Wheatley loves using an improvisational approach with his actors in film, an approach he also utilized in his 2009 crime film, Down Terrace. “You do a take on the script and then you do a take off the script, and the off-script takes are kind of paraphrased instead of wild improvisations. And you basically get them to put the script back into their own words, you get  the tight meaning of the script but you also get a stuttery, slightly wild feeling of real improvisation, it’s really helpful. We use that a lot in Down Terrace…so that’s why Kill List is additional dialogue…‘by cast’ because they are throwing stuff in that’s really good.”

Wheatley wrote Kill List for the actors he had already chosen, a method that allowed him to capitalize on the abilities of people he had worked with before. “I really like that way of working, because you play to their strengths, and their own characters, you amplify it….the improvisation gave us sweeter, funnier moments then are written in the script.”

One of the most unsettling aspects of the film is how certain major questions are never fully answered, such as Jay’s botched job in Kiev, a major detail in the film that is never fully revealed. Says Wheatley, “It could be anything from a mission that’s gone horribly wrong to a drunken dancing incident or badly handled karaoke. That’s the whole point of why it’s not said, because what you imagine in your head is probably worse.  It’s your Room 101, that scary thing that they did…and it goes through the whole movie as well…you run the risk always of showing what ultimate evil looks like is not my ultimate evil, or it’s too much for me and I don’t want to see it…but your idea of it in your own head is much more personal…you look into the film but the film looks into you as well, your own prejudices and kind of assumptions come out in reviews. So be careful…Its from the perspective of the guys and they don’t know anymore than we know as the audience, and they wouldn’t know, so why would the audience get to know?”

Wheatley drew inspiration from several other films when creating Kill List. “The one I actually consciously reference is Race With the Devil…. I remember it vividly of them being chased by these cultist people off the side of the road, and thinking they will go away, and then the fire encircling their camper-van thing, and that terrified me. It stuck with me since I was little. We kind of have a version of that in the film. Obviously there’s elements of Wicker Man in it, but in terms of Wicker Man it’s more the idea that the film is a trap for one character, and it springs shut in the end…. Other movies like that are more referenced are like Parallax View or Manchurian Candidate, which is more about assassins who are involved in a big conspiracy and then are caught in a trap.”

Kill List moves along at a rapid pace, which Wheatley says was highly intentional, in his own joking way. “I want a 90-minute film. I don’t want a two-hour film. I don’t want a long film. And maybe it’s because my ass is so fat now that I can’t bear to sit in the seat for more than 90 minutes.”

Audiences will find Wheatley’s method to writing and directing film authentically character based, a method that allows the audience to connect to the characters from the very beginning. “I wanted to approach the horror film in the same way that I approached crime films, so you know, Kill List is to horror as Down Terrace is to crime, so it’s using those strategies of kind of taking that socio-reality stuff and spending a lot of time with the character to enforce the mood of the rest of the piece and kind of leaven it…the seedier aspects of genre against the more believable aspects of docu-drama and see how that makes it work…it is kind of this genre-bending thing…you frontload it with a lot of characterization so the stuff later on actually works. But then these scenes of violence are amplified, because you think you’re in another film, because you’ve come out of this thing of knowing who these people are, and it’s…hopefully, chiming with what your relationship is with your partner and what your relationship is with your parents, your memories of your parents arguing, your memories of partnerships, and then it gets into the more crazy horror, so these things have already primed you for that. Whereas if you do it the other way around then you’re already at this really crazy heightened unreal position, and it can never recover from that. Then it’s a horror film, which is fine, but it’s a different beast. “

Ben Wheatley’s genre-defying film Kill List opened February 3^rd, and is now playing in theatres.

The moment the two comedians settled into their high-rise seats and test their mics, Shandling let Oswalt (and everyone) know exactly what he thought. “You my friend, as the kids say, killed it. I think you’re fucking fantastic.” He didn’t sugar coat, and by the reaction it gathers from the audience, everyone agreed. Oswalt was flattered, but Shandling didn’t let up, “I think your comedy is fantastic, and then to see you do a performance like this delights me to no end. I think it’s perfect.”

