(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Flions_gate_films%2Fhard_candy%2Fhardcandy_bigreleaseposter.jpg&hash=5656d1d4bc2ccf56395303d34ff9a262f4ff9154)
Trailer here. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/lions_gate/hardcandy/)
Release Date: April 14th, 2006 (NY/LA)
Starring: Ellen Page, Patrick Wilson, Sandra Oh, Jennifer Holmes, Gilbert John
Directed by: David Slade
Written by: Brian Nelson
Premise: A smart, charming teenage girl, Hayley probably shouldn't be going to a local coffee shop to meet Jeff, a 30-something fashion photographer she met on the Internet. But Hayley's ready to have fun, and soon she's mixing screwdrivers at Jeff's place and stripping for an impromptu photo shoot. It's Jeff's lucky night--until his vision blurs and he passes out. Turns out Hayley isn't as innocent as she looks after all. In fact, she has a lot on her mind. Like getting Jeff to confess to his penchant for teenage girls--and to what he did to Donna Mauer, the girl who disappeared from Jeff's favorite coffee shop. When Jeff awakens, he's tied to a chair. If he doesn't cooperate, Hayley has something to help him along--a little surgical procedure she picked up on the Internet. All she needs is an ice pack. And a knife.
I hope this is good, because the director is attached to the adaptation of the graphic novel "30 Days of Night", which will make an amazing movie if done properly.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuicidegirls.com%2Fmedia%2Fauthors%2F1924%2Farticle.jpg&hash=98d5c4216d94d15a40315c3b716aa3179c65844c)
David Slade has directed one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen. It is called Hard Candy and there is no blood, gore or anyone killing anyone else. It just hits you deep in the stomach. It’s a great movie to just sit and watch the audience react to. The film stars Patrick Wilson as a 32 year old man who looks for young girls on the internet and Ellen Page as Hayley Stark, a 14 year old girl who falls prey to his machinations or does she?
Before taking on his first feature film Slade directed many unique music videos for bands like Aphex Twin, Tori Amos and Stone Temple Pilots.
Daniel Robert Epstein: Congratulations on the film.
David Slade: Thank you very much.
DRE: Is it ok for me to think Ellen is hot?
Slade: No. Let’s talk about that straight away and address the points that I think you want to talk about. If you’re talking about Ellen Page that’s one thing, if you’re talking about Hayley Stark that’s another. When we made this film two years ago it was done completely independently with independent financing. It was the only way to make this kind of film. It was a seven million dollar budget shot in 18 days and it’s a film about taking responsibility for your actions. Be those actions looking at pornography or being human rather than a misanthropist. From that point of view the idea was to infuse the idea that there’s responsibility in all areas of life that we in the Western world like to eschew because it adds pressure and difficulty to our lives. Yet there is a degree of extremity in which responsibility is required and the more you eschew a responsibility the more chance you end up in those extreme positions. Looking at pornography is a very complicated act. It’s complex because if you want to really think about it, it involves all kinds of emotions, but it also involves the people involved in what you’re watching.
With that in mind it is not really ok to think that a 14 year old girl is hot if you are a 32 year old man. You can think anything you like and not being a prude or advocating personal censorship but to act upon it is a different thing.
DRE: You can think it but you can’t act on it, that’s the evil part.
Slade: Well I wouldn’t call it evil. I would call it a little of a psychological imbalance involved in those actions.
DRE: It did seem like you were showcasing the 14 year old character’s sexuality.
Slade: Really? You think so?
DRE: Yeah I do think so.
Slade: It’s interesting you say that because before we got to Ellen Page we saw maybe 300 girls from Los Angeles and various places. Ellen was from Canada, I don’t know whether it’s a cultural difference or whether it was just perchance, but being sexually flirtatious and explicit was really not part of what Ellen brought to this character. It was all on the page. It was there where it needed to be and in rehearsals we found a lot that people from Los Angeles really went with that and that’s what’s wrong. It didn’t really resonate because it pushed you in different directions whereas Ellen found this perfect balance. Yes the sexual flirtation is there because that’s the whole basis from which we begin this film. There was a lot of resistance from certain parties who were part of the financing and that’s the usual process of a director going into a film. People get concerned about the money that’s spent even if it is a small amount. Like, “Well can we cut these lines because they’re a little bit edgy and she’s only 14?” Well for the love of God I was 14. people are sexually flirtatious at 14. I’m not saying that 14 and 15 year old people don’t have sex, nor that they shouldn’t have sex. What I am saying, if you are a 32 year old and you’re going to manipulate somebody then you better damn well take responsibility for doing that.
DRE: At times the characters looks like a beautiful girl her age and other times she looks like a scared mouse. It seemed to me that you as a director were teasing the audience then later punishing them.
