The next question, "What drew you to the film?" was a bit safer. Dreyfuss replied that he took the part because it was a role from Tom Stoppard. Later, Dreyfuss called working with Tom Stoppard intimidating. For a first-time film director, Stoppard was very certain of everything, very quietly sure. Another reason Dreyfuss took the role was that it was a role he never believed he would be asked to play. He went on to say that he did not really prepare for the role. If anything, he went to Donald Wolfit. I had to look up that reference. Wolfit was a British actor of stage and film who played King Lear, among many roles.
The interviewer drew a parallel between Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead and Groundhog Day, the 1993 film in which Bill Murray is forced to relive February 2. He asked Dreyfuss if the characters having to relive Hamlet is what makes the Player so world-weary. Dreyfuss agreed in part, stating that the Player does know more than the others. This helps to inform the sense of irony in the play. Dreyfuss suggested a revision to the film. He would have liked to see it end exactly where it began, in order to play up the cyclical sense of the action. Perhaps, though, this was only because admittedly he didn't understand the play in total, but only moment by moment.
Dreyfuss commented repeatedly how much he enjoyed his role. He loved the Player doing Priam standing on a table. He called it thrilling and another way of acting different from what he had done. He was not intimidated by it, though. In fact, he regretted not doing more Shakespeare in his career. Dreyfuss discussed later a brief two-and-a-half week stint directing Hamlet. He discounted his effort as becoming the director that he hated, with line readings and posed action.
For an actor who repeated that he did not understand the play, Dreyfuss posed a very interesting observation about R & G and Hamlet. He called the former a fulfillment of his own idea about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He believes that they are not slimebags but rather pigeons or "schmoos," trapped in an accident of fate. When they arrive at Elsinore, the first person they meet is Claudius. It is he who tells them that Hamlet is mad. He's the King of Denmark, so he must know what he's talking about. This initial conversation colors their later perceptions of Hamlet. What would have happened if they had not met Claudius first?
When asked to name his favorite role, Dreyfuss replied, "Hamlet." (The interviewer meant one of Dreyfuss's own film roles.) When asked what part he yearns to play, Dreyfuss's answer was the same: "Hamlet." He didn't know why he never took the role. He did say that he would like to produce Hamlet for radio. (I don't know if that ever happened. I found that he did direct a stage version in 1994 at the Old Repertory Theatre in Birmingham.)
Dreyfuss's admiration for Hamlet is evident. He admitted that there are probably six or eight guys who love the play more than he does. He stated that he finds greatness, mystery, wackiness in every line. If he were on a desert island, Hamlet would be the play he would take with him. I agree with him on that one and on a comment toward the end of the discussion that could be my new philosophy.
"If I could just wake up and go to Barnes & Noble and go home and read my books, I would be fine."Who wouldn't? Indeed, who wouldn't?
No comments:
Post a Comment