Fortunately for those in attendance, it was not all just singing praises. Both Oswalt and Shandling shed some light on the craft, and Oswalt spoke openly about his preparation for the role. “You walk this tight rope between genuine humor and real rage and pathos, and if you go too far either way it becomes pathetic or it becomes too sitcom-y, so I hired an acting coach and worked with her for two months.” Elaborating on the character he plays, Oswalt went into fascinating detail on some of the character-work he did outside of the film. For those not in the know, Oswalt’s character Mike Frehauf suffers into his adulthood the permanent handicaps caused by a high school beating. “I wrote letters that he would have written to his parents in the hospital, trying to put on a brave face when he was in.” Oswalt also detailed the difficulty ahead of him in shooting the film with an actress as experienced as Charlize Theron. “The minute we started reading she (Theron) would snap into the character, and I realized it was because of the years of experience she had…and I realized I had better catch up to that.” The amount of preparation that Oswalt put into the role is blatantly evident throughout the film. Despite Theron’s completely engrossing performance, it is Oswalt’s scenes with her that are the most interesting in the story.

One of the most touching points in Young Adult is when Oswalt’s character shares a moment of genuine emotion with Theron’s character, and the two end up sleeping together. Shandling singled that out as one of the most affecting parts of the film, “It’s moving…it’s when you’re lying with her and staring at her afterwards, and you have the gravitas to bring the wisdom at the end when you talk to her…you can not be anything but be solid with what you’re doing, because she’s giving it back to you so intensely.”

For those who haven’t seen the film it might be hard to imagine such a heavy scene between the two actors; but Oswalt elaborates beautifully “She was such a dream to work with. She gives it back to you, and she gives back exactly what you need in the scene.” When pressed further about filming the intimate scene Oswalt recalls, “I thought I’d be nervous because I’d be naked with her, but I ended up being way more nervous because it’s the first time we don’t even talk to each other. The whole relationship is based on being snarky and mean, but now…I’m in this terrifying vacuum.” Despite the trepidation though, Oswalt was able to find his success by just jumping into the scene. Approaching the scene bold and fearlessly certainly pays off, as the love scene between the two is easily the most resonant part of the film.

It’s always an enjoyable experience to learn more about what precisely goes into the films that we enjoy so much while understanding so little of the process. In the case of Patton Oswalt in Young Adult the pleasure in learning more becomes twofold. Coming to understand the process of how an artist so based in comedy can extend his talent to embody a role that demands so much dramatic range is a unique opportunity. If you’re a fan of Patton Oswalt, either from his comedy or ever-increasing resume of feature films, you’ll owe it to yourself to see his turn in Young Adult. Chances are you’ll echo the sentiments of Mr. Shandling and see how Patton Oswalt really does “kill it.”

Veterans of the small screen, the actresses bonded immediately. Mitchell is Kate, a wife and lawyer caught between balancing her home and career while simultaneously pursuing in vitro fertilization. Her best friend, Julie Benz as Frankie, is a detective involved in a search for a missing person who is conflicted by her instincts and job responsibility. The characters share a bar stool chat that is indicative of the overall flow of the film.

When discussing the near instant rapport they established on set, Julie Benz is quick to note that she was happy to get the call to join the film. It was just 2 days after being informed that her character was killed on Dexter and even before having the opportunity to read the script that she accepted.

Prior to filming, Mitchell was juggling two jobs, Lost and V. When asked to work with writer/director Matthew Leutwyler, she was adamant, “Yes, I’ll accept a third job.” Both actresses agree that sleep is overrated.

Given the extreme nature of the subject matter, the city of Los Angeles is given its own personality amid the backdrop. It’s a love letter to the city. As the story unfolds with Kate’s life choices and Frankie’s search for a missing person continues, the city becomes a telltale symbol of the disconnect among people. As the pieces come together, there is a strong presence of the characters being just one inch from each other’s live. This connection becomes a call to arms that motivates people to action.

Elizabeth Mitchell has the aching ability to emote without words. Her body language and facial expressions are a key factor in her ability to communicate with her on-screen husband. She volunteers that the power of silence in a scene is listening to her co-star. Her ability to tap into Kate’s vulnerability is the humble intent of her character. As a mother, Mitchell recognizes the enormous act of optimism required to have a child.

Julie Benz in 'Answers to Nothing'.

An emotionally invested director is a plus, agree both women. When characters are as complex as Kate and Frankie, having a director with a clear vision is a gift. Benz notes that of 6 days total on-set with day one being hardest, Leutwyler allowed for a seamless transition from television to feature length film. Mitchell considers it great to have such specificity when working.

The adoration for their director is a contagion for the entire production. From the cast to the crew, every day was an opportunity to experience the machine that is the silver screen. The performances of co-stars are likened to staring at the sun for the sincerity and lack of inhibition each actor delivers. It is the endearing attachment to each member of a production that mixes the bitter with the sweet when an actor is no longer a part of a production.

With much humility, Benz clarifies that watching a hit series after her character has been killed is likened to being “invited to Christmas dinner but not being able to eat.” Mitchell realizes the sentiment as a connection to our innate humility. She confesses it as heartbreaking, though completely human, the feeling of not belonging. Although neither deny that being informed by pleased fans that a character’s demise was a marked improvement for the show keeps them from being overly sentimental.

Looking to the future, both women have their proverbial hands full. Mitchell has promised her six-year-old son that she will spend more time with him, noting that he’s old enough to notice when she is not around. Benz is currently working on Gifted Man, entertaining for the holidays and biding all other time with a wedding to plan.

Though it may not be a stretch to one day find these two paired as crime fighting lady cops, both are quite sure of what behind the scenes on-set positions they would be happy to fill. Without a doubt, Benz has her sight set on operating the boom. Mitchell would be content to hold steady cam.

When discussing the actor/comedian and his foray into grittier, less veiled characters, Dane Cook reveals himself to be a true student of the art. He continues to challenge himself as a performer and seeks a nirvana that is wholly introspective. He has moved beyond just “getting the gag”. To put it simply, he has decided that, “smaller roles are more gratifying”.

Cook’s transition from owning the spotlight in his stand-up comedy to sharing the dramatic climax in film is a vulnerability likened to his early attempts at ridding himself of shyness and anxiety. Fans of Cook will appreciate his truth to his inner voice while the challenge of expressing his range is an open attempt to welcome those who are new to his performance.

His character, Ryan, is a conflicted and unhappy person. His tangibility, almost frightening in its commonality, is given a name and a face in Cook’s portrayal. When the subject of audience response is broached, Cook offers that “sometimes the truth repels people”. Audiences will be exposed to a side of Dane Cook that is a new and unexplored frontier for the entertainer.

Though he has a tendency to come across as a Ladies Man in several of his comedies, Dane Cook is not the guy who sees himself as The Guy who gets the girl. An admittedly friendless adolescence spent sharing secrets with his mother did not prepare him for the accolades or adoration of a raging female public. At his mother’s behest, he is holding out for the “relationship that makes him feel a part of a loving team”.

Drawing upon this friendship with his own mother and confounded by her recent passing, Cook credits Barbara Hershey, who plays Marilyn in the film, with bringing about the strong emotions lurking just beneath the surface. She made it possible for him to reveal the growth of his character: a man desperately seeking an exit from the emotional hole in which he finds himself plummeted.

Representative to this theme is “the specimen” scene –audiences’ introduction to Ryan’s life. Cook is quick to acknowledge its intent to either engage or disgust. It is a humdinger of an idea and a realm of humanity that intrigues and fuels Cook as he further hones his skill as an actor. The scene represents a difficult situation that two adults can experience and has solicited much nervous laughter in response. For the actor, nervous laughter translates to the relevance of a feeling that has yet to be expressed by words.

After dedicating his early career and youth to one aspect of success, he embraces starting over versus earning one great accolade in an entire lifetime. However, 20 years of touring, from open mikes to Chinese food restaurants to selling out Madison Square Garden (twice), has prepared the comedian for a long awaited break.

Cook has re-channeled all of the energy and passion he put into his work on the stage and is directing it into the work he does on screen, a journey he excitedly shares with his fans and supporters.

For fans of his body of work he was more than willing to share some of the processes and desires that went into creating the Pre-World War I story of Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud, and Sabina Spielrein. Some of his very first insight was how Viggo Mortensen came into consideration for the casting of Sigmund Freud, “I thought that we really needed some ‘not-obvious’ casting for Freud…. It wasn’t the grandfatherly sick stern old Freud that most people think they know. This was a fifty-year-old very dynamic, very charismatic leader of a very intense group of people.” He elaborates on the casting of Mortensen specifically by saying, “I thought it would take a slightly oblique, non-traditional type of casting to deliver this kind of Freud…when I discussed with him (Mortensen) what kind of Freud it was…he could tell the writing of Christopher (Hampton) was terrific and eventually he came around.”

There was a desire to know more about Keira Knightley and her role in the film as well. Mr. Cronenberg spoke very highly of her performance in A Dangerous Method and her skill as an actress at length. “She’s wonderful. I always thought she was a very underrated actress, and that proved to be the case. She was incredibly well prepared. We discussed particularly the hysteria…and we had to show that. We had all of this accurate information about that, and I said to Keira ‘You’re asked to describe things that are unspeakable.’ She’s being asked for the first time to say these unspeakable things.” She was more than up to the task; the intense scenes of Sabina’s hysterics and traumas are some of the most compelling parts of the film.

When asked if there was something of personal interest in telling the story of these real people and adapting it to fit his own styling Mr. Cronenberg was refreshingly concise, “I have no thoughts…seriously I don’t think about my other movies when I’m making a movie. It’s as though I’ve never made one, other than that I have the craft…I don’t really try to connect each project with other projects in the way that a critic does. I sometimes I have to remind critics that my process and theirs is not the same.” Cronenberg did make it very evident that he has a passion for this particular study of human health, as well as Jung and Freud as historical figures. He shared with enthusiasm the recent return in modern psychological studies to the teachings of Freud and Jung and went on to talk further about them, “When you read the letters between Freud and Jung, they feel totally modern…here were two professional men…writing to each other about bodily fluids and erotic dreams and things that men of those time, would never ever speak to each other.” His admiration of Spielrein came through as well, “She was absolutely their intellectual equal, and she spoke about Woman’s erotic nature at the same time and same level. It was unheard of before.” Mr. Cronenberg made it evident that the combination of his skilled cast and a personal passion for the subject matter at hand were key ingredients to the success of A Dangerous Method.

Finding filmmakers that have such a diverse body of work and with such a high amount of both critical and commercial success can be a rare thing. However, David Cronenberg transcends styles and genre conventions to take on each story as a unique opportunity to create something wonderful. It’s apparent from his obvious devotion and interest in the source material of A Dangerous Method that he approached it with the same amount of devotion as he did crafting the surreal world of The Fly and the suspense of Eastern Promises. It’s a rare treat to get such insight from such a consummate filmmaker. Luckily, as A Dangerous Method will show, Mr. Cronenberg shows no sign of slowing down.

“I read the script and thought ‘My God!’” Emily Watson exclaims when asked about how she came to the Oranges and Sunshine. “I was so shocked when I read it, because I consider myself to be a well-educated British citizen and I had no idea of any of this — I’d never heard of it. And it’s within living memory. It sort of stopped happening in the early 70’s…. I thought it was a very compelling story.”

Part of what makes it compelling is how controversial it is. It’s easy to accept the barbarism that occurs in third-world nations or the atrocities that occurred in the distant past of countries considered to be more civilized. Yet, the events depicted in Oranges and Sunshine occurred only a few decades ago in a first-world country. As such, Watson explains the reactions from some groups of viewers. “I think there’s a sense of trying to make it a small story, because I think people are afraid of it,” she says. “Because to acknowledge that we collectively as a society…this happened. We’re not talking about a few kids. We’re talking about 130,000 children. 130,000 children who have fundamentally had their human rights utterly shattered. Not just sexual abuse, which is one thing, but had their identities removed. If you were to do this to a group of adults…think of the outcry there would be.”

Surprisingly, Watson has never met the woman she plays. When she thinks about why she hasn’t, Watson laughs it off with a playful, “I’m not sure.” She continues a moment later, “Margaret had been very involved in developing the script…. She was very, very wary of making this into a film, because of the sensitive nature of the subject. And she wanted it to be done correctly because there are real people still alive. So I didn’t feel like it was a rejection of her and I thought she was very in and around the project, but I’ve never met her – only spoken to her. She’s very particularly English in a very particular way and I didn’t want to do a physical impersonation of her. I didn’t think that was important for the project. I didn’t think that was important to tell the story. She’s not a known person.”

None of this is to say that Watson isn’t an admirer of Humphreys. Watson spoke at length about a documentary of Humphreys where she told one of the displaced children – now an adult – that Humphreys had found the displaced child’s mother. “And the way she does it is just so beautiful.”

Watson was also inspired by Humphreys’ strength of character. “When she started out, it wasn’t really like she chose to do it,” Watson explains, “It chose her. This woman came to her and said ‘help me’ and it snowballed and it snowballed and it just got bigger and bigger and it was like a calling she had to answer. She could not walk away. There were such desperate people wanting her help.”

Considering the storyline of Oranges and Sunshine, it should be expected that one of the prevailing themes in the film is the separation of children from their mothers. In most cases, the children were told that their parents were dead before being shipped to Australia. Regretfully, Watson could sympathize in an all too personal way. “My own mother passed away while we were filming so I had to come home and be there. That was quite tough.”

Coincidentally, however, one of the best scenes in Oranges and Sunshine was filmed after Watson’s personal loss. It features her character informing Hugo Weaving’s character, Jack, that his mother was found. His reaction is one of the best performances in the film and had a profound effect on Watson. “It was actually the first I did when I came back to the country for my mother’s funeral, so it was an extremely emotionally charged day of work, but will stay with me forever. And Hugo was amazing. He was so amazing and so beautiful and so emotional. He kind of honored my mum in a really beautiful way. It was lovely.”

Oranges and Sunshine opens on October 21, 2011.

Directed and re-envisioned by Craig Brewer, Footloose for contemporary audiences still uses the vehicle of dancing to convey a message. Its lead actors, Kenny Wormald (Ren) and Julianne Hough (Ariel), are professional dancers on and off the screen, and like the kids in the fictional town of Bomont, Tennessee, there was an emphasis on the impact of dancing in their personal lives. “It’s pretty much everything for me,” Wormald said. “It’s why I’m here, it’s something I’ve been doing my whole life. I can’t really put into a sentence what it does for me, but it’s just some incredible thing; it’s unexplainable.”

Hough concurred, saying, “It’s just an expression of who you are and I feel like I’d be a little bit dead inside [without dance] because I can’t remember my life without dance. I just don’t know how it would feel.”

“I used to be made fun of dancing, within my own town where I grew up I felt like an outsider,” Wormald continued, having grown up in Boston, Massachusetts. “I would lie to kids, I was like ‘Oh, I’m only doing tap dance; it’s really cool.’ But I was doing ballet and jazz and everything. I definitely went through a time where I felt wrong for doing what I loved.”

For Brewer, Footloose was just one of those movies that resonated within him. “I was 13; 1984; Vallejo, California; Cine 3 Theater,” he says. As a self-professed theater geek who performed in school musicals, “it was probably the most important movie of my life…. There was something about going to see Kevin Bacon in that skinny tie and spiked hair, and he was so defiant and so comfortable being himself. He was a different kind of hero. Up until then my heroes had light sabers and ray guns and bullwhips. This was different. This felt like somebody made a movie just for me.”