Slade: Well that’s a certain kind of mindset. I got to talk about Brian Nelson who is an incredibly accomplished writer. He really puts complex arguments into really simple words as a result his dialogue is really difficult to edit. I didn’t get that sense reading the script, but I certainly got a sense of having to readjust my values when I’d finished the script. Now, to that end, what people bring into the cinema will determine what they take away and every person will have a different frame of reference. That really is the point. There is no universal reading of this film and everybody’s frame of reference. The way they believe correct behavior or think certain sexual aberrances are ok will be challenged by this film. Some people will get upset because it will be completely opposite of what they want to think is right. When they get to the end of the film they will find they’ve been rooting for somebody that really is completely despicable. Then they have to reevaluate why they were rooting for that person. Ellen is certainly pretty and she was 17 when we shot this. She played a 14 year old girl who sees things as black and white and has not yet filled in those grays. She is full of the passion and the hormones of a 14 year old and that’s what’s driving her through this. She is unstoppable like the mother in the urban myths who can lift the car off a child. The point was not to preach as she does, but to think after listening to everyone’s side of things.
DRE: The film is almost play-like, like Death and the Maiden.
Slade: People always say that it’s almost play like. Brian Nelson came from a theatrical background so all of these things point towards it being like a play. But it really felt cinematic to me on the page and my job was to make it cinematic and manage the performances. That wasn’t hard because they are all phenomenal actors.
DRE: Was there a lot of rehearsal?
Slade: We were lucky enough to have five days of rehearsal. In those five days we really fleshed those characters out and adjusted certain dialogue. Brian Nelson came in and pretty much tailored lines where they were needed. It feels so fresh because we didn’t really develop the hell out of it. We just went, “Ok, this feels really visceral, this is real and we feel good about it, let’s go shoot it.” There was a certain amount of development but not a ludicrous amount.
DRE: In the past year, a new slew of interconnected porn websites popped. It is all girls who say they are 18 but have shaved vaginas and act and dress like girls much younger than that. What do you think of that?
Slade: I have no opinion on that matter. That’s something that’s not in any way connected to this film and in any way something that’s connected to my psyche.
DRE: Do you see pedophilia as a disease that can be cured?
Slade: First let’s talk about the word pedophile. It’s the most offensive word in the English language. One of the few scenes where I had to give notes to the actors was when Jeff gets called that word. I told him “Someone just called you the most offensive thing on the fucking planet, respond to it.” I believe it is something which comes from an abject state of mind which comes from a degree of aberrant behavior which grows to a psychosis and rooted in all of that is if the person is mentally stable to begin with. Films can’t really cater to the mentally unstable because if we did that then we wouldn’t be able to do anything. Then we would be in the Oliver Stone territory of Natural Born Killers like “everyone’s going to blame me.” But if a person was mentally stable to begin with then it’s a lack of responsibility that snowballs to the point of where they could detach their personal morality to go about doing these heinous acts. I can’t go anywhere near that frame of mind that would take me to a place like that. I can only imagine that it’s a degree of psychological disconnection that snowballs and snowballs and snowballs.
DRE: If all girls were as smart as this girl would there be less people like Jeff?
Slade: At the end of the day, the police will tell you that if a burglar wants to get in, he’ll get in. If a charismatic predator is going after its prey, it’s eventually going to find it. It’s not a moral question that I can answer because I’m not here to stand on a soapbox and be moral. Maybe people would be smarter and they would not go into those chat rooms and they would do other things with their lives. But human nature is an odd and difficult beast. In John Gray’s book he believes that humanism is absolutely a complete lie and we are base beasts. On the other side of it, I’ve gone to countries like New Zealand where everyone’s absolutely warm and wonderful and nice. The state of human nature could be a very warm and wonderful thing if only people were smart and would take responsibility for what they did. If they did something bad and they felt terrible and they went, “You know what, I take full responsibility of that and you won’t hear me do that again.” Perhaps Jeff does take a degree of responsibility and hates himself for it. That’s up to the audience to decide.
DRE: How did the film adaptation of 30 Days of Night come to you?
Slade: There were three drafts already of the script when I came to the project and I just took a meeting at Sony before Hard Candy came to Sundance. The Sony executives really wanted to meet me. One there told me how much she loved Hard Candy. She mentioned some scripts that they had in development anmd one of them was 30 Days of Night. I know Steve Niles’ work pretty well. I bought the original first editions of 30 Days of Night when they came out. When they mentioned that, I told them I would chew my arm off to do it. So I took meetings with Sam Raimi and I read the previous drafts. I didn’t like them very much and I eventually convinced them to bring in Brian Nelson to write the draft of the script that we will be shooting.
DRE: Will it use any of Stuart Beattie’s work?
Slade: Well Stuart Beattie wrote a draft which was much more of an action movie. We felt that we wanted to make it much more of a horror movie. A scary movie that scared people. That has nothing to do with vampires because vampires aren’t scary generally. But we found a way to make a really fresh and really realistic approach to the film.
DRE: Do you think the vampires in the movie will look similar to the way Ben Templesmith drew them?
Slade: No, but in a good way. We’re certainly keeping the tone of Ben’s artwork. The town of Barrow is going to be a very dark sort of place with lots of crucifix type poles. The gray tones of his artwork is definitely something which will be a very big part of the film.
