Advertisement
The Triumph of Clare Peploe
Bertolucci's better half scores another directorial victory
|
| L to R: Jay Rodan, Mira Sorvino, Fiona Shaw, Clare Peploe and Bernardo Bertolucci on the set of The Triumph of Love. |
Though a fan of the movies as a child-she attended American westerns frequently with her mother-she never saw herself projected into that world. Her initial entry into the film business came serendipitously, through her friendships with moviemakers in Italy, her second home. At one point an assistant to renowned Italian director Michelangelo Antonioni (Zabriskie Point, Blow Up), Peploe went on to collaborate quite frequently with Bertolucci, whom she married in 1979. "I was always using other people to give ideas to because I didn't think that I would actually be making movies. It just became a kind of necessity. Bernardo got fed up with me and said, 'Why don't you direct a film yourself?''
First came a 30-minute short, Couples and Robbers (1981), which received Oscar and British Academy nominations. Then, in 1987, Peploe directed her debut feature, High Season, which was followed by a thriller, Sauce For The Goose, (1987) and the Bridget Fonda-Russell Crowe pic, Rough Magic (1995). A director of comedies somewhat by accident-"on the whole, I don't go to comedies"-Clare Peploe returns with Triumph, her spry and deliberately modern take on the 18th century French farce by Pierre Marivaux. The picture features a tour-de-force entry by Mira Sorvino, who plays a princess who disguises herself as a young man to win the hand of Agis (Jay Rodan)-a rival for her thrown. Agis has been raised by his uncle and aunt (Ben Kingsley and Fiona Shaw) to love reason, distrust emotion, and above all, hate Sorvino's princess, a woman he has never met. Here, Peploe discusses how the 18th century translates to modern times and behavior and the difference between the scientific and romantic explanations of love.
Phillip Williams (MM): You have contributed to several films as a writer before The Triumph of Love; did this script pose any particular challenges?
Clare Peploe (CP): The script, no. Once I understood how I was going to do it-the key ideas-which was to shoot it in a certain way, very freely, in an un-theatrical manner using Steadicam and handheld, then I was on my way.
MM: There is a lot of play with gender roles and gender expectations in this film.
CP: Yes, certainly with Mira Sorvino when she falls in love with Jay Rodan and there is the sense that there could be a homosexual relationship for him. And she is afraid of that, so she has to show him that she is a girl, although he has been brought up to loathe women.
MM: To what extent did you consider the parallels that might exist between your story and what's going on in society today with gender roles-the way they play out in our lives?
CP: I just thought there were certain parallels, actually, although it seemed right to keep the story in the 18th Century, because it was exciting to see that an 18th Century play could still reach one.
MM: Why is that time period so suited for romantic comedy?
CP: I think it's because it was a period of enlightenment. Marivaux, the playwright, is analyzing love like a scientist more than a romantic. He is saying that love can make fools of us all, that it can be cruel and humiliating. And yet, without experiencing it, we can't really understand human nature. He had, I feel, a more scientific than romantic way of looking at it. He dissects those feelings of love.
MM: It seems to me that it helps to have the piece in the 18th Century, because we might find it harder to accept modern characters being so overtly philosophical, and so naive about their emotions.
CP: Yes, it is easier to absorb coming from another time, and yet there is something about the emotion of that time that I think is similar to now. For example, when I was young, in the 1960s, we were much more romantic: romantic about politics, about feelings. Feelings and emotions were more mystified. Now, we are told where the G spot is and where our erogenous zones are. Sex has become part of the health trip. It's sort of practical and that is, oddly enough, very 18th century.
MM: Why did you decide to use Steadicam and handheld cameras? Why did you go against the sort of "Masterpiece Theater" approach, which would be a typical choice with material like this?
CP: I wanted to be very fluid, and be able to register every palpitation, every heartbeat, because it was such a dissection of feelings and love. Also, I didn't want to be theatrical; I tried to get away from a sort of window in which everything goes on. I wanted to be inside the action with the characters.
