Sean Anders’ Horrible Bosses 2 is now in theaters
with Jason Bateman, Charlie Day , and Jason
Sudeikis reprising their roles from the first film.
This time around they decide to be their own
bosses by setting out on their own
entrepreneurial venture. When a slick investor
( Christoph Waltz) steals their idea, they decide to
kidnap his son ( Chris Pine) and hold him for
ransom. Jennifer Aniston , Kevin Spacey, and
Jamie Foxx all return for the sequel. While
Horrible Bosses 2 isn’t going to win any awards,
I’ll admit that I laughed a lot mostly from the
great chemistry between Bateman, Day and
Sudeikis. For more on the film, watch some
clips, read Matt’s review, watch the trailer, or
here’s all our previous coverage.
At the Los Angeles press day I landed an
exclusive interview with Christoph Waltz. He
talked about how he got involved in the project,
how he prepares for a role and if he does
anything different for a comedy, if his process
has changed over his career, what it was like
working with Tim Burton on Big Eyes,
collaborating with director David Yates on
Tarzan , and a lot more. Hit the jump to either
read or watch what he had to say.
Here’s the video of the interview followed by a
full transcript.
Collider: For this project, when they pitched you
on it, was it an immediate, “Oh my god, I’m doing
this?”
CHRISTOPH WALTZ: It was an immediate, “Oh
my god, I can’t do that.” I always take the script
seriously. Not that I shouldn’t have but what I
overlooked was that it is in a certain context.
Oh, so you read the script and you were like, “I’m
not doing this.”
WALTZ: But then meeting the people involved,
and I’m not just talking about the three guys—
some of them I’ve known before. But the
director and the producers really did put it in a
different context and it started making sense. I
started seeing layers and details and elements in
it that really, really made me quite enthusiastic
about participating. Not least of them that topic.
For you preparing for a role and you’re doing
something like this which is, you’re not playing it
funny the way the other guys are. Do you
prepare any differently when you’re going to be in
a comedy or is acting for you the same rigid
process?
WALTZ: It’s not a rigid process, somewhere it is
the same because microsurgery will be
microsurgery and car mechanics will be car
mechanics. To confuse the two could have fatal
results but every part and every story requires its
own unique attention. So, that’s what you try to
find out in the run up, so to say, which is the
right flight path? Which is the right approach?
Which is the most useful?
And in this case, the most useful I think—and it
seems to have been the right one—was to take it
like any other serious part. Because that’s my
part, only in the context hopefully it’s funny but
the context is not really what I do. I’m just
responsible for the part, so I considered myself
responsible for the seriousness, for the straight
thing. Apart from the part that it is a
mechanical necessity for comedy that you have
the serious and straight guy.
One of the things that I found, especially looking
at the bloopers of the movie is that the three of
them, I would imagine there are a lot of takes
that are ruined from people laughing. Or did you
not find that to be the case?
WALTZ: I actually didn’t find that to be the
case. Yeah, they are funny but again, as a
result. Sometimes it happens but it happens
surprisingly rarely that you crack up because they
came up with something new. If you really focus
on what you’re doing then you could see them
being funny and acknowledge the fact that they
are funny without reacting to it or cracking up.
And then, they were at work too, so you
understand that they are actually trying to find
the best expression for the situation and you
participate in that. That in itself is not a
laughable situation.
I’m curious how you’ve changed as an actor in
the way you do prepare for a role from when you
first started to where you are now. Have you
maintained a very similar routine or has it been
adapted as you’ve gotten further into being an
actor?
WALTZ: Well, of course. You develop and if you
don’t you should do something else, as simple
as that.
Is it now you feel more comfortable taking on a
role where you do maybe less work or do you do
even more work now?
WALTZ: No, I do more because I know more of
how wrong things can go. Not only how things
can go wrong but how wrong they can go. So, as
you go along you learn more and more about it
and you find yourself in a position more and
more often where you think, “I have no idea. I
have no clue. What am I gonna do?” Now,
experience is crucial because now you can open
your tool box. But you have to have used the
preceding decade to fill your toolbox, so that
might be the only difference.
I’m looking forward to Tim Burton’s Big Eyes
because it’s not a typical Tim Burton movie of
recent years where it’s fantasy filled with CGI and
effects. It’s a real story. What was it like being a
part of that, making the movie? What was it like
collaborating with him?
WALTZ: You see, I consider this a typical Tim
Burton movie because how can it not be if it’s
Tim Burton?
I don’t mean it like–
WALTZ: I know exactly, I just…I know exactly
what you mean and I’m grateful for throwing me
that ball, so I answered back. It is very much a
typical Tim Burton movie because it might not
have the branding so much. It might not have
the Tim Burton, whatever it is. I don’t even think
about it because I love working with him for
these reasons. Everything he does is typically
Tim Burton.
He doesn’t submit to commercial considerations
ahead of creative ones. He is the true artist and
the way he expresses himself, you have to live up
to the occasion the way he demands to fulfill
that expectation, or that hope rather, that he
puts in you by casting you. Apart from the
challenge, it’s wonderful to see him exercise his
marvels.
Have you seen a rough cut yet or the film?
WALTZ: No, I haven’t.
So you’re seeing it for the first time soon?
WALTZ: I certainly hope so.
I know you’re making Tarzan right now.
WALTZ: It’s done.
You worked with David Yates. What was it like
collaborating with him on this version?
WALTZ: He is probably the most circumspectant,
considerate person on Earth.
I’ve noticed that.
WALTZ: You have? How so?
I did a set visit on Harry Potter and I’ve spoken to
him a few times. He’s just so nice and grounded.
WALTZ: It’s not just nice, it’s beyond nice. He
really considers the other person’s position and
point of view. And by position I don’t mean in
the hierarchy, I mean as a human being in
society. He really is, as I said, so circumspect
that sometimes I had problems picking up right
away what he meant, “Oh. Now I get it, now I
get it. He doesn’t want to just order me around.”
He offers various perspectives and approaches,
and considerations to consider for yourself and
then choose amongst them yourself. After, I
understood because I’m just an actor. I’m used
to being ordered around. After understanding
that he refuses to do that and it’s a conscious
choice, it’s not because he’s a weakling. He’s
everything but. It’s his conscious choice to
never infringe upon your process.
Can you tell people who you play in the film?
WALTZ: No. Go see the movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment