be caught up on a couple centuries worth of mathematics just so he didn’t waste his time rediscovering things.
Q: What was the social dynamic between India and England — obviously when he came to England, he was the outsider — how did you balance the three elements or structure in the film — his time in Madras, his adjusting as an Indian trying to survive in England, and third, of showing his serious relationship with Hardy. How did you balance those things, and the social dynamic?
MB: In 1914 there were very few Indians that would have come to England and for Ramanujan to come to England it required him to break past. It was forbidden for a Braman to cross the sea. And there were very few Indians there at the time, it was the height of colonialism in many ways. There was a lot of racism.
On top of which, when the Great War started in 1914, you had all these students from Cambridge going off to war, there was a tremendous amount of resentment that Indian students who remained on the campus during that time were safe and guarded.
There was an increased amount of resentment, never mind that as a vegetarian by faith he wasn’t able to obtain fresh egetables because of the rationing, so that made it even more challenging. He really had incredible social obstacles to overcome. It was a real story of perseverance and bravery by Ramanujan.
Q: Hardy was a highly ranked mathematicians, John littlewood was 30, David Hilbert Hilband was an 80, and Ramanujan was 100 so Hardy showed his appreciation for the work they did together…. There was an enormous amount of cooperation between them.
MB: This was a man who had discovered trigonometry at age 13 only to find out that it was already discovered.
Q: Imagine what could have been done with their relationship — it makes you appreciate their relationship.
MB: Hardy had an enormous amount of respect for Ramanujan, I don’t think he could wrap his head around how it all came to him. And they, in talking to some of the greatest mathematicians alive today, they say there’s really no better explanation than Ramanujan’s own explanation, that Namagiri [a Hindu Goddess] put the formulas on his tongue while he slept.
We can’t explain how there’s a mind that’s this incredible in the world, but you have to wonder if there aren’t more minds in the world like this that are undiscovered today. And we don’t have universal education today, so outliers like this, we have to find this kind of talent and nurture it.
Q: What was invoved in the process of putting Jeremy Irons and Dev Patel together? Their chemistry is amazing.
MB: It’s incredible, isn’t it? They had wonderful chemistry and I think for both of the actors it was an opportunity to play roles that were very different from roles they played recently. They had a lot of passion for the subject and wanting to tell the story. We’re an independent film and it’s a challenging shoot, and these actors really came prepared and made incredible performances in difficult circumstances.
Q: How much did you feed mathematical concepts to these actors — or was it all Greek to them?
MB: They’re both very well aware of the human story, the incredible story that it is, so that’s what they were drawn to. As far as the mathematics go, we had Ken Ono as our mathematical advisor, he’s one of the top mathematicians in the world. He vetted the script with me and made sure everything was right in the art department as well as in the screenplay itself. So the actors could trust the dialogue and trust me as a director.
Q: Was that part of reason that you have some Japanese associate producers involved on this project? They are a lot of good mathematicians in Japan as well.
MB: It wasn’t. It just happened to be where Ken is from. I know his heritage is important to him and is proud of it but it had no bearing on my asking him to do the film. He’s one of the top mathematicians in the world and when he reached out to be part of the film we felt very lucky and honored to have him. He’s extremely passionate about Ramanujan and his story.
Q : What does the number 1729 mean to you — its the number that Hardy recalled when he rode the taxi to visit Ramanujan at the clinic…
MB: If I ever play a lottery ticket and it’s four numbers, those are the four numbers I will play.
Q: Didn’t they use that number sometimes in Star Trek or Futurama or anytime where numbers have meaning — they been used as a reference.
MB: It comes up in mathematics, it’s called taxicab numbers. It became a small field, Manjul Bhargava was explaining that to me. It’s incredible how his mind worked that he could recognize that.
Q: What sort of experience did you want audiences to discover through this film?
MB: I hope they take away the human story and that they find it to be an inspiring film. I hope it opens up their minds and their hearts. I hope it’s a film that… There are outliers in the world, so I hope that there are other Ramanujans out there that will be discovered.
Son of sports star and entrepreneur Rocky Aoki, long haired Steve strode a very different path to set in motion his own career. But becoming an internationally renown dj/mixer/producer wasn’t initially part of his plan.
A Grammy-nominated international producer/DJ, electronic dance music entrepreneur and founder of the trendsetting record label, Dim Mak, Aoki built a big business well before turning to deejaying and electronic dance production. In turn, it became an events/lifestyle company and apparel line.
Since launching in 1996, Dim Mak has broken bands such as Bloc Party, The Bloody Beetroots, Klaxons, and The Gossip through deft marketing of single and full-length album releases -- it now has nearly 500 releases to date.
Then as a solo artist, Aoki has become a force of nature averaging over 250 tour dates per year.
Aoki's second artist album Neon Future I, was released September 30, 2014 via Dim Mak/Ultra Music and features his Gold certified single "Delirious (Boneless)" with Chris Lake and Tujamo featuring Kid Ink, "Born To Get Wild" featuring will.i.am and "Rage The Night Away" featuring Waka Flocka Flame.
The second part, Neon Future II, was released on May 12, 2015 and featured collaborations with Linkin Park, Matthew Koma, Snoop Lion, Rivers Cuomo and NERVO, plus a special appearance by creative genius J.J. Abrams who voices the outro to close the album.
Aoki also Executive Produced and curated the soundtrack of The Hive -- The Nerdist's first feature film acquisition. Created by writer/director David Yarovesky and produced by Cary Granat of Scream 2 and Scream 3 fame, the film was called by Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn as "the most horrifying and disgusting love story ever."
Recently, Aoki became the subject of a documentary about his career, I'll Sleep When I'm Dead, titled as such because he never seems to stop going.
Subject Steve Aoki, director Justin Krook, and producer Matt Colon talked with a trio of journalists in New York City at the 2016 Tribeca Film Festival.
