The reality of your surroundings by Tony Flott / MEDIUM MAGAZINE / Fall 2002 He's moved into new digs in Hollywood. He's buds with Matthew Broderick and future husband to "Arliss" star Sandra Oh. His acclaimed film, "About Schmidt," created a buzz at Cannes and the New York Film Festival and is generating talk of another Oscar for its star, Jack Nicholson. "He" is Omaha native Alexander Payne. Medium went long distance with Payne in early November in Cortona, Italy, where Oh was filming her next movie. The filmmaker would be stateside a week later as preparations began for the mid-December release of "About Schmidt." The film, a dark comedy, stars Nicholson as a 66-year-old insurance actuary forced into retirement and into self examination after his wife dies and his daughter prepares for what he expects will be a disastrous marriage. The movie follows Payne's critically acclaimed and modestly profitable satire "Election," for which Payne and partner Jim Taylor earned a screen writing Oscar nomination. That, in turn, came after the controversial "Citizen Ruth." His next movie, "Sideways," will be shot in California, following "two loser guys," a failed novelist and a failed actor. The pair goes on a weeklong wine-tasting tour in California before one of them is married. People matter to Payne. "Real people. Real human beings. Real Americans," he says. The 41-year-old director talked with Medium about filmmaking, the changes in his life, working with Jack and what he considers to be the sad state of American movies. How long are you in Italy and are you there for work or play? Payne: I am here and I'm working, but my work doesn't have specifically to do with Italy. My future wife is an actress and is working in a movie being shot here. I have a computer and will travel, so I'm just here in the hotel room while she's working. I get back to L.A. a week from today. So you're engaged to Sandra Oh? Payne: Yes. When's the wedding? Payne: It's set for early next summer. Boy you're living the life now - dating a starlet, friends with big-name actors, hobnobbing with Jack, you jet-set all over the world... Payne: Actually, I flew over economy class. ...there are constant interviews. These are big changes from five, six years ago, or just a couple of years ago when I lasted talked to you. Payne: But you, you're conjecturing from very superficial conversations with me. I don't see how you can possibly know that my life is any different at all. Well, you weren't hobnobbing with Jack before, I'm sure you're getting a lot more interview requests, and you are in Italy right now. Payne: The number of interview requests usually blooms around the time a film comes out. There were quite a few when "Citizen Ruth" came out and around the time "Election" came out and a few more now. Well, do you have a big head now? Payne: I've always had a big head. Physically, yeah. But what about... Payne: I don't know. I guess that's not for me to say. That's for others to say. How does one stay grounded with such fame? Payne: I'm not trying to be difficult, but there's an assumption inherent in your question suggesting I'm famous. I guess I'm certainly known among some people who follow film, but is that the same as famous? I'm not sure how famous film directors really are. Spielberg is. And Hitchcock. Those are ones everyone knows. But if you saw Ridley Scott walking down the street, you wouldn't know what he looked like. Or would you? Not at all. Payne: So I don't know how famous I really am. I know. You've said you dislike the personal attention. Is that one reason why you're behind the camera and not in front of it? Payne: Acting is fun, but I was never all that interested in becoming an actor. It would be too terrifying. I just like movies, and I'm happy I could parlay my love of movies into making them. I am a little uncomfortable with the attention, any personal attention that's placed on me. I'm really just happy making the movies. I'm not trying to be disingenuous. I do understand going into it that if my movies become popular or accepted or are critically well received that there is some type of spotlight put on you. But that's certainly not what motivates me. I'm a little uncomfortable with it. I accept it when it brings me free things, though. Like yesterday I had a request from TiVo. Do you know what TiVo is? Yes. Payne: They are promoting "About Schmidt" on TiVo and they wanted to interview me. And my first instinct was to say, "No," but then I read the letter and it said in exchange they were willing to give me a free TiVo unit and a lifetime setup, so I immediately said, "Yes." So the perks are nice sometimes. Are you getting tired of answering questions regarding "About Schmidt?" Payne: Yeah. Fortunately for me they've been a little spread out. I did a few in Cannes in France in May for the international press. I did a couple in New York around the time of the New York Film Festival. And I'm returning to L.A. a week from today precisely because the press junket is next weekend. So I'll do a few interviews, including a TiVo one next weekend. So they've been kind of spread out. I don't like the same questions over and over again. Why don't they just read what I said in some other interview? I said it here and it won't be any better. It makes me self-conscious about trotting out the same dog-eared little mental file cards. I don't mind interviews when I can learn something during it, or it's more of a discussion about things or ideas. That's OK. I'm not crazy about doing interviews, but I don't resist them too vehemently because the studio likes me to do them, and in the case of "About Schmidt," I want to make the studio happy because I'm very grateful to them for