Ah, philosophical questions on which I butt heads with the director. This should be a really smart film. If it's not, there's always hope someone else will tackle these issues. Getting there, slowly but surely. Sometimes, I wish I lived in a different country, on a different continent, so I can gauge how far the United States is really behind in dealing with these issues. How free-thinking the rest of the world really is. How lines are drawn in different countries, and how arbitrary these lines, set as numbers, units of time, ages are. Anyway, I'm excited to see this. Poses all sorts of questions. Can't wait.
the interviewer asked some really crass questions and really did his best to sensationalize this.
Interview: Patrick Wilson
A chat with the Hard Candy star.
Actor Patrick Wilson recently spoke with the press about his role in the forthcoming release, Hard Candy. The indie drama, directed by David Slade from a screenplay by Brian Nelson, follows an underage girl named Hayley Stark (Ellen Page) who meets shady photographer Jeff Kohlver (Wilson) online. But the seedy Jeff gets far more than he bargained for when Hayley turns the tables on him in a most vicious manner.
Q: Ellen Page said that, when you were doing the film together, she never got to know you. Was that a plan because of the roles you were playing?
Patrick Wilson: Just schedule-wise, we shot this film in 18 1/2 days, and we were pulling long days to shoot 10 or 12 pages of script a day, so I didn't really get to know anybody on the film, to be honest with you. I'm a pretty private person, anyway, so it was easier, when you're doing a film like this, to say, "Alright, see you tomorrow." It wasn't, "Hey, let's go out and get a drink." Also, she was 17, so we didn't hang out a lot. I don't mean to make light of it. Maybe it was just the nature of the film. But, to give you a better answer than that, when you're doing something like this ... I didn't really get to know anybody on 'Angels in America' really, as well. When you're working on a subject like this, and you're pulling long, physically and emotionally exhausting days, and I really just wanted to go home and be with my girlfriend and talk to my friends, and just get away and take the clothes off.
Q: So, how are people who have seen this movie reacting to you, personally?
Wilson: I wish I had some kind of cool answer. I haven't been around a lot of people who've seen it. I think men and women have different reactions to the film, but also to me. I think guys, certainly for one or two of the scenes, are like, "Wow, I feel for you." I think the most surprising thing for people is when they go, "You know, I found myself really being sympathetic for you, and I didn't like myself for that," or, "It was really strange for me to care." And, that's great. That was the goal. From the opening frame, it's like, "This is not going to be good." I'm not even making light of it. Before people even appear on the screen, [you know that] this guy is up to no good. So, even when the tables turn, you don't know who to like. So, reactions are varied. I'd love to talk to somebody who just says, "Man, I hated you." But, I haven't really met anybody like that yet. Although, to be honest with you, I don't go sit in a lot of screenings of it.
Q: What does your wife think of the film?
Wilson: My wife was actually the one who, ultimately, told me to do it, 'cause it was just a different type of movie and a different type of character. Even though she's an actress (Dagmara Dominczyk) and she knows what was happening and what was going on, I think it's painful to watch anybody that you know, and even love, go through that sort of pain on film.
Q: Do you think that this movie is going to give parents more perspective as to what their kids are doing online?
Wilson: You don't set out to do a movie like this thinking, "Boy, I hope this convinces parents." I'd like to think that parents watch what their kids do anyway. If parents don't, and some parents don't, and they walk into this movie theater and it makes them, good on you, great, whatever it takes. But, it's not an instructional video. This is not a documentary. This is a movie. You don't set out to teach. For me, one of the best things about the movie is that it just raises questions and it just makes you think, and that's great. And, if that's what it makes you think, that you want to watch your kids a little more, than more power to you.
Q: What was the most difficult scene for you to be engaged in?
Wilson: Probably the first one, to be honest with you. Not the first one we shot, but the first one in the film. I remember, a couple years ago, reading something about how, on French Connection, with the opening scene, Gene Hackman had a tough time because it was his first day of shooting and he had to rough him up in that big opening sequence, and he just had to be very violent with the criminal, chasing him down and getting him on the ground. And, they had to re-shoot it, at the end. He said, by the end of the movie, he nailed it because he lived with this guy. And, I felt like that was a very similar experience. We shot most of the film in sequence, in the house, and then we went back and shot the opening scene. Weirdly, that opening scene was much more intimate. Once you're confined to a table, your objectives are pretty clear -- get out, get free, do what you have to do, try 9,000 ways to convince this girl. That's not easy, but clear. But, that first scene, when you've been hiding behind the Internet, and you see who's opposite you, that was tough. It was tough to talk about and decide the best dialogue, how to shoot it, what we're going for. I just wanted to be very clear because, if the audience isn't with you then, or they just think you're an awful person from that point, than they're not going to care about the rest of the movie. So, I wanted to play it as charming as I could and just lure her in.
Q: Did you have a sense of what the line was between being too charming and too monstrous?
Wilson: I pick and choose moments throughout the film, and throughout the first few scenes, where you might see a little, or you may not. But, I did it. Just moments where he's not just a boring, milk toast guy that met this girl. He definitely has an agenda. I just thought, on the page, he could just look so bad, and I just wanted to go the other way and not make him this leering guy. You have this idea that people who are on the Internet walk in with their shoulders hunched and they're creepy, weird nerds. I just wanted to make him very charming. He's a photographer. He knows how to work the lens. He knows how to view people and be charming. So, I went more that angle. I just don't know that type of person, to be honest with you. You have to find a kernel of something that you know, in order to develop that into the character. But, no matter what way you play it, you've still got to say these lines. So, it gave me a lot of freedom to play it the other way.