Q: Being the focus of this documentary, how did you deal with your family, friends and colleagues?
SA: I’ve had a video crew of my own — some friends of mine would shoot these guerilla-style, YouTube-style videos for the last five years. So I always had some video team with me at some point traveling through the world. When Justin came into the fold, we were going over ideas about doing a doc which obviously wouldn’t be the same thing of what’s already out there.
What hasn’t been out there is more of a personal story that I had yet to discuss with anyone. In interviews, I don’t really talk about it. I never felt safe to talk about it. It’s more fun to talk about adventures on the road or doing on the spot things that directly connect with kids that are coming to my shows.
In this story, it was hard to open up and go into it. It took time. At a certain stage of making a movie, we crossed that bridge together. I was eventually like, “All right, you have uncensored direction and access. Do what you want.” I didn’t even see the film, after two-and-a-half years of filming until a month ago. I didn’t know how it was being edited.
Krook: I think one of the shoots that really opened things up was when we went to Japan for [Steve Aoki’s] mom’s 70th birthday. He got his mom, his sister and his brother to all go out together. Steve’s busy, and everyone’s spread out around the world, so it was kind of a unique thing. We were able to tag along on this family vacation of theirs.
Meeting the family — his mom is the nicest person you’ll ever meet — and those days in Japan really helped in that aspect. And also, for the rest of the time filming, I don’t think I ever saw Steve not working for seven days straight. It was interesting to film you when you were on personal time, because it was show after show after show.
Q: How do you feel about seeing yourself in this documentary?
SA: It is awkward for me. When I started seeing the more emotional side of things, I don’t like to show that. I don’t like showing the sad or dark. I really try to stay in a fun, spirited place. As far as the public access to who I am, I just like to show the fun side of things.
My “brand,” or whatever you want to call it, the Steve Aoki you see at live shows is fun. I’m not trying to portray anything different. But with this doc, when we get into more of these vulnerable places, it’s tough to watch.
Q: A lot of documentaries take more than five years to film. What was decided in the pre-production stage, in terms of how much access you would have and how long you wanted to film?
JK: We wanted to get it done as quickly as possible. But that said, we shot over the course of two-and-a-half years. Up front, when I first met with Steve, Matt (his manager) said we’re going to get all the access we need to make this.
Saying that and doing that is one thing, so over the course of those two-and-a-half years, we were able to dive a bit deeper. From a filmmaker’s side, we were able to able to earn Steve’s trust to tell his story and his family’s legacy.
I was familiar with Dim Mak [Steve Aoki’s record company]. I had seen Steve’s shows beforehand. So when I went out to meet him, I thought he’d be this party animal, drinking all the time. No, he’s a health nut, super-intelligent and a super-humble guy. And right then and there, when I met, I knew we were going to have a really good film.
Q: Themes of legacy and family resonate throughout the film; they're an important part of the story. Those themes spoke to you -- how did they affect the presentation of the movie?
JK: When we were talking with Matt and Steve, when we were conceptualizing the film, we didn’t want to make a documentary that was going to only speak to just EDM fans. While that is a big group of people, it’s really limiting the audience at the same time.
It’s also limiting the demographic; it skews pretty young. What we wanted to do is use the dance-music scene as a backdrop. It’s sexy, it’s fun to look at, the live performances are great.
But if we could find a universal theme that could resonate with people of all ages and all races, everyone around the world can connect with having expectations put upon you. Everyone can understand these different family dynamics — whether it’s your high-school soccer coach or your parents or your teachers. Everyone understands what it is to have expectations, so I think that was kind of the genesis of it.
If we could connect with people, it wouldn’t matter if you’re a dance music fan or not. And I think at the end of the day, this film is an introduction to who Steve is but it’s also an introduction to the dance music scene as a whole. People who don’t know much about the scene come into it and understand it a bit more, but at the same time enjoy the film on a more emotional level.
SA: I think in the beginning, it was a bit difficult for me to decide to that. I never really did it before. I felt like if we were going to make a documentary that is telling a more human story instead of a dance story, then we might as well go all in. We might as well bring it all out, especially when we have people outside of my space making this film.
I didn’t want to make an EDM doc. They’re already out there. And also, for me, when I think about my father and my mother and the contributions they made to the culture — my father, particularly — there’s such a great story there.
As time goes by, it gets forgotten. It’s nice to bring it back to new generation that has no idea about it. The older generation, they know of him. That story stays in that bubble, but it’s nice to bring it to a new generation: the story of a Japanese person in America at a time a few decades past World War II, when discrimination against Japanese people was on red alert. He actually started a business that was part of popular culture in America. That’s unheard of.
His story is incredible. He was an ice cream man in Harlem, when he was 20s and had first moved to New York, and he got a loan to open up a restaurant. It’s kind of a crazy story. The hardship that he faced then, it’s hard to relate to now, but someone like him really opened up a lane for other Asians to be able to have that they can actually have an identity and be heard or be able to create a business or do something that can affect an infinite number of people.
So when I think about what he did, then it’s all worth it in the end to bring that back into this film and show that.
Of course, but when you see your dad [on TV], it’s your dad. But when you see Bruce Lee on TV, it’s like, “That’s my god! That’s my dude!”
JK: [He says to Aoki] But now it’s you as well. How many other Asian-Americans are huge, Top 40 artists?
Q: Even though you and your father went into different lines of work, you both have the traits of being a workaholic entrepreneur. He was quoted in the movie as saying he put work before his family and health. How do you balance that for yourself?
SA: It’s all about time management. Time management is how to use your time wisely, obviously, and understanding where you need help in certain areas and building teams in those areas to be able to build projects. I’m more of a project-based person, so I look at everything in projects and how to execute those projects requires help, a team.