making the film. I don't think you've seen it yet, have you? No. Payne: Well, one cannot predict with certainty how it will do commercially. The fact that the studio spent so much money on this film, paid for Jack Nicholson and gave me final cut, well, I want to play ball with those guys. It's very rare in today's risk-averse commercial film market. They took a gamble on me and I'd like to make sure they win - without any compromise to the film, of course. And the film is as good as I can make it given my level of skill and my age and where I'm at in the learning curve. Did you get 80 percent of what you wanted in the film. I read your comment about a director who said you're lucky to get 80 percent. Payne: Yeah, [Japanese filmmaker Akira] Kurosawa. That's high. You never quite get that. How much did you get in? Payne: I don't know. It's hard to put a number on it. Most perfect films are never seen by other people because they exist only in the director's mind. On the other hand, a finished film can have beautiful things in it that the director could never have envisioned. An actor can bring something, or a sky can be particularly beautiful. The gods bring nice things. Jonathan Demme said you're part of a "Golden Age" of young directors, a group that another reviewer called the "New Establishment" and that a third labeled "Maverick Storytellers." Are we seeing some sort of revolution in Hollywood? Payne: Jonathan Demme said that? Yep. Payne: That's nice of him. Now what was the rest of your question? I was stuck on the Jonathan Demme comment. The group of directors Demme referred to was called by another reviewer as the "New Establishment" and a third said they were "Maverick Storytellers." So are we seeing some sort of revolution in Hollywood? Payne: One person sees a new establishment and another sees mavericks? Interesting. But I don't know. Those things you can usually only tell in hindsight. Right now there's a lot of discussion about the golden age of '70s American cinema. It was ushered in by "Midnight Cowboy" and "Easy Rider" and finished with "Raging Bull." And I'm not sure how aware those directors were that they were living in a golden age. I think a lot of them were only seeing the struggle they had to go through to get the films made that they wanted. All directors go through that. There are a number of directors more or less my age, somewhere in their early 30s to early 40s, who were conditioned by '70s American cinema and want very much to make more human stories, less formulaic stories, and get them seen. It's time for something different from what American cinema has been for the last 20 years. It's been very formulaic, blockbuster minded. Very violent. Nothing against violence per se. Some of my favorite movies are violent action movies. But does every single American movie have to anticipate a moment of violence? We don't have to do something particularly new, but return to something old, which is movies about real people, real human beings, real Americans. We have this huge cinema, and we see few movies about actual Americans. In terms of movies about Americans, I just saw "Midnight Cowboy" about three weeks ago at the Dundee Theater at midnight. It was a much more honest portrayal of human beings than the movie I saw on the airplane the other day, "The Rookie." "The Rookie" has zero to say to me. "Midnight Cowboy" has 10,000 things to say to me. The comparison is unfair, but I'm making it anyway. "The Rookie" looks as if it were made by the ministry of propaganda of the American government. Is there going to be a directors company formed? Payne: That's come and gone. But it could come again. The idea was that there were four or five of us who began discussions about forming a company with some sponsorship. The idea of a company is great creative freedom and, later, ownership of the films. But it seems like it would be such a losing proposition, taking on the powers that be. Payne: I think it was W.E.B. DuBois, who said, "Power never yields without a demand." You have to ask. Sure you have to ask. My kids ask me for stuff all the time, but I still tell them no. Payne: Yes. But you have to ask. Shoot, look at what they did to Galileo, and he was right. And that was about more than people's money - that was about an entire world view. You've said you write to direct? Does that mean you dislike writing, or that it's a necessary evil? Payne: Writing is painful and awful. You're a writer, so you know that sometimes the same personality type that wants to write or be involved in a creative activity is the same mind that has a big discipline problem. Yeah, writing is a very important part of film making, but it is very difficult. Would you like to get to a point on a film where you don't write, only direct? Payne: I'm offered scripts from time to time and I open each one of them with a prayer. But I have yet to read one I'd like to direct. Were you nervous directing Jack Nicholson? Payne: Yes, but I'm nervous when I start directing any movie. I'm nervous at the beginning of every single day. I know inherent in your question is the idea of the cinematic icon which is Jack Nicholson. And I was certainly very respectful and cognizant of his vast experience and his great talent. But there comes a moment when thoughts like that aren't a luxury because you have a job to do. I have to direct a movie and he has to act in it, so that made it all very easy. He's very professional and reliable. He doesn't want to get involved in a movie unless he believes in the director and in the idea of the film. So it was very easy and harmonious. Any conflicts we had were always resolved very easily. How did you know he could play "small?" It's opposite