‘John Malkovich isn’t me’: John Malkovich remembers ‘Being John Malkovich’

As a filmmaker with a career spanning decades, I can wholeheartedly agree that creating a movie is indeed a challenging endeavor. Yet, for me, it’s not so much a burden as it is an opportunity to bring my vision to life – an expectation and requirement that I embrace wholeheartedly. Sometimes, we may fall short, but when that happens, it’s a lesson learned for the next project.

To this day, more than two decades past, the initial concept remains shocking, strange, and surprisingly intelligent. Tucked away on the 7 1/2 floor of an old New York City office tower, concealed behind a simple filing cabinet, is a compact entrance that mysteriously transports you into the mind of actor John Malkovich.

In my opinion, the filmmakers’ decision to cast John Malkovich, an esteemed thespian with two Oscar nods under his belt and a versatile repertoire on stage and screen, was both unexpected and brilliant. Malkovich is the kind of actor that audiences recognize but occasionally struggle to pinpoint.

John Malkovich’s film isn’t just a playful inversion trick; it’s much more profound than that. With its imaginative presentation, the movie turns the surreal into the ordinary, making everyday life seem extraordinary. It’s humorous, but it also carries a heavy dose of sadness, expressing longing for emotional bonds and the feeling that people are often enigmatic, even to themselves. The film is not about fame’s fleeting glimmer, but rather, it delves into self-exploration and personal identity.

Screenwriter Charlie Kaufman, known for working on TV comedies like “Get a Life” and “The Dana Carvey Show”, penned his first movie script for the film “Being John Malkovich”. Meanwhile, director Spike Jonze, recognized for his work in music videos and ads, also embarked on his feature film career with “Malkovich”.

The cast included John Cusack as a down-on-his luck puppeteer who discovers the portal, Cameron Diaz as his patient but dissatisfied girlfriend and Catherine Keener as the cynical colleague looking to take advantage of the situation. Orson Bean, Mary Kay Place and Charlie Sheen all have supporting roles; Brad Pitt, Sean Penn and Winona Ryder have brief cameos; and director David Fincher makes an uncredited appearance as the national arts editor of the Los Angeles Times. And, of course, John Malkovich plays the role of John Malkovich.

The movie earned nominations in three categories at the Academy Awards: Spike Jonze for Best Director, Charlie Kaufman for Original Screenplay, and Keener for Best Supporting Actress. Since then, Kaufman has gone on to win an Oscar for his screenplay in “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” and has established himself as a director. Jonze has carried on with commercial projects while also directing three feature films and the documentary “Beastie Boys Story.” Interestingly, Jonze himself won an Oscar for the screenplay to his 2013 film “Her.

In one of the special features on the 2012 Criterion Collection release of the film, Jonze stated, “Charlie and I consider Malkovich as the man who made everything possible, not just the movie but all that followed. … He didn’t have to be a part of this film, it was almost irrational for him to do so.

To celebrate the movie’s anniversary, I contacted Jonze, Kaufman, and Malkovich to share their recollections of this significant production. However, through a representative, Jonze chose not to comment. Unfortunately, Kaufman’s representatives did not respond. Despite being in Bulgaria for a stage production of George Bernard Shaw’s “Arms and the Man,” Malkovich took time out for a Zoom conversation about the film.

For a long time, you’ve mentioned that putting your name in the film’s title would mean you’d be closely tied to it more than anyone else. After 25 years, it appears that prediction has come true.

The concept was quite unusual, and I knew it resided in some other realm. As predicted, that’s exactly how it turned out. Initially, upon reading the script, I felt a strong desire to direct it for someone else. However, Charlie Kaufman didn’t share this sentiment. Consequently, for several years, it remained unrealized. As previously mentioned, whenever I found myself in Los Angeles, which isn’t often in my life or career, people would ask me why I wasn’t working on this project or that film. They’d casually bring it up even in a restaurant, as if it were my responsibility. It never crossed my mind that it would actually be produced.

A few years following my reading of the script, Francis Ford Coppola contacted me about meeting a fellow named Spike Jonze in Paris. I agreed to the meeting, and Spike subsequently asked me to join the project. This was an offer I’d never received officially before, and I had reservations. However, once Johnny Depp (Cusack) and Cameron Diaz (Keener) were on board, I decided to proceed with the production.

What specifically drew your attention when you first decided to modify both the direction and the personality of the character?

As a film enthusiast, the script’s intrigue wasn’t primarily due to its title or concept – it’s refreshingly unusual, meta, and ironically unforgettable given its seemingly forgettable name. However, what truly captivated me was the rich world that Charlie brought to life. Personally, I didn’t find any direct connection to it in terms of personal relevance. Reflection on this theme wasn’t something I delved into before or after, but Charlie’s compelling writing drew me in initially.

Were both Charlie and Spike equally adamant about it being you? Have you ever found yourself wondering, “Why was it me?” instead?

Here’s one way of paraphrasing: If there’s no other reason, it’s because I’m not particularly interested in myself or who people think I am. Charlie once said something very amusing, which was the first thing he ever said to me. We may have had breakfast with Spike, and we seemed to have agreed to move forward. The deal was set, and all that followed. Charlie remained silent during breakfast, but as we were leaving, he told me, “I just want you to know I’m a fan of yours.” I responded, “We don’t need to do that. I’ve already read the script, thank you.” And that was essentially the end of it.

