Q: When you are feted like this (festival of your films - ed.) and your early iconic films
- if
, O Lucky Man!, A Clockwork Orange are shown, as well as the latest,
Gangster No. 1,
what do you think when you get to see them all of a piece like that?
Malcolm McDowell: I get to think things like, "Wow! I made some
extraordinary things!" You know, as an actor, you really don't think about
the past, you only think about the part you're working on. So you never really
have any chance to think about the past work, at least I don't. I never watch
it, if I can help it, anyway. I do think some of the things I did in the past are pretty extraordinary and
I'm very lucky that - it's not because I'm extraordinary, it's because I was
part of an extraordinary time with extraordinary people. I suppose I made my
contribution to that, too. And all these different personalities - quirky
people that came together at that time to produce these things were sort of
pretty impressive. I think back on my time with Lindsay Anderson, who was such an incredible
man. I mean, forget the fact that he was a brilliant director, but he was just
an extraordinary person. He taught me so much about life and about acting. Not
that he
he didn't give master's classes in acting or anything like that. It
was just being around him and seeing the way he worked, and what was important
to him became important to me. That's a great teacher. He was a great teacher,
really. Of course, I used to tease him. I said, "If you really are a great
teacher, then, of course, the pupil will surpass you." [Laughs] He used to
look at me and give me a grunt, "Don't be ridiculous, Malcolm," or
something like that. No, I loved him. He was a very extraordinary man. And so was Stanley [Kubrick] in a very different way. Very different
personality, of course. But in his way, just as amazing, but rather the other
side of the coin, a very private man, very hard, I suppose, to get know on an
intimate level, where Lindsay wasn't. Everything was right out, straight with
him from the moment you met him.
Q: You made a very funny comment in something I read, saying that with Stanley, his direction was more by attrition.
MM: Yes, that was Stanley, it was. But, having said that, and I remember back
now, because of this retrospective, tribute stuff, you begin to get a sort of
perspective on it. He loved it when I would come up with some outrageous piece
of business. Sometimes it was just to amuse him or to amuse myself. "Singin'
in the Rain" is a case in point. We were all bored, just sitting, so just
for a gag, I started to sing "Singin' in the Rain," whack and crack,
you know, and it became the whole centerpiece of this sequence. And, of course,
it really worked brilliantly well. I suppose, you know, the feeding scene at the
end, opening my mouth like a cuckoo, that was another sort of fun bit to keep us
all amused, which he, of course, loved and kept.
He was very good at that. He would go on until he felt
I mean, I've heard
this subsequently. He never did 50-odd takes with me, really. I think once, for
a technical reason. I never did more than
I think if I did 18, it was
horrendous. I usually get there very fast. But I think that he thought if he
just went on and on and on, that eventually everything would break down and
something may pop out. Well, you know, sometimes that could be true, but, often
it doesn't, it doesn't.
Q: Gangster No. 1 - how did you get involved with that?
MM: I was sent the script and the director came to see me. I had another film I was considering doing at the time, but when Paul McGuigan flew over and made the effort to come from London to Los Angeles, I felt really that any man who would do that deserved I deserved to work with him. I was very happy to; I liked him enormously, I think he's very, very talented. We had fun doing it, too. It was fun. He stood up well. He stood up well, because I remember the first time on the set. I want to know what the boundaries are, so immediately I'll try something with this director to see how he reacts. And he came through it fine.
Q: In a way, it's two performances, because there's the character you present on-screen and then there's that sardonic voice-over.
MM: Yeah, I worked very hard on that. You know, it's funny, because it had a strange life of its own. The voice-over is really from the play, it's all from the play. Big passages of it, verbatim, actually, and it's wonderful language, great stuff. I remember, when I first went through, I was passing through London and Paul rushed me into a recording studio and just wanted to have this on. And I was going, "Oh, for God's sake, I don't want to make a commitment to the this is just a rough guide." So we just went through it and it was a rough guide, and it was fine, but, obviously, it wasn't going to be the one we used. When we shot the film, of course, and looked at it again, I really got into it. It was great fun to do, it's like the soul of the film. It's just extraordinary and very, quite witty, some of it, and scary, too.
Q: It seems, I think, more violent, in some sense than it actually is.
MM: Yeah. Well, I tried to get a [spits out the word] rasp in it, sort of
like a machine gun-like effect, like a really irritated, irritating effect.
[Laughs] I tried to do that on purpose. It was a conscious decision to do it
like that.
Q: It's funny, because your voice-over remembering the past is much more menacing than Paul Bettany playing the character as a younger man, because he just seems like a little punk.
