This interview was done at The Telluride Film Festival in 2000.
***********************
Q: What got you involved in this role?
Willem Dafoe: Pretty simply Nick Cage -- who has his own production company –said check this out. He showed me the script and I responded to it. Then he introduced me to E. Elias (Merhige) and I was struck by how passionately he talked about the project. He also explained some things that weren’t necessarily clear in the screenplay about how he was going to mix the film stocks and his concepts of film reality and all that. Then John (Malkovich) came on board. In a funny way it didn’t happen over night. It took a little while.
Q: You bring a real physicality to the role can you talk about that?
WD: Sure, basically so much of the starting place of the character came from imitation and then working with what we see of Max Schreck in original Nosferatu. So that’s where you start. You also have this costume that physically constricts you. Plus, it’s a silent movie world so you start to find the gestures that work fairly quickly.
Q: I guess working this way makes you appreciate silent film acting because there isn’t much dialogue on your part.
WD: I think the interesting part - especially in the end – is that he’s more naturalistic when he’s in the movie than he is on the set. Because he’s kind of on shaky ground when he’s actually acting. [Laughs].
Q: There’s not a lot we know about Max Schreck the actor in the original film.
WD: No, to tell you the truth I didn’t feel the need to research Max Schreck because the character Max Schreck [not the historical real one] is really the invention of our screenplay. One of the few things they said about Max Schreck was that he was "an actor of no distinction" until this role. The irony is that this role destroyed him because - he did work on other films - but he was so singularly identified by this role. And since half of his films don’t exist anymore we’ll never know.
Q: I’ve seen Nosferatu recently and what you’ve done is quite different. It’s almost as though you took the character further.
WD: We used Nosferatu as a source and then we made something completely different. There were no rules that we had to have an allegiance to the original. We could break any rule we wanted. The only reason why we would stick to the original is because it’s what you’re interested in on some level. So we us it to the degree where it’s useful to tell your story and where it isn’t you depart from it. So the truth is I watched Nosferatu and I took away from it what I needed to tell our story and the rest of it fell by the wayside. So, when we’re actually playing the scenes the original is far from my memory.
WD: That’s not my experience of it I should tell you…really. It’s interesting that you say that. I think that [my character] is a presence through the film so maybe that’s what you’re sensing. There actually is a fair amount of dialogue.
Q: That’s true there is that long scene with you and Udo Kier.
WD: Yeah, that’s like a seven-page scene.
Q: What about improvisation? Was there any used in the shooting of the film?
WD: Not really. Certainly there were many adjustments. We were working quite fast. Elias was quite clear about what he wanted to do but we were always conscious of making the day. There are a lot of exteriors and it was difficult. So in that respect we had to do some scrambling to get it done. But as far as improvisation in the normal way of actors having the premise and improvising the dialogue -- not so much. Because [the script] written quite clearly and quite strongly and even though it’s not poetic language or anything the choice of the words is very careful. So I’m sure if you started to improvise there would be some deviation. The dialogue is good because it’s very modern but it never really jumps out. The use of profanity is modern but when I watch it I don’t experience it as kitchy. I can’t imagine it being improvised.
Q: Can you talk about the costume and the makeup? How did it change the way you normally approach a role?
WD: This was a literal representation of what I always search for when I approach a character. I’m always looking for a mask. I’m always looking for something to work through because it’s liberating. When you’re disguised you no longer have an allegiance to yourself. So you can let yourself go a bit and you can forget about yourself in ways that you can’t when you feel more exposed. Ultimately… hopefully you can expose more with a mask.
Q: You can bring more of yourself out.
WD: Right. Normally you act through socialization and private objectives and narcissism and vanity and all those things. If you shatter those then you’re working from a much stronger place to pretend and you may be able to act upon impulses that you wouldn’t normally. So this was a great set up. Not only did I have a great model to work with but I had a very beautiful specific costume. You know, on screen I look like a silhouette so you may not see how beautiful it is but I felt it. And it made me feel a certain way. The prosthetics (the make-up) were the same way. I could forget myself.
Q: You’ve worked with many great directors. How was working with Elias? Was he a good actor’s director?
WD: It’s hard for me to say but I think so. The best thing a director can do for an actor…I think people always think it’s about coaching – but it’s really more about giving them a great set up. Making the world that you’re living in very clear and making the story that you’re trying to tell very clear and giving the actor all the tools in terms of how he looks, how he dresses and all those things. Elias brought a lot to the table and then he over saw it in a way that made it jell. Is he good with actors? It’s not for me to say. But if you like the film and if you like the performances then he must be good. [Laughs]. I think he cast it very well.
Matt Langdon