of all his other characters? Payne: Because he's a great actor. And who wouldn't want to see Jack Nicholson trying to play small? We think of him so much as this great movie star, but he became a great movie star because he's a great actor. Paid his dues in B movies for a long time. Payne: Yes. He was in many stinky films for many years. But he's very well trained and keeps his acting instrument very alive and in tune. He's one of the great actors the cinema has produced in its first 100 years. The press focuses a lot on you with your films, but does Jim Taylor get overlooked? Payne: I don't think he does. Now that "About Schmidt" (has come) out, many of the reviews, if not all of them, mention him in them. They'll say the film is directed by Alexander Payne and co-written by Jim Taylor. It's our vision. The New York Times review spent almost a paragraph talking about our working together on "Citizen Ruth" and "Election" and now this. Of course, there's a lot of attention put on the director of films. But the smart people don't overlook the writers. A lot of film people know Billy Wilder's two screenwriters. Their names escape me right now. No, I'm just kidding. I.A.L. Diamond and Charlie Brackett. Jim's going to direct his first film I understand. Will that be "Sideways?" Payne: No, that's my next film. We just finished the first draft on Jim's movie. What's hardest about making the transition from writer to director? Payne: In every case? I actually don't see much of a transition. Film directing is three jobs: writing, directing and editing. That's how I'm trained. I'm always eager to go from one stage to the next. When I'm writing I'm eager to start directing. When I'm directing I'm very eager to start editing. And editing is where I'm happiest. Is that because it gives you the most control? Payne: It doesn't really have to do with control. It has to do with...Kurosawa also said, "The only reason I write and direct is to get things to edit." Get pieces of film to edit. One is the knowledge that you're over the hump, and so you've got two of the three phases over with. Also, editing is joyous. It's quiet, just you and the editor in the room, and it's where you make the movie. And it's the most, uh, magical art of filmmaking. Montage is the one part of this, the part that's unique to filmmaking. Writing, well there's something in common with writing in plays or narrative prose. Directing has something in common with theater and photography. But then there's nothing quite like film editing, putting two pieces of film together. You have a guy in a close-up getting out of a chair. Now he's on top of a building getting up out of a chair. Isn't that interesting? How you can adjust emotions, adding a frame or taking away a frame? Very interesting, and I'm very absorbed in it. What's the most recent movie you've seen? Payne: I just saw, "The Rookie," of course. I saw it on the airplane. It looked like an American equivalent of a kind of Stalinist image of the American experience. All archetypes. Very strong kind of national archetypes. That's why people are flooding to see "My Big Fat Greek Wedding." It's about a large audience hungry for sincere human films. All the ethnic groups are going to see it. Cambodians are going to see it. They say, "They're Greek and we're Cambodian, but it's like us." What else have I seen recently? Oh, I just watched "My Man Godfrey" on DVD and "McCabe and Mrs. Miller" with a commentary by Robert Altman. And I just watched a 10-part PBS series on the history of American cinema. It came out seven years ago, but I missed it. Was it any good? Payne: Excellent overview. Best movie of all time? Payne: That's hard. It's impossible to say. Come on. Payne: I can't do it. There are many excellent movies. You don't care for the state of movies these days. Will they change? Payne: Not just American movies. There are many good ones, but in general I find it difficult, I would find it difficult every week to find an American movie, a new one, that I'd want to see. But I want to be clear I'm not trashing American cinema because we have a great, great tradition of fantastic movies. "My Man Godfrey" was from 1936 and "McCabe and Mrs. Miller" from 1971. Wonderful American movies. I don't need to see all the new ones anyway. Any upcoming movies you're eager to see? Payne: I can't wait to see "Adaptation." "Chicago." "Gangs of New York," of course. There's an Iranian movie coming out about...oh, I can't remember the name now. Oh, is it about elections? [Ed.'s note: It's "Secret Ballot"] Payne: Yes. Any Iranian film that gets a release in the U.S., that's worth seeing. They're pretty much making the really great movies right now and have been for about a decade. Why is that? Because they're more desperate to tell stories worth telling? Payne: I had dinner with a critic, Godfrey Chesire. He is writing the first definitive English language book on Iranian cinema. I asked him the same questions. Why are there so many good ones? They have a fairly rich cinematic tradition there that even predates this current trend from the last 10 years. And under a repressive regime, artists are inspired. They want to speak out and they have to find very artistic and creative ways to express ideas because of the censors. You find great artists in Spanish films under Franco. In communist films and Eastern Europe films. Now look what's coming out of Iran. I'm not sure I detect any Jesuit influence in your films? Is it there? Payne: Well, I'm not a Jesuit. Yeah, but you went to Creighton Prep High School. You're Jesuit-certified. Payne:I hope my films, well, I hope there's always a moral center, an implication of morality. And of humanity. I would aspire to that.