Initially, I had an inkling that my actions might be pushing boundaries since, despite being an actor who attracted some level of attention, I was generally left undisturbed. I enjoyed this freedom to pursue various projects, like acting in plays or directing one in Bulgaria, without interference. This liberty was something I valued greatly. However, I feared this might change as my actions could potentially alter the public’s view of me. In hindsight, it seems that perception has shifted, but at the time, I considered it a risky move. Despite my belief in the script’s brilliance and Spike’s exceptional directing, I thought it was a questionable decision, as things could have gone awry.

In what manner did you get ready for the film, and how did you handle the part of John Malkovich in comparison to other roles? Was your approach different in any way?

That’s an interesting question. The thing is, there wasn’t that much to search for, because the world is so specific that Charlie created. I remember one day when I did something and Spike Jonze said to me, “John Malkovich wouldn’t do it that way.” And I kind of chuckled, but I said, “Oh, OK. How would he do it?” And I really didn’t think that much of it because anything I do isn’t me. But John Malkovich isn’t me either, any more or less than anything else isn’t me. So if somebody says, “That’s not the way John Malkovich would do it,” maybe they know better than I do.

I’d like to discuss the intriguing scene titled “The Dance of Despair and Desperation.” In this sequence, you portray John Malkovich, while within you, John Cusack is playing a character who is essentially controlling John Malkovich. Could you elaborate on how you tackled this unique aspect from a physical standpoint during the performance?

In our preparation for the project, we had extensive rehearsals with a choreographer, which was quite complex. I didn’t give it much thought at the time; instead, I trusted Spike’s guidance. With my background in numerous films, directing one, and possibly directing several unofficially while also writing some scripts unofficially, I understand that film directing is an extremely challenging task. It places a significant burden on directors, and I am content to follow their instructions. My role, I believe, is to aid them in discovering, sustaining, and conveying a vision for something. Since the beginning of my acting career, I’ve viewed being in a film as being a character within someone else’s dream. It may be called “Being John Malkovich,” but it’s not just my dream; it belongs to Charlie, Spike, and everyone else involved. My approach to this unique and rare role would be similar to any other film role, with the added distinction that it possesses a quality that is singular and exceptional.

Was your act of kindness towards the newcomers, Spike and Charlie, during their first film project incredibly selfless? It seemed as though you gave everything – your reputation, identity, and fame – generously. Did you perceive it in this manner?

To be clear, I didn’t find it exceptional, merely another film. However, there was something amusing about Spike that caught my attention. I found him hilarious. You see, the first time we met, we chatted for around an hour or so at a restaurant in Paris, a hotel restaurant to be precise. After an hour, I had to ask, “Excuse me, are you American?” I assumed he was Czech due to his surf-inspired dialect that I couldn’t quite comprehend. It seemed like a foreign language to me. To be honest, I was completely convinced that the script represented a truly unique voice, a genuine one. And I felt confident that Spike would assemble an outstanding cast. I had faith in his vision, his humor. That’s essentially how I operate.

Regardless of who it might be associated with – whether Wolfgang Petersen, Raul Ruiz, Spielberg, or Schlöndorff – the task remains challenging. Essentially, your role is to strive towards realizing that vision. To me, this isn’t a burden; it’s an expectation and necessity. If, at times, one cannot meet this standard, then, in my view, it’s a shortcoming on my part.

Has there been any change in your thoughts towards the movie and your initial choice to work on it throughout the years?

To put it in simpler terms, when I saw the movie (which I only watched once at the Venice film festival), and learned that Charlie Sheen was my friend, it was a prolonged fit of laughter, about 15 minutes long. And then, when I told him I’d become associated with a group of lesbian witches, he casually said, “Give me their number when you’re done with them,” in a way that only Charlie Sheen could pull off. That’s just the kind of guy he is. And in that moment, I thought, “Well, it’s as expected.

In the special features on the Criterion Collection disc, there’s an interview where you comment, “The film isn’t primarily focused on celebrities or myself.” So, from your perspective, what is the movie essentially about?

Reflecting on this memory, there was a conversation with Charlie, Spike, Vince Landay, and perhaps Johnny Cusack about their dissatisfaction with the film’s ending. This discussion led me to contemplate the phrase that I hadn’t yet used in my work: “What you believe is yours, isn’t.” I find this sentiment very relatable and fitting for the movie “Being John Malkovich,” which, despite being associated with me, belongs more to Charlie and Spike. If it belongs to anyone, it truly belongs to them.

In a different perspective, it’s all about the fleeting nature of life and art. Once your creations are shared, they become part of the audience’s experience, regardless of their reaction – be it admiration, dislike, or indifference. They no longer belong solely to you, but have taken on a life of their own in the minds of those who encounter them. This sentiment holds true for my films, your work, and even our personal identities.

You realize, you put in a lot of effort into various tasks. Some of them gained recognition or appreciation, while others didn’t. However, it seems like the things I did are not entirely mine; they belong to those who watch and value them. For me, the work itself is what matters. It’s an honor and a joy to be able to do this with my life, but ultimately, it doesn’t belong to me – it belongs to the audience who engages with it. If some people don’t care for or appreciate what I do, that’s perfectly fine by me. That’s how I view things.

Read More

• TOMI PREDICTION. TOMI cryptocurrency
• PROTEO PREDICTION. PROTEO cryptocurrency
• ARPA PREDICTION. ARPA cryptocurrency
• ARIX PREDICTION. ARIX cryptocurrency
• Silver Rate Forecast
• DATA PREDICTION. DATA cryptocurrency
• SLIM PREDICTION. SLIM cryptocurrency
• MEOW PREDICTION. MEOW cryptocurrency
• EUR USD PREDICTION
• ELF PREDICTION. ELF cryptocurrency

2024-10-29 13:32