MM: Yeah. It helps him out. It helps him out.
Q: But then the man the character becomes is so brutal and so much more imposing.
MM: But, you know, it's true, though, isn't it? The people that you meet I remember when I was a very young actor, of course, I was just a little punk. You hang around long enough and learn and learn, never stop learning. You change.
Q: When you were a young actor, you had a mentoring relationship with Lindsay Anderson. Now that you're older, do you find yourself mentoring younger actors?
MM: I try not to, because it's too much of a responsibility, for one thing.
Of course, you know, if I can help them in any way, I'm happy to. I don't think
I really know anything. It's awfully difficult to pass on
I could give them
my technique, but they're not me, so they're not going to be able to do what I
do in the same way. They have to find their own. And that's the great thing, I
think, that you must implant and pass on in that whatever you do, do it with
great confidence and do your own thing. Whatever your influences are, I've been
influenced by some extraordinary people, and some ones that you would think,
"My God!" Comics, I love comics. Stand-up comics, to me, are the
bravest kind of people. Seeing Jonathan Winters last night [at Winters' own Mill
Valley Film Festival Tribute] and Robin [Williams] coming in and doing a
fantastic rap. Forty-five minutes of sheer bliss, to me. That's what I'd like to
be able to do, but I can't do that. That's not what I can do. So there are so
many things, really.
Q: Can you talk about Assassin of the Tsar? It was nominated for the Palme d'Or
at the 1991 Cannes Film Festival, but then nothing, and now it's just starting
to be shown at festivals like this one, a decade later. You're amazing in it.
MM: Thank you. I love this film. I think it's an amazing film that I was very keen to make, because I met with the director. They came and they sort of found me in Geneva. I was doing a film in Geneva and suddenly I'd been sent this script, which I found absolutely fascinating, and I just thought, "I'm going to make this film." I don't know how they couldn't pay me, it was a Russian production, they had no money, really. I just thought, "You know what? I have to make this film." It says a lot about Russia and about the Soviet Union and its decline and all the rest of it. The whole psyche of the East, really. I met with the director, who was an extraordinary man. He told me that when he was writing the script, he had my picture over his typewriter. And, you know, you have to listen seriously anyway, we made it work and I went there.
Q: What was it like, filming in the Soviet Union at that time? Was it still the Soviet Union or ?
MM: It was still the Soviet Union and it was brutal. It was absolutely
brutal, but it was also wonderful. It was like you were waiting for a civil war
to start, you were waiting for some
I don't know, earthquake to erupt. It
was a society that was, in a sense, lawless. People who had pensions they were
supposed to live off, they couldn't even buy a potato with it. A month's pension
was like $12 or something, and there was scary sort of inflation. It was just
crazy. They were trying to be capitalists and they were trying to do the
American thing, and, of course, you can't do it overnight. You can't change the
whole infrastructure of a country, a huge country. It's the largest landmass. I
mean, you can fly for 14 hours and get out and still see the same buildings,
it's the same.
There's a sameness about it that's horrific. And yet the people are adorable.
The Russian people I loved very much. I found them an extraordinary race of
people, very similar to Americans. Americans are very generous people, too. I
think it may have something to do with the huge landmass or something. I don't
know. But I liked them very much and they're very, very talented, highly
educated, very savvy, and all the rest of it. Very well-read. I'm just talking
about the average people, really well-educated. And there's nothing they can do
with this education.
I haven't been back for a while, but I'm sure it's probably even worse. I
know the Mafia gangs have moved in and taken advantage of it all. That was
happening when I was there, but it wasn't happening so badly. But I loved it. I
loved working there. It was brutal. A lot of chicken soup and all that. Not much
to do. The cameraman gave a party for me right by Mosfilm. A brilliant
cameraman. Look at the photography of the film and he's using tinfoil as
reflectors. Like you wrap a turkey in it at Thanksgiving, he's using tinfoil and
string to do this. It's the most primitive thing, and, yet, it doesn't really
matter. It works. The lights are extraordinary.
And they dyed my hair dark; they used carbon paper and cologne. And I was
like, "Oh my God! This is going to be terrible." And it was perfect;
it was fine. "What the hell! This is absolutely fine." They know what
to do. When you have to use your ingenuity to get by, they know. The Russians
are pretty damned good at that, because they've had nothing ever since they
started. They had nothing under the tsars. They had nothing; they were serfs.
They had nothing under the Communists, really, so nothing changed that much. And
they've, of course, got this great, ironic sense of humor, because that's the
only way you could get through the day. And, so, yes, I had a wonderful time.