MM: Did you want people to be reminded that it's a modern viewing of the story?
CP: I wanted people to know that the text was not a story taking place in the 18th Century, but it was a story written in the 18th Century, which has its own stylistic codes. And at the same time (laughs) to forget about it. There was always this play, a kind of dance between theater and film. When we see the modern audience inside the film itself, it's not just to inform us that we are watching a theater piece but to add a kind of feeling to the characters, as well. They-the characters in the film-are confronted by the presence of a physical audience. It causes them anxiety, like a jump cut. In fact I use it like a jump cut. It's a dance between 18th Century theater and film; between the 18th century and the modern. We took a similar approach to the soundtrack.
MM: You used Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmore on the soundtrack. How did that come about? Modern rock guitar with 18th Century classical?
CP: Yes, we were using music of that period. It was rearranged but and it was very rhythmic, cinematic music, which went very well with the film. At the same time we wanted to be able to forget the 18th Century. When the emotions go haywire, when they're losing their heads, it's almost as if the electric guitar that comes in-or the modernity-represents a kind of truth about these wild, intense feelings. It's about getting away from the formality.
MM: How did you prepare for this film? Would you consider this film a departure for you?
CP: A departure in that I never thought of adapting theater. It all happened by chance. I fell in love with the piece and just then Bernardo had money to invest in a little film that had to be shot in Italy within a certain time. And I thought this could be perfect for that. The preparation was pretty straightforward. The casting was crucial, of course.
MM: Was the casting process a lengthy one?
CP: The whole thing went pretty quickly. The most important thing was casting Mira, the lead. I knew I wanted Ben and Fiona has always been one of my favorites. It was difficult to find Jay. It was difficult to find a young actor who somehow has a sort of otherworldliness about him. He has a kind of melancholy-a secret melancholy-about him, which went so well with this character, who has lived on his own for so long and has no friends.
MM: Did your conception of the film evolve much over the course of making the picture?
CP: It did a lot. I would plan the shots very much at the last minute-the night before, or I'd work them out with the operator. I would have a conversation about a scene with the actors but we might just say, 'Well, we'll start over there and end up here.' As vague as that and then work out very fast, in the moment, what we were going to do.
MM: What films or filmmakers are exciting to you these days?
CP: I love Abbas Kiarostami (Taste of Cherry) films. And also Samira Makhmalbaf (Blackboards), the young girl who won at the Cannes Film Festival. She's great. She did a film called The Apple (1998)-her first film-when she was 18 years old, and it's the most incredible metaphor of repression in Iran.
MM: There is an incredible intensity to Iranian films.
CP: Yes, very simple. And it's partly because they are not allowed to say a lot of things. There is so much that they can't say that they have to find other ways of expressing things.
MM: Like American cinema from the '30s and '40s.
CP: I know, yes. It's like, 'great poetry came from the gulag' or whatever. It's so ironic that our freedom is leading to everyone having the same taste.
SHARE THIS STORY |
TAGS |
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Del.icio.us
Reddit
YahooAdvertisement
COMMENTS | POST A COMMENT 
This story was sponsored by
Latest from the blog:
Jaman Launches “Movie Channel for the World”
Jaman.com announced the availability of instantly streamed, HD-quality movies—for free.
With nothing more than a simple click, cineastes can watch one of 100 ad-supported titles from the online distributor's collection of more than 3,000 films at no cost. Alternatively, those viewers who are less inclined to "pay" for the free films by watching the ads can pay just $1.99 to watch them commercial-dree. “By offering a free streaming media service along with our current rental and ownership download options, we are anticipating the future of digital cinema," says Jaman founder and CEO, Gaurav Dhillon. "With streaming, we provide our community with a quality viewing experience that is free and for our advertisers, we deliver a unique audience and premium and targeted placement opportunities.”
Posted 05.15.08 | News/Commentary | 1 comment
Other recent posts:
Posts people are talking about:
SITE DELIVERY OPTIONS