Q: For the scenes in the house where you're tied to the chair, were you really tied down?
Wilson: Yeah. And, that's not out of any sort of ego. You're only going to get three passes at this. You're only going to get a couple takes. You've got to move on because we've got 12 pages to shoot today. So, the last thing I would want is to be all into the scene, and have them light it and get it ready, the camera's ready, you're rolling, and then the ropes come undone. That's the worst, to me.
Q: Was it physically uncomfortable?
Wilson: Yeah. It was supposed to be uncomfortable. But, I knew it would be over. For instance, in The Phantom of the Opera, at the end of the movie, there's a scene where I'm tied to a grate, and we shot that thing over four days. Now, to me, that was more uncomfortable. With this, it was like, "Tie me down. Oops, I can get undone. I'm telling you, just tie me in. It's just going to be a few minutes. We'll do it. Can we shoot again, or do you need to untie me? We've got another one in there? Great, let's do it." We were all on this schedule to just go at it, which is why we didn't get to know everybody. It was like everything else went away, and here we were. So, when I saw the movie and saw that my hands were all purple, it was news to me. That wasn't make-up.
Q: Did you look at any movie like Misery, in terms of things to do or things to avoid?
Wilson: No, not really. I loved Misery when I saw it. I know Misery. I've seen Death and the Maiden. I've read that. And, Oleanna -- that's a different sort of take. Extremities. There's a number of two-handers where the predator becomes the prey. But, for me, I've never done a role like this, so I didn't feel like I needed to steer clear of any other action. It was pretty cut and dry. We had five days of rehearsal, which would have been great on any movie. But, when you're only spending 18 1/2 days shooting it, to have five days to talk about it is gold. So, that was when we flushed out any of the traps of, "I've seen this before. This feels a little Hollywood. This feels kind of typical. Let's go the other way. Let's leave a little to the imagination."
Q: How would you characterize Hayley as the antagonist? Would you say that she's evil, or just misguided?
Wilson: Oh, gosh. I think they're both antagonists. I don't think there's a protagonist in the film. [Laughs] They're the two villains. There's no real heroic. I guess, maybe, some people might think she has a heroic moment. As an adult, we can sit back and go, "Wow, she definitely has some issues." I don't mean to be snarky about it, but yeah, she's certainly got some issues. But, I don't know. I don't sit back and think about it and judge it because there's so much of this film that you could just judge, and I've never really cared about that. Some people may think she's doing something great and heroic for society. And, some people may go, "You have gone way too far. This is completely masochistic and you have real problems, as a teenager." I think the way some of the dialogue is set up, which I think is great, is that teenagers do see things pretty black and white. Adults tend to find the gray more. I believe her. I believe her agenda. I believe that she thinks that she's doing the right thing. But, I really don't get caught up in what I feel about it.
Q: What about doing the back story for yourself, so that you can justify what your character has done in the past?
Wilson: I just needed to be clear on what the story was. So much of the film is about responsibility from him, and what he cops to, at the end. I just needed to be clear on, "What did he do with this girl? What exactly happened?" And so, the ironic thing is, by the time you get to the end of the movie, you don't even know if he's telling the truth or not. You're like, "Did he do it?"
Q: How did this film find you, or how did you find it?
Wilson: They came to me and threw it my way. I don't really know where else it was. I know that they had the hardest time, and rightfully so, looking for the girl. It's a very difficult character, and I'm so glad they went the way they did. We have this idea of the young girl on the Internet, luring the man in with her sexuality and with her overt [behavior]. We all try to justify it, men and women. She has a very specific look. She looks very young. And, she looked even younger when we shot the movie, a few years ago. So, finding someone who had that strength and passion, and who is a very well-read, astute young woman, but still had the innocence to betray the look, was a real find.
Q: Was it a straight offer, or did you have to read for it?
Wilson: No, no, I didn't read for it. I guess I could have answered that quicker. [Laughs] I didn't audition.
Q: You have this extensive theater background, but you're new to movie making. Are you becoming increasingly more comfortable with the process?
Wilson: Yeah. I've got to say, when my first real film experience, even though it was a mini-series, was with Mike Nichols and the cast of Angels in America, it was a pretty seamless transition. I'm very fortunate for that. I auditioned for a lot of TV shows and things, and never got one, so I did theater for 8 or 9 years. Mike Nichols saw me in a play and brought me in to audition, and I got Angels in America. So, for me, my transition into film has been pretty seamless, as a result of that. The parts that I get offered, or that I'm up for, I'm very fortunate that the project usually carries some sort of weight to it, really because of Mike Nichols.
Q: What about on an acting level?
Wilson: I love the technique. I love acting. I've always been a perfection. The great thing about doing theater is that you get to do it better the next night. If anything, film makes you prepare a little differently. The preparation is different. But, I'm also not 20 years-old. I have been acting long enough. You just have to adjust a little bit. You do a different preparation. It's just a little quicker. You can't be dilly dallying around. You've got to do your rehearsal on your own time 'cause you gotta show up, ready to shoot.