Wormald and Hough definitely wanted to respect the film and its stars as they had set the bar in 1984. “We knew the movie so well so we didn’t want to do anything that Lori [Singer] or Kevin [Bacon] did,” Hough stated. In her interpretation of the character she plays, “I think she’s more likable in this version. There’s a lot more depth to her; you understand why she acts they way she does. So I think Ren finds her more attractive that way.”

As with any film, however, there are challenges, and naturally some had an easier time than others. Andie McDowell, plays the wife of Reverend Shaw (played by Dennis Quaid) in the film, and found it an easy role to fall into. “It was like seeing my husband again, because I worked with him on Dinner with Friends. We’ve been married for a long time. [laughter] We were like an old married couple.”

Miles Teller, who plays Ren’s best friend in the film, Willard, found a particular challenge in learning how not to know how to dance, during the iconic “Let’s Hear It for the Boy” sequence. “You want to hide the fact that you can dance. It was something that I had to work on. I just imagined what bad dancers must feel like when they’re dancing, and that’s like awkward and self-conscious. So that’s what I was playing to.”

Ziah Colόn (Rusty) could testify that having a dance choreographer who catered to their needs as individuals in their corner beneficial to their experience on the set. “Jamal Sims was great! First of all, he was an amazing teacher, because neither of us are professional dancers. He was patient and adapted it to us. He choreographed all the dances, and they are hot! He did a really great job.”

“He’s very flexible in his training,” Tenner concurred. “Like, he would show me some choreography and I would say, ‘okay, I can do all of that but I can’t do that move’. So we’d work together to figure out something else.” He’s tremendous; he’s got a lot of patience.”

There were some differences in the film noticed by the cast, with hopefully one of them being a reflection of the audience growth from 1984 to the present day, as well as the shift in what being a parent represents to children. “The parents are more relatable in this one,” Wormald said. “It’s more of an understanding; you relate to both sides. [Brewer], when he saw the original, he felt like a Ren McCormack type. Now he has two kids of his own and he feels more like the Reverend. So I think he found a way to blend both without going too far from the original but kind of giving you that relationship, making it more clear.”

“We’re in the day and age where, even though people are certain ways, it’s not as crazy as it was from the eighties when the parents were like ‘you’re going to go to Hell if you’re dancing!’” Hough expressed. “It’s like, all right, it’s not that much right now it’s more about protecting your kids from harm.”

Further differences in the film centered on the issue of culture and music, as Colόn pointed out. “Craig definitely gives a great depiction of what the South is today, because there are so many cultures in the South now, and I think that people forget that, so we get to see that. He adds that grit and the hip hop and the different genres of music that are in the south.”

“Everybody’s white in the first one, so there is a difference. [laughter] And the music has been updated a little bit,” Teller added.

In the end, however, the collective effort of pushing the story’s heart to the fore was a source of satisfaction to Brewer. “I think it turned out great for what I wanted it to be, which is by no means a Footloose replacer. I come from the theater and I believe in revival, where you may do a modern version of West Side Story – you run the risk of losing what was special with West Side Story if you do a modern version. So as long as I kept to the core story of the original Footloose, I felt that if we just served that, then we would have a chance.”

Footloose is in theaters on October 7th, with wide release on October 14th.

Originally from Venice, Italy, Antonio Padovan moved to New York in 2007 to work in architecture after graduating college. “I think I started to develop an intimate and strong feeling for New York after 9/11,” he says. “I was a teenager and I believe that everything that happens to you when you are between 12 and 18-years-old stays with you forever. After three years of college I couldn’t see any other choice other than moving here.”

