In concieving the film, I realize how arrogant I as Director can get. It’s all about my shots, my conception, my vision. And then the actor steps on to the set and completely changes everything …
.. what he does with his face, his voice, his walk, his attitude is so fascinating that all I want to do is shoot him. I am talking about Jordi Molla, a leading Spanish Actor ( 40 films as an actor, and a director of 4), who plays King Phillip 11 , who was at that time the most powerful man in the world.
Phillip was a devout Catholic, who had taken it upon himself to change the whole known world to his own ascetic and fairly brutal form of religious fundamentalism.
Jordi is playing the part not as the obvious fundamentalist. He is exploring the character as a human being, and dare I say it, frail. Something we these days are so afraid of doing to modern day terrorists. Which makes the character even more scary. For there are so many aspects of the character’s frailty you recognize in yourself. Yet this is the man that caused so much suffering during the Spanish Inquisition.
And back to the point of my arrogance. In a film of this scale, and with a schedule this tight, a director must atleast seem to be planned and prepared with his shots. And in that planning there is a major part of my being that wants to express my being, flex my muscles.
What am I going to do when Cate Blanchette, for example, begins to shoot ? Will I completely alter my conceptualizations ? Will I want to linger on her close up’s all the time ? What happens then to the ‘style’ of the film ?
Who knows ..
Shekhar
Dear Shekhar
I want to know the answer to your last questions, too.
love, Heather
In the spirit of being organic, from your earlier entries, I posit the idea of a plant:
You “flexing your creative muscles”, conceptualizing, in essence creating a structure and flow for the project is like the root.
What the actors/other creative contributers bring become like the stems, leaves and branches. They are brought into being and sustained by the root, but are something unto themselves.
Both together are the plant’s identity, and if the plant is healthy, its branches and stems and leaves will grow out in many directions, striving to gather more and more of the sun.
What happens to the style? i guess it will reveal itself …
Let the style reflect inward of the story. Kate was a lonely woman, trapped by royaltry, deception, and constant treachery; even by her closest alies. In the end, she could trust, barely anyone. I think, it was Elizabeth’s “role” as Queen, which saved her sanity. Had she not been prepared, she may very well have failed to rule, and fallen prey to her shadow enemies, always in the lurch!
Greetings Shekhar, and all cast and crew!
quite excited about this film, absolutely love Cate and Clive, and will no doubt adore Jordi; if he is that powerful as the other two I mention!
I like good acting! I couldn’t care less if the girl is beautiful and the boy, handsome; so are millions of others.. so..
“could they act?” is what I want and expect in a good film! lol
Shekhar, it would seem you have begun with the best on cast and crew!
North
Dear Shekar:
Your vision about Philip II is very influenced by the “English vision”.
1) The king didnīt have religious power, itīs right that he was influenced by church but the inquisition was a independent institution depended of romeīs pope.
2) The king Philip was a much more open that some person of these times like Cromwell or Elizabeth.
3) Phillip was a parlamentary king. Righ!!, he was king of three independent kingdoms: Castille, Aragon, Navarre. Spain was founded as united kingdom in 1714. Navarre and Aragon was parlamentary and the king always respected the parlamentary institutions of these kingdoms.
4) The king didnīt disturb the spanish muslims, they were expulsed of spain 100 years later!!!.
So please donīt be politically correct and study mire history!!!.