Q: Does that make the intensity better, for a film like this, when it is shot in such a short amount of time?
Wilson: Yeah, but also, there's an intimacy that you can't lie. There's such an immediate intimacy with film that you just don't get in theater. Some of the greatest performances in theater are always your first job because it's that energy of the first show. And, that's kind of what film is, all the time. Yeah, you can try to shoot the first one, it probably won't be great, but you might catch something fun. By the second time, you're solid, and then you go for one more. So, I'm a fan of just a few takes.
Q: Has your family seen the picture?
Wilson: Not yet. I'm probably going to show it to them in the comfort of my own home, I think. My mom's seen me play some different kind of people, but I think, not even the type of person, but the amount of pain that I go through in this movie, would be hard for any parent to watch. I think I'm just going to show it to her, where I can tell her about each scene, and she can turn it off, if she wants, and walk away.
there are few films that i have more contempt for. absolutely hated it.
Y'can't give us popcorn and say "no butter." Why?
i was going to wait till more people had seen it, but okay.
it's sort of an ambulance chaser of a film that takes something very serious -- pedophilia -- and not only gives its victim a voice in a way that i don't think is anywhere near appropriate or interesting or effective, it pats itself on the back all the way to the end. it's self righteous and mastubatory, the kind of American indie film that takes a social issue and tries to build a narrative around it that ends up defeating its own purpose. i don't know why i said "kind of... film" because i can't come up with any other examples that fit that description but something tells me that there's an abundance of them. or maybe i'm thinking of student films. anyway, the film resorts to generalizations and is extremely one-dimensional. not to say that pedophiles deserve sympathy or that the victims are to blame (not in every cayse, anyway) but Hard Candy takes, to use a stupid metaphor, the road MOST (haha!) travelled, and milks it for all its worth. intstead of making a film that approaches a complex subject with sophistication or even just an interesting perspective, it takes what is already the popular and general opinion and amplifies it by way of what is very cheap cinematic devices--the style completely condradicts any of the significance that it thinks it has (and it thinks it has a lot).
as usual, i don't know if this makes any sense because i've found that i'm pretty terrible at articulating what goes on in my mind but i found this film offensive and criminally stupid/lacking in any sort of sophistication or any sign of intelligence or thought. they took a controversial topic and figured that because it was just that, they could just make a stylish film around it and be on their merry way to praise and recognition. it's a pretty cool looking movie but when considered with its subject matter, it doesn't even matter. the writing's compotent but pretentious, and distracting. the girl, whatever her name is... the potential is there but holy shit is she aggravating in the film, and yes part of it is due to the character she's playing... patrick wilson (who looks a lot like steven soderbergh, i think. in this film, anyway) is pretty good. sandra oh? in it for about two minutes. so if you're a fan of hers, don't let her involvement be a reason to see it. you'd be saving yourself money, time, and frustration.
right. ok. it'll be interesting to see what other people think about it.
Interview: Ellen Page
A chat with the new Kitty Pryde.
IGN FilmForce recently participated in roundtable interviews with teenage Canadian actress Ellen Page, who stars alongside Patrick Wilson in the Lionsgate thriller Hard Candy, which opens today.
Page told IGN and the other reporters about the challenges of making such a dark and daring film as Hard Candy, where she plays Hayley Stark, an adolescent avenger out to get pedophile Jeff Kohlver (Wilson). Page also spoke about her role as Kitty Pryde in the forthcoming X-Men: The Last Stand.
Q: How hard was it to go (into Hayley's mind) every day?
ELLEN PAGE: I think the reason I wanted to be an actor is because I like to go to those places, whether they're dark or whether – I like to become completely and utterly engrossed in something and just lose myself. And this allowed me to do that so I'm grateful for that.
Q: Did you take it home with you?
PAGE: To a certain extent for sure but I think elements go home with you. On this film, because we shot it in 18 days, it was kind of grey because the immediacy I think made it the film that it is, kind of like a manic nature. But, yeah, I would go home and obviously there was a lot of dialogue, memorize lines, sleep, wake up, go to set but it's why I love to do it.
Q: Did you and Patrick hang out?
PAGE: No. I actually, it's really interesting. I really don't really know Patrick very well because we met, rehearsed, shot this movie and in New York the other day is the first time I've seen him since we finished shooting.
Q: Can a movie like this change a bad person?
PAGE: I don't know. I have no idea but it's clearly provoking people strongly and that's great because it's what film should do. It's what art should do so cool.
Q: What was the hardest scene to shoot?
PAGE: I don't know. Actually, sometimes it's the much simpler things that can be – or what appear to be simpler, can be more difficult. Like I wanted to maintain vulnerability in the sense of her being 14 and not some kind of superhero or whatever. And then like shooting the stuff with Sandra [Oh] was oddly like, "Am I doing this right or is it just stupid?"
Q: What was your take on the character?
