Not long ago I saw a video of him screaming hysterically at Lily Tomlin. When Tomlin was asked about it later, she just shrugged it off, saying, "There was a lot of pressure in making the movie.."
The more I study it, the greater the puzzle becomes. The Golden Voyage of Sinbad
It seems he made a calculated decision to be a monster on the set. Here's from an article in the New York Times (regarding a scene that didn't make it into the final cut of the film, shot one week before the incident of Russell shouting at Lily Tomlin):
July 24, 2003: The Car Trip
It is a hot, tense day in a dried-up marsh near Los Angeles International Airport. The shoot is nearing its end. Mr. Hoffman, Ms. Tomlin, Ms. Huppert, Mr. Wahlberg and Ms. Watts (devoid of make-up and wearing an Amish bonnet) are all crowded into an old Chevrolet for the critical scene in which they will articulate the movie's themes: how everything in the universe is connected, and how sadness is an inevitable part of life. In an essential bit of back story, Ms. Huppert will explain how she became a pessimist because of a failed love triangle with Ms. Tomlin and Mr. Hoffman.
The actors do take after take in the crowded car, with Mr. Russell, as is his habit, constantly throwing new lines at them from a few feet away. The dialogue is poignant and bizarre at the same time, and the scene culminates with Mr. Hoffman and Ms. Tomlin weeping simultaneously and loudly.
While the cameras roll, Mr. Russell berates the actors: "Where's the [expletive] reaction?" he swears at Mr. Hoffman.
The actors look tired. As he has throughout the shoot, Mr. Russell is touching them — a lot, and sometimes in private places. At one point, Mr. Wahlberg grabs the director's megaphone, shouting: "This man just grabbed my genitals! It is my first man-on-man contact!" At other times, the director whispers into the actresses' ears — lewdly, they later say — before a take.
So far, the actors have been remarkably tolerant of Mr. Russell's mischief. As Ms. Huppert later observed in a phone interview, the actors knew Mr. Russell was intentionally trying to destabilize them for the sake of their performances. "He is fascinating, completely brilliant, intelligent and very annoying sometimes, too," she said. They also know he has created superb films from chaotic-seeming sets before. Besides, he's the director and the writer; now that they've cast their lot with him, they really don't have a choice.
I don't think so. The movie is uneven, and on the whole mediocre. Given the talent involved, it fell far short of its potential, and Russell and his monstrous behavior probably had a good deal to do with that. When behaving badly results in a worse film, we don't even reach the question of whether abusive behavior is justified if it produces a better film.
O & HOW is it better if it is intentional?
Ask someone who thinks that such behavior is better if it is intentional. That's not me.
reply share