“Architecture is my background,” Padovan continues. “Originally I wanted to try to work here for a couple of months, but my studio ended up hiring and sponsoring me. They made it possible for me to stay and I will be forever thankful for the opportunity.” Padovan mainly worked on interior design and restorations in New York since it’s difficult to build something new, which he’s grateful he never had to do. Nevertheless, those curious to see Padovan’s handiwork can find it in Diesel stores as well as their headquarters on West 19^th Street. He also worked on Domenico Dolce’s penthouse in Chelsea.

Surprisingly, Padovan’s switch to filmmaking could easily be described as impulsive. On the other hand, the move exhibits a kind of courage that very few possess to follow one’s passion wherever it may lead. “I was in the office 9 to 8, and often weekends, which is pretty normal for an architect,” Padovan explains, “but I realized it wasn’t for me. I’ve always loved films, I own myself probably 2000 DVDs, but back in Italy I never thought I could have been part of it.” As he describes it, one night Padovan went to see a movie and the next morning enrolled in film school instead of going to work. “I did an 8-week program at the New York Film Academy, where if you go with the right approach is a great school, and at the end of the program they gave me a full scholarship to come back for another year. I’ve been working in films since then.”

His first short film Socks and Cakes was a New York Film Academy project that not only won a Golden Ace Award at the 2010 Las Vegas Film Festival, but also impressed the academy enough to award Padovan with a full scholarship. He recalls the shoot fondly. “We had a few days to shoot it and it was in winter. For me [it’s] all about the experience of shooting; I want to have fun. So I came up with an idea that took place all in interiors, in this beautiful loft in the Village. I didn’t want to stay outside for hours and freeze. At the end my crew was the only one that worked in short sleeves, inside.  It was very relaxing and enjoyable.”

His second short film was his student thesis called Perry St., which has been accepted into 16 film festivals and continues to be well received. It has already won four awards and an honorable mention. Perry St. is a romantic comedy about a therapist and patient who struggle with the issues within their separate love lives. The film distinguishes itself with an engaging story and wonderful production. “Our producers did an amazing job,” Padovan says. “Some of them worked [with] me on previous projects. They liked that I am a very cynical filmmaker; I like to work on projects that can happen soon and can be done soon.  I can’t write something that I intend to shoot in a year or two, because that idea scares me. I write knowing how to shoot and when, so that everything runs easier.” Perry St. has recently been accepted into the New York City International Film Festival, which runs August 18 through the 28^th.

Padovan isn’t sitting on his laurels, however, and he’s working on several projects in various states of production. “I just finished shooting the first part of a feature, called Tillman – shot between Queens and Long Island. The producers are in the process of finding the funding to shoot the rest of it.  It’s my first experience ‘outside the city’ but it was very nice. I am co-writing a horror film – which is a genre that I have never explored before – that should be shot this upcoming fall.  I have a project in China and I recently started to write a feature film that I hope to shoot next winter.” As a writer and director, Padovan gets to experience both sides of filmmaking, but he admits that he prefers directing. “Of course when you can do both it’s a win-win. I usually tend to feel guilty about the idea that I can possibly ruin someone else’s script.”

Antonio Padovan on set.

Before the interview ended, Padovan shared a few critical, but fair thoughts on the state of Hollywood films. “The movies that are in the theaters nowadays are usually worse than movies that were in theaters years ago. There are probably two movies out of twenty that I am interested in seeing right now. In Europe there is a better selection. But on the other hand, the quality of most of Hollywood films, technically, is still the best.  People are always going to complain and accuse it of being a moneymaking machine – because that’s what it is – but the most professional way to make movies is the way they do in Hollywood. I am talking about the process, the photography, the editing, etcetera. Unfortunately, usually the story is not worthy.” He also doesn’t like the current use of 3-D in film. “Films are magic because they capture reality in two dimensions in a unique way. I believe that it should be the story that takes you into the film rather than an obnoxious pair of sunglasses.”

It’s still early in Antonio Padovan’s filmmaking career, but for now it’s refreshing to see someone who still receives such obvious joy from what they do. “I think that the feeling I have when I wake knowing that I have a full day of shooting in front of me is equal to the feeling that a singer has before a concert. The best part is that you can’t wait to work. To like what you do is the key to do a good job. Doing films, I understand how my old boss felt about doing architecture.”