Even though it says DIY, it’s really DIT: doing it together. That community-based spirit has been a thread since day one, when I was in the punk and hardcore scene, whether it was doing a ‘zine, forming a band or starting a fashion company. You can’t do it alone.
If I’m going to execute something with music, I might be the one creating the music, but I need a team to help me get it out there. So it’s all about how to delegate and know where your weaknesses are and where you can help fill in those spaces with the right people.
Q: Given that you’ve been in the music industry for so long and have a lot of influence, is there anything you wish you could change about the industry?
SA: I think one of the good things that’s happened, in terms of where the industry is going, is that the people who didn’t have a voice before, who needed these larger financial institutions to provide them with a voice for people to be heard, that’s changed.
If you don’t have the money, you can create a YouTube channel and start singing on YouTube and create a space for that and become your own star with your own crowd. Soundcloud gives you that platform as well.
There’s a lot of platforms for independent artists to have a voice and have a following and be able to get their music heard. That’s a great thing, but there is still a ceiling that is hit where you need some of these major labels, these financial institutions to break through.
And I feel like that ceiling needs to go away, more like an anarchist way of looking at what good music is. Good music isn’t always in the Top 40. That’s just the music that was paid to get up there.
There’s a lot of good music that hasn’t been heard because of these ceilings. How do we get through that? That’s the question. We’re already going in that direction, but how do we break it down even further? The artists who really have the influence have the platform.
Q: Where do you see yourself in pop culture and how does that relate to the overall message behind I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead?
SA: Dim Mak has hit 20 years as a record label. We started in 1996. I started DJ’ing in 2003, and before that, I was in bands. So I went from being in bands and touring to realizing that I enjoy developing brand-new artists and helping them get their music out there, and learning how to do that better and better.
So that’s always been my life’s blood, even through the course of me DJ’ing, I realize the weight and influence that I have could really help out artists who are, in my opinion, much better producers than me.
Q: And how do you help them? What can I do to help them?
SA: I always have something that is part of my role: How can I give back to artists and build a culture moving forward, and make it more self-sustaining, which it has become? That’s what’s exciting when you’re a part of a group that can build something that’s self-sustained, that doesn’t need or require other people’s input, other people’s money or influence. And that’s something I’m trying to help make bigger and bigger.
Once Brooklyn debuted at the 2015 New York Film Festival, it was on the path toward major award notices. There’s a universality to this story of Eilis Lacey (Saoirse Ronan) an Irish immigrant who finds freedom and self by coming to America during the 1950s. People can plug into it as a simple love story, but it’s also resonates as the journey of the immigrant that makes America great.
As a nation of immigrants, everyone has a story to tell somewhere along the lines of this film. Directed by John Crowley with a screenplay by famed author Nick Hornby, the film is based on the novel by Colm Tóibín. It showcases some best Irish talent besides Ronan including Domhnall Gleeson, Emory Cohen, Jim Broadbent and Julie Walters, with the able production team of Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey.
When Ronan set out on this journey within the film, the national dialogue about immigration wasn’t what it is today, which is now seeded with an antagonism that reminds us that every class of immigrants, at some point, faced racism or racist stereotypes about who they are.
While two-time Oscar nominee Saoirse Una Ronan was born in The Bronx on April 12, 1994, she landed in County Carlow when she was three years old. The only child of actors Monica and Paul Ronan, they tried New York City at the time of her birth but came home. Then as a teen, she ended up in Howth, County Dublin.
The Irish-American actress made her screen debut on Irish TV’s RTÉ, in the 2003 prime time medical drama The Clinic and then in the mini-serial Proof. She had auditioned to play Luna Lovegood in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix but it went to Evanna Lynch.
At 12, Ronan attended a casting for director Joe Wright's 2007 adaptation of Ian McEwan's 2001 novel Atonement for the part of Briony Tallis, a 13-year-old aspiring writer who accuses her older sister's lover of a crime he didn’t commit. Starring alongside Keira Knightley and James McAvoy, Ronan impressed Wright on-set who then made her the lead in his 2011 spy actioner Hanna.
Her other film roles before Brooklyn included City of Ember (2008), The Lovely Bones (2009), The Way Back (2010), Byzantium (2012), The Host (2013), and The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014).
Receiving two Oscar noms — this year for Best Actress in Brooklyn and for Best Supporting Actress in 2007 for Atonement, she's also snagged three BAFTA Award nominations, two Golden Globe nominations, two Screen Actors Guild Award nominations, and one Satellite Award.
From her 2015 NYFF premiere on, Ronan's been happy to talk about this role that celebrates something of her own personal histroy as filtered through the experience of an earlier generation of Irish newcomers to the U.S.A. As she explains in this Q&A conducted at a MoMA screening, it gave her a chance to look inward and learn from it -- something that helped her prepare for her upcoming Broadway debut in the revival of Arthur Miller's award winning The Cruciible.
Q: This wasn’t a typical award-oriented film…
SR: We had no idea that was going to happen. To this day, [being nominated] has been one of the highlights of this whole adventure. It’s a very traditional type of film, not exactly edgy and raw, there’s nothing cool about it.
Q: Your character has an amazing journey, but you’ve taken one as well. In the year that you’ve been on the road promoting this movie what have you learned about her or yourself?
SR: When I learn something about her it helps me. So I learn something from realizing all these layers she seems to have and it's taught me. One of the main lessons that Brooklyn, and John [Crowley] particularly, has taught me is that I could be quite lazy, just read the script and learn the lines and play a character, but I realized that the more and more I read from this that there are so many secrets that can come into the mix that you can delve into.
When we started to actually talk and share with people, that’s when we began to realize the power of development. Journalists were coming up to me, and usually it gets pretty repetitive when you’re dealing with press all the time and talking about the same thing, but with this, the reason we haven’t gotten sick of it isn’t that it’s done so well so far, but also that every journalist has had such a personal attachment to it.