PAGE: I wouldn't say she's evil or sick at all. I think she's an extremely passionate, intelligent young woman. So I actually found it kind of inspiring in a way. And in a symbolic sense perhaps. But no, I wouldn't think she's crazy or evil. I think she sees something wrong with society. She's irritated that people are ignoring it and she's going to do something about it.
Q: Was it shot in sequence?
PAGE: Oh, not predominantly. We shot in sequence which was fantastic. We actually shot all the café stuff at the very end but other than that, all the stuff in the house was pretty much in sequence. It was great to go on the journey that way.
Q: How did the director [David Slade] help you build the character?
PAGE: I think before we shot we just developed a trust with each other. He's just so open and awesome, we just went for it. There wasn't a lot of time to talk.
Q: How hard to go back and do the beginning last?
PAGE: I don't know. It was kind of nice because we shot the stuff on the roof right before the café stuff and that was like – I mean, that took a lot of physical and emotional and it was kind of nice to finish with something a little peachy. But yeah, it was a little awkward though because it's like kind of a very different character in a way.
Q: Did you look at Misery, these torturer characters?
PAGE: Not consciously, no.
Q: What's your reaction when you read a script like this?
PAGE: It totally blew me away. First of all, I found it just incredibly engrossing and obviously original. And then on top of that to read a role written for a teenage girl with so much passion and intelligence, that was extremely refreshing because most scripts I get are like girlfriend of the lead at this point or oh, she's doing cool things and then she gets a crush on a boy or something like that.
Q: Did you come up with a backstory for Hayley?
PAGE: Well, I think the whole point of the movie is that she is ambiguous so I'm not going to share my backstory with anybody.
Q: Could this movie make parents think more about online safety?
PAGE: That'd be great. We didn't make the movie as a preaching about the evil of the internet or anything, but yeah, if it makes people more excited then that's great. I mean, it can be a scary thing but it can also be a great thing, like pretty much anything in our world.
Q: What's it doing for your career now?
PAGE: It's been really fantastic. I'm really grateful, first of all to even have been able to play this role and then on top of that, it's opening many, many doors.
Q: How did this project find you?
PAGE: Yeah, well, I was in Toronto and I read the script and I had just shaved my head for a film so I sent a tape but I had a shaved head so I guess David liked it but the producers were like, 'For Christ's sake, David, she has a shaved head. And then later I flew down and auditioned and luckily they gave me the role.
Q: Was it the plan not to talk between scenes with Patrick?
PAGE: Well, there wasn't much time. It wasn't like a normal movie. Actually, no, what am I saying? I grew up working in Canada so everything was low budget. It's true, like 18 days I've done tons of times. So there isn't really a lot of time to be friendly, nor did I really want to be. So Patrick was awesome and he's a great guy, a great actor but yeah, I mean, the immediate nature of such a shoot doesn't really allow for playful chit chat.
Q: Have people reacted positively and negatively?
PAGE: Of course, which is great. It's all good. Yeah, people really angry and they all seem a little whatever. Or really inspired or sick or whatever. It's all good.
Q: What are the angry reactions like?
PAGE: The funny thing is, I don't actually cut off his balls. In the end, she doesn't do anything to him other than make him realize that what he did was extremely, extremely sick and any justification he feels for himself is ridiculous. ... One woman came up to me and was like, 'You're totally sadistic.' And I was like, 'A, fiction. B, I disagree with you' and then I did the whole stupid actor thing of like 'She's not sadistic.' There's no point in doing that with this woman. But yeah, you get really angry people, angry men and then not so angry.
Q: Are they saying you shouldn't punish pedophiles?
PAGE: Exactly, that's what's so interesting about it. And I think what's interesting about the film is people are justifying a guy who's done something so awful and like still try and justify it. I think it's because they get scared because they were feeling a tremendous amount of sympathy for him. And the whole point of this movie is that neither characters are really right or wrong. And you leave without any answers. And I find right now movies give too much answers. We really like to categorize things. It makes us feel safe as humans I think. Things are always pigeonholed. I think this movie scares people because they're not given answers. It's not cut and dry just like life isn't cut and dry for God's sakes.
Q: Has your family seen it?
PAGE: My dad has. My mom hasn't. She's seeing it tonight for the first time.
Q: What did your dad think?
PAGE: He said to me, as we were walking out in Sundance, 'I feel like I've been kicked in the stomach.' And I said, 'Good.' And my mom hasn't seen it so she'll see it tonight.
Q: And then you went from this to X-Men.
PAGE: Well, it's a huge transition. There actually isn't a comparison. There's no point in trying to compare the two. X-Men is massive, like nothing I've ever experienced. But great in its own way. I'm grateful for that. ... It's a unique thing to experience and I think you just –it's different and you have to understand that it's different. You have to look at it with a different perspective and know that one, yeah, it's a little more action orientated and the other is not so much. So in X-Men, yeah, I wear a leather suit and run through explosions. Who gets to do that? It's fun and I'm grateful for it. I don't know. It's just about changing your perspective and it's cool to do something that's the complete opposite or something that you never thought you'd be doing. It's kind of the only reason to do it.
Q: Have you seen the other two X-Men movies?
PAGE: No, I hadn't. But I did after I talked to Brett.
Q: Is it hard to do less in a movie?
