MCN Blogs

By DP30 david@thehotbuttonl.com

DP/30: Amour, writer/director Michael Haneke (LA 2012)

Please see “DP/30 @ Cannes 2012: Amour, writer/director Michael Haneke” for more conversation specific to this movie.

This Interview interpreted by Robert Grey.

7 Responses to “DP/30: Amour, writer/director Michael Haneke (LA 2012)”

  1. Kevin says:

    Maybe next time you could treat Micheal with a little more respect, and ask him some decent questions?

  2. David Poland says:

    Perhaps you will give me a list…

  3. shank says:

    Watching this interview is so awkward..Bad silly questions..totally wasted the great man’s time

  4. scooterzz says:

    finally got around to watching this and must call bullshit on those first two comments…where exactly is the ‘disrespect’ and what questions would you two geniuses asked the ‘great man’? (really?…’great man’?…jeeze, fanboys can sometimes be such boors)…

  5. David Poland says:

    This attitude came up on the first Haneke interview too. Not sure what they want. Don’t much care. Haneke seemed engaged. That’s what I am after.

    It’s funny. I was quite intimidated the first time around with MH and with Olivier Assayas, The Dardennes, and a few others. Each time, it’s turned out that the director was far more down to earth and less up his/their own ass than I feared. So I remember pretty much every one of those with great pleasure.

    I had a pretty specific conversation about Amour with Haneke in Cannes and I’m not sure there was a ton more to say about that film. He is not terribly interested in self-dissection. So I did in this one what I do with many extremely talented people… I had a conversation as I might over dinner. I’m not saying it’s always great. But I don’t run into many people who are anxious to run as soon as the shoot is over. And MH and I did 10 minutes – that I wish I had on tape – on today’s indie film scene. He was not insulted or unhappy with the conversation. And that’s really my first goal. Then I pray that it is interesting for the viewers.

  6. Niall Maher says:

    David,

    What you do – I love.
    Your interviews give an insight into both the creative and the fiscal aspects of the film making process.Fantastic.

    Now David – the rub – PLEASE PLEASE have a bit of a chat with your camera crew.

    It’s below par, the constant re-framing suggest people justifying their existence.

    One good Mid – and THAT is a good interview.

    Sorry to leave a negative comment.

  7. Matt says:

    Thank you Niall, exactly what I was thinking:

    Great job David, but the camera is irritatingly distracting.

    Simplify please. One MID all the way.

Leave a Reply

DP/30

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Let me try and be as direct as I possibly can with you on this. There was no relationship to repair. I didn’t intend for Harvey to buy and release The Immigrant – I thought it was a terrible idea. And I didn’t think he would want the film, and I didn’t think he would like the film. He bought the film without me knowing! He bought it from the equity people who raised the money for me in the States. And I told them it was a terrible idea, but I had no say over the matter. So they sold it to him without my say-so, and with me thinking it was a terrible idea. I was completely correct, but I couldn’t do anything about it. It was not my preference, it was not my choice, I did not want that to happen, I have no relationship with Harvey. So, it’s not like I repaired some relationship, then he screwed me again, and I’m an idiot for trusting him twice! Like I say, you try to distance yourself as much as possible from the immediate response to a movie. With The Immigrant I had final cut. So he knew he couldn’t make me change it. But he applied all the pressure he could, including shelving the film.”
James Gray

“I’m an unusual producer because I control the destiny of a lot of the films I’ve done. Most of them are in perfect states of restoration and preservation and distribution, and I aim to keep them in distribution. HanWay Films, which is my sales company, has a 500-film catalogue, which is looked after and tended like a garden. I’m still looking after my films in the catalogue and trying to get other people to look after their films, which we represent intellectually, to try to keep them alive. A film has to be run through a projector to be alive, unfortunately, and those electric shadows are few and far between now. It’s very hard to go and see films in a movie house. I was always involved with the sales and marketing of my films, right up from The Shout onwards. I’ve had good periods, but I also had a best period because the film business was in its best period then. You couldn’t make The Last Emperor today. You couldn’t make The Sheltering Sky today. You couldn’t make those films anymore as independent films. There are neither the resources nor the vision within the studios to go to them and say, “I want to make a film about China with no stars in it.”Then, twenty years ago, I thought, “OK, I’m going to sell my own films but I don’t want to make it my own sales company.” I wanted it to be for me but I wanted to make it open for every other producer, so they don’t feel that they make a film but I get the focus. So, it’s a company that is my business and I’m involved with running it in a certain way, but I’m not seen as a competitor with other people that use it. It’s used by lots of different producers apart from me. When I want to use it, however, it’s there for me and I suppose I’m planning to continue making all my films to be sold by HanWay. I don’t have to, but I do because it’s in my building and the marketing’s here, and I can do it like that. Often, it sounds like I’m being easy about things, but it’s much more difficult than it sounds. It’s just that I’ve been at it for a long time and there’s lots of fat and security around my business. I know how to make films, but it’s not easy—it’s become a very exacting life.”
~ Producer Jeremy Thomas