Here’s a video of Robert Pattinson and David Cronenberg’s interview with Fox.
Archive for August 19, 2012
From AZ Central
The phone call began with Pattinson and Cronenberg laughing.
Question: Sounds like you two aren’t having any trouble having fun.
Pattinson: We rollick and frolic. We have no problem.
Q: And Robert, you haven’t been in the news enough lately.
Q: Your character is a disconnected guy trying to connect. Or maybe it’s the other way around. How do you play that?
Pattinson: I think he’s just very, very self-obsessed. It’s going deeper and deeper into self-obsession until it kind of implodes. It’s also just the words. Everything is done for me. I sort of instinctively felt like I knew what to do from the beginning because the script was so good.
Q: Is it tricky to direct someone having a prostate exam (as Packer does in the film)?
Cronenberg: For me? Oh, no problem.
Q: Robert, I assume you’re rich. But Packer is incredibly rich. Is there a freedom to that?
A: I think it’s actually quite a difficult way to live. I’ve met a few people who have fictional money (laughing). If you have any interest in the world, it’s very difficult to see. Your eyes are totally different to most people. Money really does change people. You have to make an effort to be normal, I think.
Q: Did you go through that when you became successful?
Pattinson: It’s different. Dealing with fame is different. Everyone gets stuff thrown at them in life, and you have to figure out how to deal with it.
Q: There’s a ton of publicity surrounding you now, good and bad. Presumably you’re in a bubble while shooting the film, so not as many people are keeping up.
Cronenberg: In fact, a lot of the “Twilight” fans were keeping up. They made websites, and they had spy-cams. But all of that was really quite sweet. It was quite gentle and quite affectionate, and you had these young girls who had never read anything but “Harry Potter” and “Twilight” before (but) were reading “Cosmopolis,” they were reading Don DeLillo and writing about it on their blogs.
Q: Robert, “Twilight” is winding down. What has that been like?
Pattinson: Pretty crazy (laughing). No one ever believes me, but no one involved with the first movie had any idea that it was going to turn out to be what it was going to be. We didn’t even know if we were going to make the sequels. You go on this runaway train that I was entirely unprepared for. And at the same time, I was kind of figuring out whether I wanted to be an actor or not, which is kind of interesting. You’re in your 20s, you’re trying to figure out what you want to do with your life.
Q: What about the fame aspect of it? Isn’t that kind of a weird way of life? You can’t even walk across the street without someone taking a picture.
Pattinson: Yeah. It’s just how you deal with it. Everyone has to figure out how they want to live. It’s a challenge.
Cronenberg: I can say that Rob was definitely able to walk across the street in Toronto (where “Cosmopolis” was shot) and no one noticed. And he could go to a bar and he could go to a restaurant. Really, part of it has to do with where you are and how much you’re publicizing yourself. If you’re Lindsay Lohan and you’re making sure that everybody knows where you are at all times, then you know what the consequences will be. But if somebody doesn’t want that, there are ways you can do that.
Here’s a great new Cosmopolis Wallpaper by Jules
Here are some black & white pics of Robert Pattinson I made for you guys from NY Times Talk, Good Morning America, MTV First, the New York Stock Exchange and the Cosmopolis premiere in NYC. Enjoy!
Click to make bigger
Here’s the weekly round-up of pics and quotes of the day that we post on our Tumblr.
“I’m in it for movies. I’m not interested in trying to sell my personal life.”
Videos thanks to @Mel1518 and @annapr002 | Via
David Cronenberg talks Robert Pattinson and Cosmopolis at the Museum of the Moving Art
From The Filmstage
Oh, hell: “Brilliant.” Cosmopolis is certainly a brilliant film, one filled with all the subtext and qualities we call “cinematic” that you could ask for, but it presents this in a manner so deceptively simple it can only feel like genius. David Cronenberg’s newest effort says inordinate amounts about our society, often, by saying so little, to the point where it feels as though we, the modern audience, are looking into a funhouse mirror only two degrees off from being an exact portrait.
And that’s more terrifying than anything the Canadian auteur has ever put onscreen.
More unsettling, yet, is Cosmopolis’ insistence on what truly constitutes time. Everybody here is moving, everybody is going toward something, everybody is trying to get away from something, yet they’re not reaching anywhere. Cronenberg’s world is one in which time is an inevitable, unstoppable, horrible form of forward momentum which everyone is consumed by with every passing (nano, zepto, centi) second. Whether we’re inhabiting a 20-foot vehicle on the way to a barber or marching in a funeral procession, there’s no real difference; it’s only taking us one step closer toward the end.
Not that you’d get it from the basic “plot,” as it were, in which billionaire Eric Packer (Robert Pattinson) decides he needs a haircut. Nothing about his upper appearance would suggest such work is even necessary — heck, his hair is practically short — but he needs one, and he needs to get it at a specific place. With his loyal guard (Kevin Durand), he sets off into the Manhattan streets; the slow collapse of society is just an obstacle to drive through.