Every single one has said, “I’m in a long distance relationship, so I relate to it for this reason” or, “I’m a parent who was left alone when my kid went to college.”
People are able to appreciate [this film] from different perspectives. But one of the things that I loved about Éilis Lacey and I realized more was that this is… One of the qualities I love the most about her is she’s got such a strong will. There’s a real echo in here and it goes with her little top knot.
She has a really strong sense of self and it’s important to see a female character [like that] on screen. We don’t see it much when a young man comes up to her and says, “I’m in love with you, don’t worry, let’s get married”, she doesn’t melt and go, “Ok, let’s do all the things you suggest we do.” She needs time to think about it.
It’s not that she doesn’t have feelings for him and reciprocates this love, but I like that she’s created this world for herself and she doesn’t necessarily want to compromise that straight away. So that was something that was very helpful for me to hold onto, even when dealing with press and becoming more and more apparent in the industry side of things. It’s a weird world and it’s a world that, ironically, filmmakers aren’t actually used to.
Q: She goes through an arc, committing to her immigration to the United States. How did you work out the racism and other elements into that character set a while ago.
SR: It was a while ago, but I don’t think it would have been right to look at it, and I know that’s not what you’re saying, political standpoint. It had to be incredibly personal and intimate and I think that’s why [it works] right now, because it’s an incredibly heated discussion, as it always should be, but it is right now for the wrong reasons.
To have a film where people can at least empathize with one person and apply that to the mass of people that are fleeing their homes. I was in London before Christmas doing rehearsals and I saw migrants just in the park, there was about 40 of them under a tree, it was cold and they had nowhere to go, and it baffled me. Especially Ireland, some people have had such a strange reaction to it.
We’re a nation of immigrants — it’s something I can personally empathize with and it’s something I hope the film will do, so people can look at it in a more intimate individual sense and give some heart to the stories of these people that are making the exact same journey, if not worse, right now.
Q: Did you know any Irish immigrants of that generation before or speak to any in preparation for this role?
SR: I didn’t know any before, but I’ve met a lot since and heard stories from people who ultimately went back to Ireland and who are at home [there]. There was one woman who’s actually from [Eilis'county], and, I think it was around 1951 or '52, that she decided she was going to go to America. She actually had a very good job, so she was going to go over there and going to work, which was just unheard of then. Even when my family went over, that’s what I drew from because it was their story that I grew up with.
Q: Your parents immigrated...
SR: I was born in the Bronx as I’m sure you can tell; you got that from me. My story is in reverse of Eilis. My mom and dad went over in the '80s; there was no work at home in Ireland and a lot of people say the recession back then in Ireland was worse than it is now, though it was pretty bad a few years ago.
A lot of young couples and young people left. My dad and his friend went ahead of my Nan over to New York, and then herself, and the friend’s girlfriend followed.
They went there to work and spent about 11 years here. I’ve taken my mom to places in Manhattan since then when they were just in the Bronx. I’ve taken her to places in Manhattan she had never been to before.
So I grew up appreciating what the struggle was like, but certainly didn’t realize the longingness and grief that came with it until I knew it. I was in a much more fortunate position than Eilis, getting a nice flat in London.
And it was in that time, maybe a year before I did the film, before I signed up and there was a year where I moved away. But it’s a completely different perspective when you’re in the middle of it and trying to overcome… We don’t know what it is.
It’s like being in this new city, now what do I do; exist in the same place? But I didn’t have a purpose there. Brooklyn gave me that. So to go back afterwards really help me to overcome all the fears I had before I left to do the shoot.
Q: You’ve done historical dramas and fantastical films. You worked with Joe Wright on Hanna to great success and then you did a fantastical film with Wes Anderson. Does it charge you to flip back and forth?
SR: I wouldn’t want to be known for anything except working consistently. That would be one of my great fears, apart from forgetting my lines, is just being known for one role. The first one I did I was 10 and a couple years later I had a taste and that was around the time Atonement came around.
I got this other action film and I knew I didn’t want to go down that commercial route just for the sake of exposure, even when I was a kid. I always felt like I had to do something that makes you feel something.
It takes me in different directions, whether it’s the action genre or a romance it means you’re stretched all the time. I feel that as an actor I wouldn’t be method or anything like that, but I learned the most working with different types of directors where I stretch myself and adapt; that has helped me learn so much. It's kind of like when you actually play a character, you’re getting to know and pick up so many new perspectives.
Q: Any secret stories you want to tell us about the shoot working with John Crowley?
SR: It’s been great [nervous laughter]. John and I almost fell out forever one day. We did so many bloody dinner scenes, over the course of two days we must have done eight dinner scenes; we ate so much. We were properly eating too, it wasn’t like in a movie where you dance around with a fork and pick it up and put it back down. I hate it whenever I see people do that. We were properly eating. It must have been the third dinner scene of the day, which is a lot.
When you’re doing a dinner scene you have to coordinate with six, seven, eight people, multiple different angles, everyone gets a bit tired and a bit angry near the end, and that’s where we were. We were also near the end of the shoot as well, and we were eating stew.
We had a fork, a spoon, and a little knife for bread. So Jane Brennan and myself, who plays the mother Mrs. Lacey, we went to eat with our spoons, and, I don’t know about you, but when I eat soup, I do it with a spoon, I don’t do it with a fork.
John came up to me — he was getting a bit grumpy, and I was getting a bit grumpy — and he was like, “Do this, do that, it’s easier for us if you’re using a fork when you eat the stew.”
I looked up at him and said,“What?”
“Just use your fork.”
“Hold on a minute.”
So we get into this huge argument about whether to use a fork or spoon, I ended up using the fork, but to me, it doesn’t make sense at all. So if I look bitter at all in that scene it’s because of the director.
Q: Using a fork makes no sense.
SR: It makes no sense! What are you supposed to do with soup? I don’t understand.
Q: You had two dashing men — Emory Cohen as Anthony "Tony" Fiorello and Domhnall Gleeson as Jim Farrell. Gleeson’s now in everything; he’s having his Star Wars moment. Each one has a distinct character with a different frame of mind, so what was it like having these two actors informing your character? It seemed fun.
SR: It was for different reasons. We started in Ireland, so we did the beginning and close to the end was three weeks. I had to fall in love with one actor then another. Domhnall has the same sort of attitude as me towards work, we had good craic. That’s not the drug [but the Gaelic word for fun].
Domhnall and I knew each other for years and there were a couple of little things we tried to do together and it just never happened.
When Irish people get together there’s a very familial atmosphere, it’s very personal and familiar with each other even if you never met them before, so it was very relaxed.
With Emory and I in Montreal, we had the girls for a few days but then it was just me and him and we had so many scenes were it was just the two of us. The scenes I shared with him were some of my favorite to shoot, dramatically speaking, because they are some of the most life changing moments for her.
And he’s wonderful, really magical. He was so committed and would have done anything to make John happy. He had a lot of integrity and I really respect that. But we work in different ways.
We’re both coming at it from very different angles and because we have that yin and yang dynamic it really worked. The characters have that on film — they’re very different from each other and come from different sorts of backgrounds — and they get together because of that, so that’s where the attraction comes from. I can definitely identify with the conflicts she has as an Irish person in America.
I’ve certainly felt that, even from being on film sets. You can kind of own your Irishness a little bit more when the person you’re with isn’t well up on Ireland or where you’re from. You can milk it a little bit. It gives her this charm and extra bit of confidence that she steps into when she meets this guy, it’s pretty instant.
Q: You brought that inner strength to your interactions with him.
SR: As soon as we met I was pulling him up on everything. He took it but he had no choice really -- to be honest. The dynamic just naturally established itself instantly. Whereas with Domhnall we had known each other for a period of time and we were very familiar with each other anyways, and that really worked for our characters because in this film Domhnall represents home and that total security to her and familiarity. It really was like life imitating art when it came to the dynamics.
Q: So romance is still cool — who knew?
SR: Who knew? Cool is cool. We had a screening and [at the time] it wasn’t necessarily the one to watch but people were intrigued by it. The response we have had from the very beginning was so amazing.
When an established award-winning director like Ridley Scott makes a space movie — something associated with serious drama — humor isn’t expected from its star. Yet in The Martian, where Matt Damon stars as American astronaut Mark Watney who’s been accidentally left behind on Mars after a mission disaster, humor humanizes the situation.
At first, no one knows he’s alive so what would seem to be a totally despairing situation is relieved by Watney’s incredibly determined instincts to survive until he can let them know back on Earth he’s alive.
So from the moment this film screened, first at The Toronto International Film Festival and then debuting in the USA at the 2015 New York Film Festival, it made an impact, proving to be more than a proto-documentary.
Based on 2011's eponymous novel by Andy Weir, the film -- scripted by Drew Goddard (who at first wanted to direct it himself) -- is the ultimate survivalist story conceived by the smartest science nerds in the world.
As helmed by this veteran director -- who established himself as a master of sci-fi by doing both Blade Runner and Alien -- authenticity was at the heart of this feature. If audiences didn't buy it, then the film would never succeed.
To insure that, the cast is loaded with Hollywood's A-list of thoughtful movie stars such as Chiwetel Ejiofor, Kristen Wiig, Michael Peña, Kate Mara, and Jeff Daniels; and it was shot on one of the largest sets ever built.
In rooting for the hero, one has to believe in human intelligence and ingenuity -- as the most “uplifting” film of the year, it defied expectations of an award worthy film. Yet it culled an enormous list of nominations including various Oscars.
The Martian is sort of radical for a Hollywood film where the only antagonist is the environment itself -- there are no real bad guys -- so audiences see the conditions he fights as obstacles we can survive with the right knowledge.
Sir Ridley discussed the film several times in NYC and this Q&A is culled from several of those conversations.
Q: What went into the decision to make this survival movie feel like something so effortless even though so much effort went into it?
RS: That’s what we do. [It’s from] experience. Effortless? When you get a screenplay from a gentleman like Drew [Goddard] it’s like [having] the blueprint of a building or the architecture of what I’m going to do, so I can trust it and get on with everything else.
It’s trust in the script which was so good. My only significant question to Drew was, “This is pretty comedic, right?” I hoped he wouldn’t look at me and say, “No, it’s a drama.” But it is a drama that’s actually pretty funny. But it’s organically funny because it comes out of the cause and effect of the situation.
Q: You must get offered a lot of space movies after having done Alien. What made yo cast those aside to work on this one?
RS: I don’t get offered a lot, actually. And they stopped offering them to me because early on I realized a good script isn’t going to land on your desk because you have to develop your own material. So if you go off and develop your own material people kind of get used to being turned down, so they say, “Fuck you” and never send you anything.
So you’ve got to make sure you don’t run out of work. This one actually landed on the desk because--you tell the story better. It landed on my desk, I read it and went, wow. My first question to him was, “Why aren’t you doing this?”
Q: Matt Damon was already attached to it when you got into it?
RS: I auditioned for Matt.
Q: How does Sir Ridley Scott audition for anyone, let alone Matt Damon?
RS: He says, “How many takes do you do?” I said, “Two.” He goes, “That makes you twice as better as the guy I worked with recently.” I can’t repeat that one. When I repeated it, Clint got really pissed off!
Q: You told Matt Damon how much work he was going to have to do?
RS: Well, Clint gives one take, and Matt said, “Can I do another one?” and he said, “Well, if you really must waste everybody’s time…” So, I give him two.
Q: When did you realize that you only had to do one or two takes as a director? You’re known as a director who moves incredibly fast. This was shot in something like 72 days. That’s really quick for a movie like this.
RS: Tell that to Fox. It could’ve been 130 and I would’ve gotten paid twice as much. No, we’re really fast, and it’s to do with the superlative team I’ve got. It’s probably one of the best teams in the business. You find them out over the years, and the great thing is that they come back for more punishment, which means they’re vaguely enjoying themselves in the process.
On top of that, you’ve got a really great cast that worked most certainly on track because it was an ensemble cast, which means there’s no one with a particularly big part in it — except for Matt Damon. And everyone else -- this cast is fabulous — and they came in to play these individual roles as an ensemble, which is really nice, as a nod to the screenplay.
Q: As a working director, you must trust your instincts more than ever at this point.
RS: You better, or I should’ve given up 10 years ago.
Q: Was there ever a time where you didn’t?
RS: No. I did, I think, 2,023 commercials, both in New York, France, Los Angeles, et cetera. In those days, I could do -- on a good year — 150 commercials personally. So, today they think they’re busy if they 20 commercials -- any commercial makers in the room? If you’re only 12, go find another job.
We learned. It’s the best school I could possibly had, because there was no film school when I was 20. There’s no film school at that point. i found my way almost accidentally into doing advertising, and was lucky enough to catch the wave, the beginning of serious advertising in the UK. At that moment, they’re completely enamored by the Madison Avenue Mad Men era.
We started to do it pretty well, and so I enjoyed the actual wave of some of the best advertising ever. I did Steve Jobs’ commercial in 1984, that was one of the 2,000 I’ve done. By the time I’d do a movie, it was pretty easy.
Q: Many have commented that this is a more upbeat, humorous movie for you, done in the style of films you make. Even some of your darkest work, like The Counselor, can be humorous at times.
RS: That’s because you’re intelligent. There are so many silly people out there that actually, you look for humor in everything you possibly do. Even in Alien there’s humor. When he said, “Stop complaining,” “I like complaining.” There’s a lot of humor. I’m always looking for humor, If you can, because that’s part of life, of people, who they are.
Q: Did this feel different when you finished your cut and screened it for the first time? Did this feel like it was landing differently than everything else you’ve made before?
RS: No. Funnily enough, this landed better than anything I made before. So I think it’s partly due to the screenplay.
The cast did enjoy themselves, so everybody was enjoying themselves doing it. It’s a danger, because if you’ve got a comedy, and everybody’s laughing their ass off thinking it’s funny, the danger is that when you get the cut, it’s awful because everybody thinks you’re doing this great piece of work. You’ve got to always have that position in the back of the room, looking at it with a cold eye, saying, “Is this right? is this wrong?” You learn to do that.
Q: It felt like Matt Damon and the crew were like a band of filmmakers trying to make a movie -- solving problems along the way. Did it feel that was the case — kind of metaphor for filmmaking?
RS: It’s a metaphor for good filmmaking. There’s a lot of guesswork and confusion. Everyone has their job on the floor, and if you’re a director, that’s what you are. You walk on the floor in the morning, you’ve got to have anywhere from 50 people — and in my case — 500 people to 700 people, all turn and say, “What are we going to do?” You better know what you’re going to do. And you’d better be running by nine o’clock with five to 11 cameras.
Q: You’re making two movies a year — two very large-scale movies in a year.
RS: I wish. I cross over more in prepping now in Sydney.
Q: You’re already prepping. What does prepping look like in terms of getting to the day? What does the crew get from you — from prep to start shooting on the day?
RS: There’s key personnel. Lighting, camera is very important to me. Design is very important. Set dressing is incredibly important as well and so is wardrobe — incredibly important. Makeup and hair become extremely important in certain kinds of movies. They’re all keys. Oh, and head of construction. I run a film like a company, like a corporation.
And when I begin, I always have Monday morning meetings. Everyone’s sitting around the table, all the key heads with their few bits, it’s about 40 people around the table. And I’ve got, “Okay, page one, problem? Page two, problem? Page three. You’ve got a problem. What’s the problem? Have you talked to engineering?” “No.” “Well, bloody do so. Page four.”
Q: You’re a boss.
RS: You have to be. So, by the time you’re through the third week, you should be running like silk because people don’t talk to people for help, because either ego gets in the way, or something’s not being constructed, which case you gotta have his head slapped. And by the time you’re running, everything’s flying.
Q: You're a nuts-and-bolts sort of boss -- it’s a business. At the same time, you’re known as a maker of the most beautifully composed shots with incredible art direction. With Blade Runner, Alien, and The Martian — you’re an artist leading the set, not a nuts-and-bolts boss who’s just making sure everybody’s doing their jobs.
RS: You hide that, you don’t let that out. I never talk to an actor about what shots I’m going to do. Never. I used to do that when I was doing live TV; and I once caught an actor rolling his eyes. Never talk about what you do, talk about what they do, what they’re gonna do. You are a boss, that’s the very terminology, you better be a boss.
Q: When you get on set and are working with Matt Damon every day, and he’s the only actor there, does he really need that much work at this point?
RS: Well, he’s on set with only 500 people that could actually get him a cup of coffee. The only asshole he’s got to talk to is the guy on the other end of the walkie-talkie who wants to give him two takes. He’s sitting there, sweating it out in this space suit, the temperature on the set is about 40, so he’s the only warm guy in the room, he’s doing all right.
But I always work with many cameras and this instance, I didn’t need more than four. I learned way back when that an actor, when he comes in, if he’s worth his salt, her salt, have come fully prepped with their own ideas.
The key thing is to let them run the ball initially, to show you what is in their mind. So, I’ll come in with the geometry of the scene saying we’ve got to hit this, that, and that, and we’ve got to hit this point right.
And I say, “you want to do it?”
“Right now?”
“Yeah.”
“Really?”