PAGE: I don't know, I think the important thing is to not judge and everything has its place and it was a really cool experience. I worked with some really amazing actors and now have a whole bunch of opportunities, you know. I'm really grateful for that.
Q: What's up for you next?
PAGE: Well, I just shot a film in Toronto called The Tracy Fragments directed by a wicked Canadian director named Bruce McDonald. It's very, very small. It's very, very, very dark comedy. So dark. That was great. That's exactly what my heart needed. I didn't think you could do something more intense than Hard Candy but boys, oh joys.
Q: Difference between U.S. vs. Canadian filmmaking?
PAGE: I think I meant like Canadian and X-Men. I don't know. Canadian's all small. There's no big budget Canadian movie. Whatever movies are big budget in Canada come from the states. Or also have states financing. Everything's pretty small.
Q: Any reshoots?
PAGE: I think they called once but I was so busy so they managed to – it was pretty short and they used the stunt double. Maybe I shouldn't be saying stuff like that.
Q: How much does Kitty have to do?
PAGE: That's a good question. I actually haven't seen the movie so as far as I know, I have no idea what just happened in the edit. Kitty's involved more and has a bit of a subplot with a certain other mutant and we'll see. It's all fun. I get to fight in the end.
Q: Are you signed for more?
PAGE: Yeah, kind of but it doesn't mean that there's going to be those films. Really, I know as much as anyone else does on the planet.
Q: Was it a big audition? Lots of competition?
PAGE: No, I didn't actually. I actually hadn't worked in ages. After Hard Candy I took the year off and went back to Halifax where I'm from and graduated from a wicked high school and had a great year of just chillaxin' and being myself and then I literally graduated high school, was like being a ridiculous teenager and then ended up getting the call. And then Brett Ratner ended up calling me because he saw Hard Candy and he really digs it. So he was like basically are you interested and I'm going to bring you out.
Q: What was your reaction to the first time you saw Hard Candy?
PAGE: The first time I saw it was the premiere at Sundance which is a really bad idea. I shouldn't have done that because I was just like – I didn't know what to say. It's hard to even articulate it. I can't really explain. I'm not good at watching stuff that I'm in at all. I should stop. I shouldn't watch something for the first time with a room full of people at Sundance. It's not a good idea.
Q: Are you doing any stage work?
PAGE: It'd be really cool if somebody gave me the opportunity but other than Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in grade five, I don't really have any experience. So if someone wants to give me the opportunity, yeah, that would be really cool. If things line up, I'm shooting a film, maybe the end of the summer called Jack and Diane with a really great director named Bradley Rust Gray, who directed a movie in Iceland called Salt. So anyway, we'll see if that happens.
Q: Are you recognized now for X-Men?
PAGE: Yeah, it's really crazy to think that it's happening already but it is and it's really freaky. I was on like the streetcar in Toronto and someone came up to me. And then I was in a Borders in L.A. and it just – yeah, it blows my mind but I don't know, I'm not going to change because of it. I don't like think I'm cool because I'm an actor. If anything, it makes me more self-deprecating. So we'll see.
Q: So we can bug you without having publicists in our face?
PAGE: I don't think it's going to make that – I think maybe for the first after it comes out for a bit it'll be, you know, a little bit of a circus but then I think it'll be totally fine. I think people over-exaggerate that. If you carry yourself like, 'Oh, I'm an actor' then yeah, you should expect people to bug you. But if you're just a friggin' person.
Q: Why does Canadian television offer a better picture of teens?
PAGE: Our government might be a little more lenient than yours. I don't know. It's a good question. Like Degrassi and stuff? I know you guys wouldn't air some abortion episode which is crazy and I heard abortion is now illegal in South Dakota, which makes me really scared inside.
Q: Any role in your sights for the future?
PAGE: A dream role? No, I just, to be honest, want to keep doing different things and challenging myself and keep passion – if I lose passion then there's no point so if anyone wants to give me the life story of Patty Smith, that'd be dope but no, I have nothing specific. There's roles that I want that I'm pursuing but who knows if people will put me in their movies.
I went in really wanting to appreciate this film, and ready to. It was a major disappointment. I agree with Samsong for the most part.
If you thought that this was probably a smart or incisive film that just had an over-sensationalizing trailer... no. The film is like the trailer times 10.
Poorly written and over-directed (I could almost hear the director telling the cinematographer and the actors to give him "More! More!"). The whole thing feels tremendously scripted, and proud of its own words, which are not impressive at all. The philosophical ideas range from not there to stupid. The whole thing becomes that kind of exploitation film that you can't enjoy, because of the mean-spiritedness of it all.
The initial idea of a young girl and an older guy hooking up through the Internet is strong because no one can deny that it happens. It's scary because it's not ludicrous. The film then takes that and takes it into ludicrous territory, thereby removing whatever potential power it may have had. It cuts its own balls off.
This film reminded me of Crash, really. There are many similarities, but at least I expected not to like Crash. There's the same potential for a great film, the same self-destruction through the poor, very movie-ish dialogue, and the distinct icky feeling of a writer putting his own weaknesses into the movie and then one-sidedly BASHING them. The kind of writing that thinks it's being insightful into the human condition by talking about the normal things that most people do in private but don't talk about, just so that people could say, "yeah, yeah, I know that feeling, I know what he's talking about. That guy's a genius writer."