Of course everybody wants to ask you about your star, who unfortunately has decided not to join us today. I guess he has his reasons. How and why did you wind up casting Robert Pattinson?
Well, it begins in a very pragmatic way. You get a list of 10 people from various producers and agents, and you start with the basics. How old is this character, and how old is the actor? This character is young, his age is given as 28. So that’s where you start. Does he feel like the right guy? Eric talks about working out a lot and is very physical, so you’re not going to cast someone who’s overweight. It’s simple stuff like that to begin with. And then you get to the pragmatics: How big is your budget and what kind of star power do you need to get the movie financed?
And here’s something people don’t think about, which is the passport of the actor. This is a Canada-France co-production, so you’re really restricted in the number of Americans you can use. There’s only one American in this movie, even though it’s set in New York, and that’s Paul. So the fact that Rob is British helps, because he can fit into the co-production thing. So that’s the long way round, and ultimately you get to: Does the guy have the chops and charisma to hold the movie together? Because this character is in every scene of the movie, without exception, and that’s very unusual, even for a star.
So I looked at everything I could find that Rob had done, including “Little Ashes,” where he plays the young Salvador Dali, and I thought, yeah, he could really do this. And I think he’s actually extraordinary. It’s ultimately intuition on my part, and casting is a huge part of directing that’s very invisible. Making-of documentaries don’t usually cover the casting process, but for a director it’s a hugely important part of your art. Juggling all those other balls that I was just talking about, and still coming up with the right guy.
I realize I’d be better off asking him that question, but do you think Rob is eager to change his image after “Twilight,” and push into doing different kinds of characters? After this role, and playing a sadistic sociopath in “Bel Ami,” it certainly looks that way.
Well, I know from doing interviews with him in Europe that he’s not really thinking in terms of his career. He gets offered a lot of stuff, and it’s usually very conventional, boring stuff. He’s always been interested in doing unusual stuff. He’ll tell you that when they started with “Twilight,” he thought it was kind of an indie film. Which it sort of was, you know! It had Catherine Hardwicke as the original director, and it was an unusual, off-kilter vampire story. Nobody knew that it would be the kind of mainstream success that it became.
In a way, “Cosmopolis” is a lot closer to his heart than “Twilight,” you know. When he read it, he told me that he was also struck by the dialogue. He thought it was incredibly fresh and new and surprising and engaging, and he immediately wanted to do it. He was afraid, because I think he still hasn’t come to terms with the fact that he’s actually an actor! He didn’t grow up thinking he wanted to be an actor. As with many actors, and not just young, inexperienced ones, he wasn’t sure he was good enough! He wasn’t sure he was the right guy, and he didn’t want to be the guy who would bring down this terrific project. So my job, at that point, was to convince him that he was indeed the right guy. That took me about 10 days, I suppose.
Are you telling me that you have actually watched the “Twilight” movies? That’s a bit hard to imagine.
Yeah — or no, I watched about one and a half of them. I’m interested in everything, frankly. I’m not a snob, you know. I really am curious about everything. If something’s hugely popular, it doesn’t automatically mean I’m going to look at it, but sometimes I’m curious as to why something is really popular, let’s say. In the case of “Twilight,” I was watching it for Rob, that was the thing. It’s not like – I mean, I hadn’t seen them before that.
Robert Pattinson and David Cronenberg talk about Cosmopolis, fans, fame and more with The Boston Globe
Robert Pattinson and David Cronenberg interview with The Boston Globe
Q. You both have said that you filmed this movie in chronological order, and I know that with many movies, the last scenes are shot first. Was that a luxury — to film from start to finish?
Cronenberg: One of the trickiest things that I had to learn as a director was exactly that. I mean, suddenly you’re forced to shoot the last scene of the movie first. And it’s hard for the actors because they don’t know who they are yet and they’re doing their death scene. As an actor myself, I was in Clive Barker’s movie “Nightbreed,” and the first thing we shoot was my character getting killed. And I said a typical actor thing. I said, “How can I know how to die when I haven’t lived yet?” So it is kind of a luxury. I think Rob can talk about that.
Pattinson: I agree. (Laughs) I don’t think I can add to that.
Q. You have both been very candid in interviews about the fact that you didn’t necessarily know how this novel would translate to film and what it meant to you. Do you have a different interpretation of the text now that you’re finished with the film?
Pattinson: Well, I like it. I don’t think that confusion is necessarily a bad thing. We’ve done hundreds of interviews now and I still find myself coming up with new things to say.
Cronenberg: Those statements that we made, which were very candid, can be misinterpreted as meaning we were inept, incompetent. But not at all. You know, I don’t do storyboards, for example. I don’t really know what I’m going to do at every set up and every shot. It’s all very spontaneous and of-the-moment, even what lens to use. That’s what we’re talking about. We don’t have it all mapped out. We’re trusting the script and trusting the dialogue that is all 100 percent Don DeLillo’s and taken from the novel directly. We know that if we respond directly to that . . . the movie will have its coherence.