I've many fond memories, people that I liked very, very much. They were very
talented. I think I was the first foreign actor to be invited to play a Russian
in a Russian film. It was quite extraordinary, really.
Q: You've worked with a lot of different directors. You obviously had the
iconic relationships with Kubrick and Lindsay Anderson, but who are some of the
others that you've worked with who've made an impression?
MM: I loved very much Blake Edwards, absolutely loved him. I'd do anything
with Blake. I did a film, it wasn't one of his best, but it didn't matter, I
loved it, called Sunset with Bruce Willis and James Garner. James, I just think
is one of the greats, he's another national treasure.
Paul McGuigan, I would have to say. And Joe Losey, who was an extraordinary
man, more in the historical sense, I think, than as a great director as far as I
was concerned. But he'd worked with Brecht, you know. He'd worked with Brecht.
Wow! That was something. He was an extraordinary man, Joe Losey, actually. Very
quiet, a wonderful sort of person. He'd give me great long typed notes about the
character [for Figures in a Landscape]. I couldn't understand most of it, you
know? Basically
I just don't work that way; it doesn't really mean that much
to me, but, anyway, I appreciated it at the time.
Who else? Well
of course, I can't remember what I've done now. But I
think I've been lucky in that I do work a lot, by choice. I'm a working actor
and I like working. Of course, you know, how many good films can you work on?
How many good films are there in the year? So the chances of me doing many good
films is very slim, so you treasure the ones that are good. That's why I
treasure something like Assassin of the Tsar and Gangster No. 1, because they're
both wonderful films in very different ways. But I'm very proud of them. You
know, I'm working on an Eddie Murphy film now [I Spy] and the budget is $100
million. It just isn't even
I can't even relate to it, in that sense, but
it's fun. In its own way, it's fun. I guess the thing is, I do love what I do,
and, hopefully, I can infect an audience with that sort of joie de vivre.
Q: I'm sorry that you haven't gotten more of the Time After Time - type romantic leads. I remember the first time I saw that, I just fell in love with you.
MM: Yeah. It's a lovely film.
Q: Do you regret not getting more parts like that?
MM: I do, in a way, yeah. I don't know why I didn't. I just don't know. I guess people couldn't actually, it was best said last night by Jonathan Winters, "Best not to be too " What was it?
[McDowell's friend] Mike Kaplan: "Only wear one hat."
MM: Yeah, don't get too diverse. It's no good, going from one end of the spectrum, to be able to play a psycho, and then a whimsical leading man, because they don't know what to do with you. They haven't got a clue. And so, basically, you know, I'm still being cast, really, from Clockwork Orange or now, at times, from Star Trek. Who can play the loony and blow up the world in six scenes?
Q: When I mentioned to a friend that I was interviewing you, she said, "I remember him from Cat People. He still scares me."
MM: [Laughs] Good, good. Cat People, there's another film I rather like. Paul
Schrader, another good director. Yes, I've been very fortunate. I've worked with
some wonderful people. I'm really, you know
of course, the movie is a
director's medium and you're really only as good as the director. Of course, one
hopes one can influence and one tries to do one's best. I think I've been pretty
lucky. Most of the people I've worked with have been very pleasant and very
nice. I think it's rare that I come away thinking, "Oh God, I wish I'd
never done that." It's really rare. I can't remember the last time I felt
that.
But, you see, with all these tributes and all that, you tend to think,
"Maybe this is it. My time is up." But the truth of it is, I honestly
feel better now and more in control of the work than I ever did. And I'm
enjoying it more than I ever did. Why is that? I don't know. I mean, you'd
think, you know, all this travel and all that, I'd just want to stay home. But I
just love working on something that's fascinating. I'm going off next year to do
a production in London's West End of The Dresser. We're going to do Ronnie
Harwood's play again, so that's an awful lot
a big part to learn, but it'll
be fun. Then I've got a couple more films to do in the spring. I never really
stop. I'm very, very fortunate that I still get offered work, you know. Not many
actors can say that honestly. There is also, I think, there's a measure of fear
in it, that you feel if one of those balls should drop, the whole lot collapses.
Q: I read another quote from you where you were saying that you'd like to have
the kind of career that John Gielgud had and he worked until the end, into his
90s.
MM: When I worked with John, I looked at him with total love and amazement, because there was this man who was holding forth about the world, and I guess he was in his 60s when I worked with him [on Caligula]. And I just looked at him and thought, "That's who I want to be. That's the kind of a career [I want], because he always works, he loves it, he has a great life." Even though he'd say, [adopting Gielgud's regal tones] "But the money edge. I don't know what I'm going to do. I'll have to get rid of my Rolls Royce." I'd say, "Well, John, take a train." "I couldn't possibly take a train!" [Laughs] There he was, he's still carping. And then, at 90, he's calling his agent, "Anything for me?" It's wonderful, really.
