Interview (2007)

In case you're wondering, this story was not written by "the" Theo Van Gogh (brother of the famous Dutch painter) but his great-grandson who wrote and directed the original "Interview" in 2003 a year before he was shot, stabbed & partially decapitated by a ticked off Muslim extremist who didn't like his movies.The only reason I'm mentioning this is to illustrate that Theo Van Gogh's films certainly had an effect on people. I haven't seen the original Dutch "Interview", but based on the story re-told here I see the kind of biting wit & satirical finger-pointing that packs a punch. While I seriously doubt anybody will get assassinated over this film, I'm sure it may (good naturedly) ruffle a few feathers in the world of self-important journalism and Hollywood tabloid reporting.Steve Buscemi plays an arrogant political journalist who is sent on a fluff assignment to interview a soap opera/B-movie celebrity (Sienna Miller). He's rude from the outset, but due to his grandfatherly appearance and self-deprecating, sarcastic wit he has a certain charm that's fun to watch. He's a character we love to hate, and that's what makes this film work.Sienna Miller is well cast as the starlet known for her love affairs & bust size more than her talent. But she's shown to be intelligent and good natured, so again we quickly become attached to her character even though she is a Hollywood cliché.What follows, in a very minimalistic, stage like show, is the torrid volley of love-hate banter between these two egos, each seeking to dominate the other. If you like the characters, then you're set for a fun and sometimes suspenseful ride. If you don't like them, well then I can see you becoming bored or annoyed.Really, though, who doesn't like Steve Buscemi & Sienna Miller? Here they have an interesting chemistry, at times father-daughter, at times more like bickering exes. And always one is trying to one-up the other. In the second half they raise the stakes, building momentum to a big finale which I found very satisfying.If you're a fan of plays or films made from plays, particularly ones where characters love to antagonize each other like "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" (1966) or "A Streetcar Named Desire" (1951), with a somewhat claustrophobic 1-on-1 presentation, then give this playful movie a shot.

When he dies I hope they preserve Steve Buscemi and slice him up to figure out how someone could present such a Cretan, regardless of how his character is written on the page. I will always remember his persona from the first time I discovered him on screen in Reservoir Dogs, as the non-tipping Mr. Pink of Quentin Tarantino's crime tale.In the case of the film Interview, we are very lucky that he decided to pursue funding for what for many was a very individual film in the hands of the original filmmaker Theo van Gogh. Van Gogh's background was ostensibly journalistic and his outspoken voice got him eventually killed. That Van Gogh's treatment of his subject matter may have been more for explication than entertainment, this adaptation may be better than the original.Generally American remakes (I don't know why Hollywood constantly does it) are not as good as the originals. Al Pacino was in the remake of Scent of a Woman (ugh…!), and was award an Oscar for his acting in the thing! The TV series The Office with Steve Carell is a remake of an excellent British TV show that is so far above the American simulacrum, that I am embarrassed to admit that it is playing in a country I inhabit.But the Interview remake has a lot going for it that the original doesn't. Steve Buscemi does double duty as director and lead character, political journalist Pierre Peders, assigned the task of doing a fluff piece on the flavor-of-the-week Sienna Miller's self-involved actress Katya. At first this seems like a thin plot to hang an entire film on, but the movie touches on several cultural flash points that are sure to cause controversy in the viewer.There's a particularly vibrant live feeling about the film, and this comes about primarily due to the way the scenes are directed. Buscemi's direction is to tap into the truth of the relationship between Pierre and Katya, and this does come off as caustic at times, but the actors always seem like real people.The look of the flick is well-matched to its themes. Three camera operators shoot consistently each scene from specific vantage points so that many of the reactions from the actors are spontaneous. This is a two-hander and Buscemi and Miller carry the entire feature, and the dynamic that ignites between the two is memorable and will leave you thinking through much of what the characters say and do as the screen fades.The film at times may feel a little too much like theatre. Things happen without a convincing amount of set up. We may wonder why Katya brings Pierre into her apartment in the first place. Some viewers may see it motivated by a sense of guilt on her characters part. Once inside it seems that each character needs the other to fulfill a need. This is never overtly expressed and director Buscemi allows the viewer to supply some speculation.Whatever reason works to drive the story, the needs of each character come out in caustic, sometime violent ways, and the integrity of each is shown as completely devoid of substance. You may feel that the conflict is a standoff, and that viewpoint depends on what your value system dictates.

This movies was written, directed and stars Steve Buscemi. This trio involvement spells potential problems because it so lends itself for the artist to indulge in his work. Don't get me wrong I'm a fan of Buscemi and have a crack at anything he's involved in, unless he dares go in the horror genre; I draw a line somewhere. The performances by Buscemi and his co-star Sienna Miller as well as a good part of the dialogue satisfied my expectations but I don't think there was sufficient material in the script for the length of the movie. Hence, I thought it dragged in many parts of it and would have made a great short story film rather than a feature-length one. Sienna Miller character was excellent writing and she was a pleasant surprise by the time the movie ended. It is a smart drama. I understand why Buscemi evidently cared about it; the character is right up his alley, as witty yet non-comedic roles go. There are no supporting characters in the story; it's sort of a one on one thing (lucky Steve). I doubt you will like it; you may if you dig his work and know it well.

"It's interesting because this film is about hurting each other. I believe you can't hurt somebody you don't care about and you can't be hurt by somebody you don't care about." Steve BuscemiThe Dogme 95-esque filming manner of Interview, a remake of a 2003 Dutch film by Theo van Gogh, draws on the bare elements that films require; actors and recording equipment. The film is set majorily in Katya's loft, and as the fly-on-the-wall bystander in the open-plan apartment, leaving the room without knowing a conclusion to the situation is bottom of any voyeur's to-do list.Baring in mind that mainstream films often rely on spectacular scenery, extraordinary events or one-man-can-change-the-world approaches, it is thoroughly encouraging to occasionally spend a close hour and a half with only two character, and not be able to decide who is good or evil. Much like the time we spent with Jeffries in Rear Window, or the sales team in Glengarry Glenn Ross, the characters confide copious amounts of past histories which the audience have no license to be knowledgeable of.A physical scar catalyses the movie into a deep intricate account of their personal inner lives. The war and political journalist shares tales of his compelling past with close relatives; his brother's suicide attempt, his ex-wife's death, and his daughter's heroin overdose. Equally, Katya has a larger than life history, a drug habit, smoking endless cigarettes and an untruthful relationship with her boyfriend. Although the film does take two extraordinary lives, there is no evidence that anything seen or heard is the truth and could quite easily be Pierre's alcoholism and Katya's cocaine snorting resulting in flamboyant imagination.Like in any script; conflict drives the narrative. There are no explicit goals attempting to be won or achieved, but a greater focus on the struggle to maintain supremacy. Katya's role in society – purely being a stunningly beautiful "actress" – lends herself to being celebrity with little reason for success, obliging Pierre to take superiority on the importance scale. While the film twists and turns its way through personal trauma, the erratic audiences' empathetic emotions fluctuate accordingly. Generally one might align themselves with either Pierre or Katya, but the film will bring the imagined character-spectator relationship into question at some point during is running time, and probably subsequently when the DVD player is switched off.In Interview, we find out a hefty amount more about the interviewer rather than the interviewee. If the journalist undertook his customary research and interview preparation, we would be left with the boringness of another Katie Price interview concerning her latest perfume. The ignorance of each other's toil provides opportunity to enquire into irrelevant issues on both parts, and as sexual tension turns into a familial relationship, sparks fly in all directions.