At a point, I noticed that way back when, you always got the best takes in take one or two. Any actor worth his salt comes in prepped, so locked and loaded, that when you talk to him or them, they’re going to say, “For fuck’s sake, shut up, let me do my take. “
Don’t get in my head. “I’ve got a plan!”
There’s nothing worse than a wedding speech. Don’t talk to me before I do a wedding speech, I’ll try and change it. So, it’s very important to just let the actors fly. I sometimes will go, wow, because what you’re looking for as a director, in parentheses, I never thought of that, I’m sitting there waiting to get surprised. If the surprise is great I’ll go out and give them a big, fat kiss and ask them if they want one more take.
Q: When it comes to the actors doing a scene that’s mainly dialogue or actors just working -- say it’s Matt Damon alone -- do you see how he blocks it out in his head and then you think about how you’re going to shoot it? Or do you have your setups and then he’s going to play in that?
RS: I don’t do formal rehearsal anymore, and my formal rehearsal is, well first of all, The Counselor, it was all about dialogue. The whole thing is dialogue. Therefore, it was essential [to] sit down and group them into their groups in the scenes that they’re doing and separate them. So, I spend all day with Javier Bardem’s and Cameron Diaz’s scene, and Javier Bardem with Michael Fassbender.
And you sit at the table with a cup of coffee and just chat and they start talking about who they are. Once that starts to evolve, talk the scene inside out. And in the scene there are targets, milestones, emotion, funny, real emotion, tears maybe. And I say, “You’re happy, want to move on?”
“Yeah.”
Never read it. Never read it. I know what they’re going to give me. I never say, “Right, do you want to read it?” or Michael might say “I just want to try something, can I read it?”
“Yeah, read it.”
[We’ve] gone through this tactic, [we’ve] talked our way through the movie, so that the actor is a virtuoso of themselves. He’s the best violinist of himself, better than me. And therefore, the key is to cast really, really well. I’m a very good caster. If you can cast well, that’s going to come with a whole bundle of stuff, both emotional, technical, creative. They’re going to do a lot of work on my behalf, having talked about it at the table.
Q: Sir Ridley Scott knows his shit. You are an incredible multi-tasker. While making this movie, were you in preproduction, working on scripts for several other movies?
RS: Well, yeah. You have to keep things moving, and you keep things going in the background. There’s a lot of television. I do four TV shows. “The Good Wife” is not mine, it’s Julianna Margulies', but it’s our show, she’ll have seven years of that. “The Man in the High Castle” has just gone out, we’re doing “Mercy Street” which has just gone out.
I’m doing a show right now with Tom Hardy about the East India Company in 1813, when slavery was an industry. So, we do a lot of that, and they ask me to read stuff occasionally or say, “Here’s the cast, what do you think?” I get in that far…
Q: You do these things while you’re in production or while you’re in production on a movie like The Martian, do you just have to laser in?
RS: No, I have to. I get up early and I sit there and I’ll talk with London, I’ll talk with LA. You know, if you keep up to speed every day, it’s only 15 minutes. If you let it go for a week, it’s a nightmare. So, I just keep it up and go on set. I believe the key is to be prepped for what you’re doing so I can walk out that door. My prep is an old friend of mine I knew in England, and he always had the brains at school, and I was seriously non-academic, and I saw him like, 20 years later, 30 years later, he said to me, “Hey Ridley, are you still pushing a pencil?”
And I said, “Frankly, I am.” My whole life is drawing. I draw everything. Once I’ve gotten a script, I draw everything about the way the film’s going to be, so I’m filming it on paper. It won’t be stick figures, it’s really is--I studied art school, so I’m a very good draftsman, I can draw really fast, and I’ll be going through it, and if I get stuck on a scene, it’s a bit like having a blank sheet of paper in the Olivetti typewriter. I’ll just draw the room, draw the thing within where you’ve got to be, and then I’m already moving, and I’ve started to film it on paper. I walk in in the morning, and I’m set.
Q: If you’re drawing the script as you’re reading and get to a scene where you’re stuck, and don’t know how to draw it, does that indicate a problem with the scene itself? Sidney Lumet always said that when he was shooting, if something bored him or if he didn’t know where to go while watching the actors, that meant that there was something wrong with the writing and he had to fix that.
RS: I’m glad that you picked Sidney Lumet, because I think he’s one of the great unsung directors in American cinema history. Remarkable, and not ever acknowledged enough in my opinion.
Q: So understated...
RS: He’s incredible. I always admired everything he did. So, he would plan location hunts, walk around a few months prior, say, “Right. The chair’s going to be there, mic’s going to be there. Going to walk in there. Next!” It’d already been in his head. Two months later he’s got the chairs there, lights there. But I still think he was special with actors. Something happens and I think that some actors...
I thought you were going to say “doesn’t it not leave any room for your actor to come and make suggestions?” which is a good question, it’s a good question. Be sure that you know what you’re going to do, because i have done that with actors. Any actors in the room? So, I have enough actors, and they say, “Let’s show you what we’re going to do,” so I go, “Okay, action,” [humming noise] and it usually ends up with two people standing at either end of the room talking to each other.
And I say, “Cut,” and the star said to me, “That was fuckin’ boring,” I said, “That’s right.” So, I’ve got a good intuition about geometry and leave the performances to them.
Q: Geometry is in the momentum, essentially.
RS: Movement, if it’s required. No movement if it’s not required. That only comes from experience.
Q: Besides Sidney Lumet what other filmmakers are you inspired by?
RS: Oh, you know, a little bit of the best of them. Kubrick, Kurosawa, interesting Scandinavian director, The Seventh Seal. All of his social stuff later was incredible. They were all in the days when I was trying to get-- I couldn’t get going.
I didn’t make a film until I was 40. So, those filmmakers out there who are still 30 have got a long way to go. I hadn’t made a film until I was 40. But, I saw a lot of cinema. And it was nearly always visually-oriented.