Q: The last time I interviewed you, you gave me a criteria for picking film roles, and you said that if you got two out of three, then you'd do the film. But when you decide to do a stage play
MM: It has to be three for three, because you're literally not being paid. So I would only work on-stage if I had to play this part, I just had to play it. And The Dresser, of course, Norman he's one of the great characters and I love Ronnie, Ronnie Harwood. The last play I did was a Ronnie Harwood play, Another Time. He's a brilliant writer and a most incredible man. And being back in London made me nostalgic for the theater again. Usually I like to do plays in New York, and I will work in New York, of course, go back to the theater there. But it's time to get back to my own country to do some work, because I don't even know whether they still remember me, but
Q: [Laughs] I think you're kind of hard to forget.
MM: Who knows? Anyway, it'll be nice I haven't worked in the West End since the '70s, when I did Entertaining Mr. Sloane, so it's really oh, no, no, no, I did Holiday at the Old Vic in '87. But, anyway, it's a long time. It'll be hard to go back and do that play, but I'm looking forward to going back. Nothing really stops, you just keep going and enjoying it.
Q: What are the differences between working on something with a modest budget like Gangster No. 1 and a $100 million Eddie Murphy film like I Spy?
MM: The big difference is the size of the trailer and the size of the
craft-services table, and that's basically it. There's just a lot more people
around and you honestly don't know what half of them do, but I'm happy either
way. Of course, it's quite nice to sit in a huge trailer, but at the end of the
day, it's not really necessary. I think Eddie Murphy has four. I don't know what
he does with them; I suppose he has a lot of family and stuff. But it's like a
Tuscan village on the move. I'm working with Betty Thomas, whom I adore, she's another great director,
fabulous. Fabulous lady, calls the shots as she sees them, and she's fantastic.
I'm very lucky to work with her. She saw Gangster and cast me, boom! The studio
said, "What do you want him for?" A lot of that going on and she said,
"I want him! You just get him." So, good for her. Thank you very much,
Betty, is what I can say. But it was after the terrible events [of September
11], they had to fly me out on a private jet; they couldn't get me to Budapest
any other way, so I sort of lived the life of a multimillionaire for 10 minutes.
It was quite pleasant.
Q: You've been working for over 30 years now and you have some pretty iconic
movies on your resume, but, in your own mind, what are some of your career
highlights?
MM: Well, you know, I suppose if
, O Lucky Man, and Clockwork Orange are
my early things, for various reasons. if
, it was my first and I met this
great man. Clockwork Orange, obviously, because it was such a great part and
such an extraordinary director. That was another incredible period in my life,
the year spent working with [Kubrick] every day, sometimes 18 hours a day with
him, getting to know him and getting to know him well. Probably getting to know
him too well. [Laughs]
And then working on my own script, which became O Lucky Man!. And, then, you
know, even something like Caligula was sort of an amazing period, a year spent
in Rome in the '70s. It was an extraordinary time to work with John Gielgud, and
Peter O'Toole, whom I adore. I think he's a wonderful, wonderful actor. Of
course, he is. I go to see him every time he appears, Peter O'Toole. He always
goes, "Ah! Tinkerbell!" That's what he calls me, because I had all
these funny costumes on as Caligula.
I don't know. So many stage plays. Every stage play, because that's a whole
life, you know. I'm there because I want to be. So every single part I've done
on-stage has been amazing, and I've loved it. Whether people thought it was
amazing or not, that's not what I'm talking about. But I felt it was amazing to
be there with these people doing it. And then Gangster was certainly a gift, an amazing gift of a part. It's
something that I was ready to do, ready to let fly with that. That was very
exciting. And then Time After Time, where I met Mary [ex-wife Mary Steenburgen]. We
fell in love in this city and had two children, which was great. What more could
you ask from a film than that? Two children, one of whom made a speech
introducing President Clinton the other night, and wow, was his dad proud. And
the other one, who is now a film director. You know, I'm going to be in my
daughter's film. So I've had a very charmed life, a very lucky life, and a privileged life.
I'm married to a wonderful person now, so what more could I ask for? I mean, so
when is it all gonna
when are people going to find out? That's what I want
to know? When are they going to wake up and go, "My God! He's not that
good!" [Laughs]
Q: I don't think that's going to happen.
MM: You never know. You never know. Believe me, you never know.
© 2001 Reel.com
Archived 2002-08 Alex D. Thrawn on www.MalcolmMcDowell.net