And the more I think about it, the more I dislike it. I'm so disappointed. I had only planned to watch one film today, but immediately bought a ticket for The Notorious Bettie Page afterwards, which served to successfully wash the bad taste out of my mouth.
My last point will be on the acting. It's difficult not to admire how fully the two lead actors throw themselves into this. I admired that a lot. Nevertheless, due to weak direction and poor writing, I have to say that the performances are ultimately shrill and shallow. I've seen Patrick Wilson do better, so I know he's got it in him, and as many have said or will say, Ellen Page has tremendous potential. But all in all, in keeping with the rest of the film, neither of these two hit a single honest note.
Similar to how the really aggressive gay-bashers probably have some suppressed homosexuality in themselves, this film gave me the feeling that the writer is haunted by his own feelings regarding this subject matter. I can't explain any other reason to write a piece that does nothing but indulge in the most violent bashing of pedophilia. In any case, bash-fests like this film are ultimately worthless.
The first twenty minutes were excellent. Then I realized where it was going, was slightly disappointed but still interested, and just adjusted my expectations accordingly. And then adjusted them again. And again. And when Patrick Wilson found the strategically placed paper clip, I felt sorta cheated and just gave up. Overall, the film didn't leave a bad taste in my mouth because I wasn't able to take it seriously whatsoever.
Technically, it was pretty great. Great photography, and beautiful production design. I liked the staging of the whole thing, and I liked how you never saw the photos on the wall until the end.
Saw this last night. My God, it made me feel so sick. I mean physically sick. No film that I have ever seen made me feel that way. It just darker and darker and darker and more disturbing that I was glad it was over afterwards. Outstanding cimentography, dialogue and production design.
movies suck.
Quote from: Ghostboy on April 29, 2006, 10:26:56 PM
The first twenty minutes were excellent. Then I realized where it was going, was slightly disappointed but still interested, and just adjusted my expectations accordingly. And then adjusted them again. And again. And when Patrick Wilson found the strategically placed paper clip, I felt sorta cheated and just gave up. Overall, the film didn't leave a bad taste in my mouth because I wasn't able to take it seriously whatsoever.
Technically, it was pretty great. Great photography, and beautiful production design. I liked the staging of the whole thing, and I liked how you never saw the photos on the wall until the end.
I've never agreed with a review so fully on here before. But this nails it (for me (so far)). I especially agree about that clip....way to undermine the only thing that was giving the rest of the film locomotion. And JESUS did she HAVE to say: I am every girl blah blah blah? Man, that was such transparent, crap writing.
Pretty much agree with samsong and matt, but walked away from it like GB did.
*SOME SPOILERS*
The film gave no sense of realism at all. The dialogue felt staged and wordy. The operation scene went so far, you knew she was just fuckin' with him because it came off as a simple harmless procedure.
I couldn't understand which side the film wanted me to be on. Maybe that was the point, but it did a poor job of executing that since there was no give and take in the film. It only gave her side and she showed no vunerability; whatever he dished out, she had an answer for. The film only makes us sympathize with him, not because we see and understand his side, but because of how crazy she is that I think we all wanted him to break free and shut her up in some way.
I hated Page's character and how she played her. And the women tortured in the Saw films, for example, resist and put up a fight far greater than Wilson's character did; he was ridiculously calm for what was being done to him throughout.
The film would have been SO MUCH better if a modern day (re-)telling of Mamet's Oleanna was the model for the script, but instead the ending which turns the film into a revenge movie completely takes away whatever statement the film was trying to make about pedophilia.
i liked it. i admire what they were able to do with no budget in one of the better sundancey movies i've seen in a while. two great performances in what is essentially a play, BUT the way it was shot (and COLORED) i think it earned its right to be a film. the big scene was one of the most tense experiences i've had in a while. its a good rental.
Quote from: modage on September 21, 2006, 10:32:47 PM
i liked it. i admire what they were able to do with no budget in one of the better sundancey movies i've seen in a while. two great performances in what is essentially a play, BUT the way it was shot (and COLORED) i think it earned its right to be a film. the big scene was one of the most tense experiences i've had in a while. its a good rental.
i agree, just saw it last night and was on the edge of my seat. i watched the special features after the film and the producer said he was looking for a playwrite when he came up with the idea. this may address some of the issues brought up on this thread. i thought both of the performaces were great, yes over the top, but what the story needed. if this was done too realistic i think the message/intent would have been lost because it would have been too off-putting. it plays out like a stage production, and i liked that element.
i also like how there is no clear cut bad guy in this film. i was constantly wondering if he deserved it (in some saddistic revenge kinda way) or if she was just fucking nuts. there is clearly no good guys, and i recognize the male lead is a horrible man, but the choice of making him charismatic, while the girl was the opposite, was very interesting. it helps break the polarizing effect the topic normally has, which leaves you a little jaded. the girl's performance is true anti-hero in the most literal sense of the term. i really liked it.
-sl-