"Where Movie Critics Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine"
Subscribe To Weekly Newsletter!

AN INTERVIEW WITH:
Charlie Kaufman & Michel Gondry
by Peter Sobczynski

March 19, 2004

Imagine, if you will, a long table sitting in the middle of a conference room. Near one end, a group of journalist types are gathered with their tape recorders waiting for the men of the hour, writer Charlie Kaufman and director Michel Gondry, to come in to discuss their mind-blowing new film "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind". The idea, of course, is that the two of them will sit together at the end where everyone is gathered and begin talking. When they enter, Kaufman sits where he is expected and then suggests that Gondry sit at the opposite end of the table, which he does. When it is pointed out that the Ping-Pong effect will wreak havoc on the recordings, Kaufman agrees. However, instead of having Gondry come down by everyone else, Kaufman moves down by Gondry, forcing everyone to move their recorders down to the other side of the table.

This is actually a pretty good metaphor for what has made Kaufman one of the most distinctive screenwriters working today. He takes a simple idea and then throws in one little twist that completely rearranges everything and forces the themselves to make the necessary adjustments. He has also been lucky to find, in both Gondry and Spike Jonze, a pair of directors who are just as willing to turn cinematic conventions inside-out and the resulting films, Jonze’s "Being John Malkovich", "Adaptation" and Gondry’s little-seen "Human Nature" are among the most inventive things seen on movie screens in recent years. "Eternal Sunshine", in which an ordinary guy (Jim Carrey) goes inside his own mind in order to prevent all the memories of a failed love affair (with Kate Winslet) from being wiped out though a new medical procedure, is just as impressive-the screenplay is endlessly clever and inventive and the visual look is also astonishing, but what is really surprising is just how emotionally satisfying it is. Instead of getting hung up on the gimmick, Kaufman and Gondry use it as a way to explore notions of love and loss-whether it is better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all (or at least have no memory of it, good or bad).

Of course, it is a film that raises any number of questions and this is how the duo responded to some of them.

How did "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" come about?

Kaufman: Michel had a friend who is in an artist and he had this idea of sending cards to people saying that you had been erased from someone’s memory. Michel came to me with that idea and asked I wanted to help try to come with a story for that. We pitched it around town and sold it but I had to do another script first. In the interim, Michel was interested in doing "Human Nature" and he did that.

"Eternal Sunshine" has a very different look and feel from "Human Nature"-was it difficult to change to the more documentary-like approach that you decided on for the film?

Gondry: No. In my videos, I have already tried to go into directions that are new for me. Plus, I don’t want to be attached to any visual style. I hope I have more to say than just something visual. I wanted the memories to feel real and vivid and that is why I wanted to work with a DP like Ellen Kuras-I saw this quality in her work. She can capture very precise and very vivid moments-I remember watching this movie that she did called "Swoon" and I wasn’t a big fan of the film but there were a couple of shots that really made me feel, even though it was in black-and-white, like I was there with them.

I didn’t want to do any storyboards or have a preconceived notion of how things would look. I spent six weeks in New York taking pictures in the suburbs to learn about how people live. By going into apartments and taking pictures, you can get a feel of how life is. Now it would be much easier for me to do the film because I have been here for two years and I understand it better.

The idea of erasing memories could have been taken in any number of different directions. What was it that made you decide to focus on the aspect of lost love?

Kaufman: Immediately when we began working on this, that was what was interesting to us. I kind of think that, in reflection, the reason is because it is something that is real. We didn’t want the movie to be a spy movie because then it becomes about the conceit of the memory-erasing. We wanted the memory-erasing to be used to tell the story about something that was actual that we could identify with.

The two of you have been hailed in the past for pushing the boundaries of your respective art forms. When was the last time that you were told by people that your ideas were too outlandish or confusing?

Gondry: A couple of months ago. Even between us, it is a conversation that we have-how far can we go and when do we lose the meaning? It is hard to know. Movies are made by piecing together things and after 100 years, people have come to accept that you see something one second and then something else the next. because of the fact that they have to tell stories that need to be pushed along. Personally, I like to try different things and be creative every time I do something. and sometimes we are reminded that people may not understand and that we need to move back a little.