Orson Welles was a master of everything. As a director, he was interested in the lights, in the suits, as well as the words and the lighting...the whole thing. I always thought that those are the best films, that live longest.
Same with David Lean. David Lean was a kind of master. Kubrick was that, Kurosawa was that, Ingmar Bergman was that, and if you can get that and take that all on board because you love it, love the details, I love the details. God’s in the details, as well as the performances.
Q: If you could ever travel to Mars, would you do it?
RS: Are you kidding? No way. I think the beauty about filmmaking is you get to go where it takes you. The 16th century, or you know, the future, or the present. I think that’s the journey. Yeah, I don’t need to do it.
Q: We see Damon’s character has lost some weight and there's a reference to his family. Did you write more of that and decide to pull back a bit, to not go that far into the depths of his despair?
RS: No. I got in more on the fact that once the guy was into a self-learning curve which I sort of relate to The Right Stuff. The Right Stuff is fundamentally the definition for courage under pressure, courage under fire, courage when you’re in a steel tube and you’ve got cobblestoning…
He’s talking really cool, he’s about to break up...and that’s where the Chuck Yeager Right Stuff came out, because I think every air traffic controller’s cadence was super cool, any pilot was super cool, and I think it’s partly to control your emotions when you’re against the gun. And the Matt Damon character could have taken the pill and killed himself. There is a pill, they don’t let you hang out there and say, “Oh, God, what am I going to do?”
You could always walk outside, and it would be horrible. But you could take the pill, it would just put you to sleep. But then he realized he had to stay alive and do his job. By doing it, as he finds the inspiration to stay with it, that takes over and that takes over for the fear. I always think the guy who’s not brave, who’s terrified, does the job. The guy who’s not terrified is just fuckin’ crazy.
Q: What happened when NASA read the script?
RS: I discovered also the book had become a bit of a secret reader in NASA, I called up and said, “Can I talk to somebody?” I got the head of NASA. “Are you guy from the movies?” I said, “Yes,” and he said, “Oh, we like your science fiction movies. We really like the space suits, what are you doing next?” I said, “Well, we’re doing this thing…” They were right into it. They showed me everything. Their habitat, their new space suits, which almost look like Teletubbies. I said, “We can’t do that,” He said, “We don’t like them either,” but they shared everything.
I would go to Pasadena and walk around the back lot, it’s pretty casual, a lot of flip flops and long hair. As opposed to NASA’s dress code, ties...because they’re putting human beings in space. These guys in Pasadena are putting machines into spaces. So I walked around the back and what’s that thing. The land...the crawler… Pathfinder. There’s a Pathfinder lying in a garage...
The doors opened and I fully expect to see a ratty old Volkswagen, but it’s a bloody Pathfinder lying in there, amongst Coca-Cola cans and rubble. That’s it? “That’s it.” We copied that. Everything you see is absolutely copied.
Q: How important are awards to your filmmaking?
RS: That’s a big question. Well, everything’s a war, really. People say “you like Westerns?” but I’ve never done one. Almost everything’s a Western isn’t it? Man against the environment, man against, you know. Who is it that said there’s only seven stories? Is that true? No. But war to me is not--it’s only interesting because you’re taking human beings into a situation that’s entirely unrealistic, and you’re dealing with that, and you’re dealing with how they’re going to function in that environment.
One of the things I did in war is obviously something I did called Black Hawk Down, because I’d done The Duellists, and I’ve done -- The Duellists was interesting because it was about mindless--the great thing about The Duellists is they’d forgotten at the end of it what the argument was about, which is kind of wonderful, really. But Black Hawk Down was a real thing, no more than celebrating a certain kind of soldier, who will go in there, for the right reasons, not oil, none of this, it was actually fundamentally to stop genocide.
And that’s why they were put in there, and Bill Clinton came in two weeks later and yanked them, because he did not want to get stuck with a Vietnam. We got stuck in northeast Africa. And he pulled the guy out and the army was furious. But I just love the dilemma. It’s a pocket war, and for a good reason. There’s never a good reason for war, that’s one of the best reasons.
There was a good reason for the second World War, it’s a bloody good reason, because this lunatic called Adolf Hitler doing shit. And you do look at these people in history and think, MI5 or MI6 went to Wilt Chamberlain in 1936, don’t quote me on the date, and had said, “This Chancellor is going to be a huge problem. We think we should do something about it.” He says, “What do you mean?” He says, “You know what I mean,” He said, “That wouldn’t be gentlemanly, would it?”
Three years later, he walks into Poland. You know what I’m saying? That’s an extreme way of looking at things, but sometimes you can save the world a lot of problems.
Q: Except for possibly dying on Mars, there’s no villain in the film and that’s refreshing. No one at NASA is slowing things down for his own bureaucratic reasons. The closest to that is Jeff Daniels' character, who is doing things for the right reasons, to a degree. In the beginning there’s a line, a guy says, “I just lost my best friend, I don’t want to lose my commander,” which is a great way of setting up who he is, and how human he is.
RS: He says it’s not about one person, and the other guy says, “Yes, it is.” That’s the key, that one guy.
Q: You never succumb to having a corporate villain or a villain on the ship in the narratives going on within the film. Were you tempted towards that? It was not in the novel so you could stay away from it?
DG: Yeah, and consciously I made a decision to push it even further, because Jeff Daniels’s character in the novel is more as you described, to give an antagonistic relationship... one of the things that excited me about the book was the aspirational quality of the piece. I kept saying early on, the villain circumstance. Everyone else gets to be a protagonist.
RS: Mars is the beautiful monster, killing you 16 different ways in three seconds. He almost falls in love with Mars. That’s why we used the music at the end, it was Bowie, going off on his long drive, a kind of ode to Mars, in a way, because of its beauty. Would he go back there? No bloody way.