But isn’t fakeness just a part of being an actress and a journalist? Slipping into the guises of other characters, fooling audiences, befriending strangers for entrance into their intimate affairs.

I must preface this column with a statement: I did not expect to like Steve Buscemi’s film “Interview” (2007). The DVD looks really commercial, and the bio sounds kind of bland: a writer interviews a star, and their perceptions are subsequently challenged, etc. But I was intrigued enough to watch it. And it surprised me, in a good way.

The film, a remake of a 2003 Dutch film, tells the story of a Newsworld journalist named Pierre Peders (Steve Buscemi). Peders, used to covering the political environment in Washington, D.C., is taken out of his comfort zone when he is assigned to interview starlet Katya (Sienna Miller).

Peders is less than impressed with the assignment, and it shows in the very little effort he puts into the initial interview they have at a New York restaurant. The interview ends abruptly, with Katya storming out of the restaurant after it becomes apparent that Peters has done absolutely no research for his interview.

This would be the end of the movie, if it were not for what happens next. Katya walks the few blocks to her loft while Peders hops in the nearest cab. The cabbie sees Katya walking on the street and begins catcalling to her. Distracted from the road, he slams into an art supply van.

Buscemi gets out of the car, and noticing that he is bleeding and feeling responsible for his accident, Katya invites him up to her apartment to regain his composure. What transpires is a strange sort of interview that reveals a lot about lies, the truth, and what gets caught in the middle.

The chemistry between Peders and Katya is strange, touching and volatile. At times, hardly a beat passes before their conversation changes from sensual to aggressive; their bodies are on the edge of fornication one moment, strangulation another. This is, in part, a commentary on the way these types of movies usually operate: girl meets boy, girl hates boy, girl falls in love with boy.

This film throws that notion and all filmic notions of human relationships out of the window. “Interview” suggests that human nature is much more complex than is usually suggested, that people do not have black-and-white feelings for one another, and that it is entirely possible to love and hate someone simultaneously.

Likewise, Buscemi and Miller are exploring the stereotypes of actors and journalists, both of which they probably have extensive experience. Buscemi seems to get to the root of the journalistic motives without appearing cliched; Miller is vacant as a soap star bimbo without being empty.

Buscemi, who directed and co-wrote the film, adopts a very diary-like film style (think “sex, lies, and videotape”) that simultaneously takes away and injects artificiality.

The camera work makes us feel like we are watching a documentary, yet the editing forces us to question the nature of performance. Buscemi used a three-camera setup to shoot the film, and as he abruptly cuts from one vantage point to another, there is an uneasiness that is created.

We do not feel entirely comfortable with his camera work, which mirrors the feelings we have for Peders’ and Katya’s interactions. At times, Peders’ video camera, his substitute for a busted tape recorder, is turned on one of the characters. When Peders films Katya, it is easy and natural, a place that she spends a lot of her time.

It becomes interesting when the interviewee turns the lens on the interviewer. He is clearly not as comfortable being captured and projected onto a widescreen TV. It is a position that is new for Katya, being the voyeur as opposed to the object, a privilege that she clearly enjoys. The audience watches one camera examine another, a form of direct address that makes us aware that we are watching a movie.

Additionally, the colors are drab and unspectacular, taking the film away from a slick production and bringing in into gritty realism. Since, however, we are typically not as convinced by lower production values, the artificial atmosphere of the scene attracts attention.

But isn’t being fake just a part of being an actress and a journalist? Slipping into the guises of other characters, fooling audiences, befriending strangers for entrance into their intimate affairs. When it comes to interviews, the whole concept of lies and truth is almost moot, since we mostly deal in shades of gray—lies holding onto fragments of the truth, lies that have become truth over years of denial and self-conditioning.

While I am not convinced that “Interview” is a great film (though it is quite good), I am convinced that it provokes important thought about journalism, human nature and the artificiality of movie-making.

> Comments