Do you ever find that reputation to be a bit limiting-that people are now going to expect that every single thing that you write or direct has to be somehow strange and outrageous? I remember when "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" came out, for example, and many seemed to think that the notion of Chuck Barris as a CIA assassin came from your mind when, in fact, it was a relatively straight translation from his book.

Kaufman: I actually don’t that is what I did there. I took that assignment because the question of the truthfulness of the narrator interested me. When I read the book, I was interested in whether or not this guy was lying and if he was, why he was lying that particular lie. Those were the things that interested me and I don’t think they are that apparent in the film version, which I wasn’t involved in making and which changed considerably.

I’m not really interested in topping myself. I am interested in challenging myself every time. I’m not interested in the idea of doing something to screw them up by doing something straight. I’m not thinking of other people when I write-I think about what I am interested in and how I can struggle with this idea in order to do something honest with it. However that comes out is how it comes out and I am perfectly happy with failing in my attempts-actually, I welcome it because I think that if you are willing to do something original, you have to embrace the idea of failure.

Can you talk about the casting of the film-specifically having both Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet playing against type?

Gondry: When Jim decided that he was interested in the script, we needed somebody strong for Clementine-she was clearly the character with more life in Charlie’s script and we needed someone strong enough to go against Jim. I met with a lot of different actresses and when I met Kate, she had this energy and determination and she seemed to respond to it. She doesn’t seem to be like a movie star-she feels real. After I met with her, I read the script with her in mind and I felt that she had to be Clementine.

Charlie, it has been written that you have the Holy Grail that all screenwriter hope for-approval over the directors on the scripts that you write. Is this true and, if so, what is the criteria that you use for choosing directors?

Kaufman: I can answer the first question, which makes the second part irrelevant, and say that is not true. I read that in some article and I don’t know why it is there. I have had the fortune of working with two directors on four movies that I really like and who I liked working with. I don’t think there is any such thing as that power for a screenwriter. I probably have more say than most people but I don’t have any sort of control.

Do you have any plans to go beyond screenwriting? As recently as the 1970’s, you had any number of writers who were pure screenwriters but nowadays, it seems as if every writer eventually goes into directing themselves. Is that something you are interested in doing in the future?

Kaufman: At this point, I’m not sure. When I was younger, I saw being the director as sort of the thing. I don’t see it that way anymore-I see what I do as important...(Gondry begins to laugh). I like what I do and it is a struggle to be good at it. It is a struggle that is of value to me. I guess what I was going to say was that instead of looking at it as the next step, I would see it as taking on another job-not so much for protecting my work, although that is important, as to see what something would look like if I directed it.

You have said that you aren’t a particularly organized writer but your scripts are formally very inventive in terms of structure. How do you reconcile your work habits with the end product?

Kaufman: I think that disorganization is helpful in that regard for me. If you know too much about where you are going and you can do it too expediently, then you are going to simply go there. If I get really stuck, and this happens to me a lot, and I can’t think of anything for a week and a half, and then it finally come to me-what would have happened if I had just come up with another idea a week earlier? The movie would have gone in a completely different direction, so I am glad that I got stuck. That happens again and again to me and I think that combination of disorganization and long periods of time has come to help my scripts come to their conclusions.

Michel, you came to feature films from the world of music videos, a medium generally looked down upon by many being not particularly important or significant. In recent years, however, some of the most influential and admired working today got their start doing videos-people like yourself, Spike Jonze and David Fincher. Do you think that the idea of music videos as a sort of training ground for new directors is taken more seriously these days?

Gondry: See, I don’t feel as though I belong to the music video world, although I am doing okay in the medium. Being there, I always like an outsider. Even in the beginning, it took me years and years before I got some jobs. I was showing my films and people were laughing at me. I remember one meeting where I was begging to do this video for a French band and they laughed at me and said that if the money was really poor, then they might ask me. Sometimes it is hard to be part of a group that has never really accepted you. I am trying to do my stuff, the things that I did when I was a kid, and do it in whatever medium I can participate in.

I don’t feel that I represent the world of music video-I never had long hair or did cocaine. When I worked with Bjork, she was the same as me or Charlie-we just do our stuff and even though people tell us we are part of a group, that group doesn’t necessarily want us.

-- PETER SOBCZYNSKI

Copyright © 2004 Peter Sobczynski
All rights reserved.
Used with permission
Peter's Film Review Archives