“I thought the script was hilarious,” Don Cheadle says regarding his attraction to the film. He especially enjoyed the character arc of Brendan Gleeson’s character. “He’s the most honest cop although you see him dropping acid in the first six frames of the movie. I just loved it. I thought it was great when I read it and just wanted to be part of seeing it get made.” Cheadle also has a producer credit on the film, which he partially dismisses. “The credit – I don’t care about that…. You do as a producer (does), which is exploit your resources to the best of your ability.”

Brendan Gleeson plays Gerry Boyle who is in many ways an absurd character who does a lot of shocking things that many would find unbecoming of a police officer, like drug use and procuring prostitutes. For Gleeson, however, the role was less about shock and more about depth. “That really bores the face off me,” Gleeson says of shock jocks, “where guys say shocking things, but there’s nothing behind it. There’s no real depth of thought…. The danger with Gerry was that he’d be a shock jock. Right? I don’t believe he was a shock jock, because I think behind all that stuff there was a whole other thing ticking and there was a whole life going on.”

On working together, Gleeson had only nice things to say about Cheadle. According to Gleeson, there were no surprises. “All he did was enhance his own reputation as far as I was concerned. On a daily basis there were always surprises. We were always kind of getting little tastes on stuff that I hadn’t seen before that were funny and good and interesting and subtle and layered. I don’t know why, but I kind of expected it from his work. And so sometimes it’s a great joy not to be disappointed by people.”

Cheadle, on the other hand, joked that he still wasn’t comfortable with Gleeson. “He’s a bully; you see how big he is!”

Nevertheless, Gleeson was unrelenting with his praise. “He’s a great actor, you know. And he works the way great actors work, which is collaboratively…. You can always raise the bar for people and they can always raise the bar for you. And collective stuff is almost always, for me anyway, far more interesting than any great, intense sort of separate thing.” He fondly recalls filming the scene where Gerry openly taunts Wendell with racist remarks and how Cheadle responded with an expression that his character has dealt with this scenario before. “And that’s really character work. That’s proper history…. That’s when it becomes joyous, because you can feel ‘ok, I’m dealing with a real person here now.’”

Both actors also agreed on how much they enjoyed the setting. Since Gleeson is already familiar with the location, he was delighted that for once he wasn’t the one who had to learn how things went. Cheadle also approved of being a fish-out-of-water. “That was the great thing about it…. I’ve never been to that part of the country and people in Ireland have never been to that part of the country. So I will be a fish-out-of-water, playing a fish-out-of-water. This is great. It’s not often you get to marry the circumstances in that way. So I just thought it was going to be a great addition to the piece – to not have to act that part. That part is just the truth.”

The Guard stars Brendan Gleeson, Don Cheadle, Liam Cunningham, David Wilmot, Rory Keenan, and Mark Strong. It opens in theaters on July 29, 2011.

Working Author: How did you get involved with “High Road”? What attracted you to it?

Joe Lo Truglio: Matt Walsh and I were working on an indie last year and he told me about High Road then.  It sounded funny, he had all these funny people in it.  When he asked if I’d do it, it was a no brainer.  I loved the idea of doing a movie that was improv’d…the challenge of that.  Who knew if it would work, story-wise, you know?  I knew there’d be laughs because of the cast, but whether or not there’d be a coherent, engaging story after everything, that was a question mark for me – even knowing that Matt and Josh wrote a basic outline.  Turns out, it all worked really well and I thought it was dramatically engaging too.

WA: What was your experience like working with this cast? How is Matt Walsh as a director?

JLT: I knew a lot of the cast personally, so it was basically hanging out and being stupid with friends.  This is always a great situation to be in.  Walsh was great – with a movie like this, it’s important the director makes sure everyone knows what plot points to hit in the scene.  To keep the story on track, details like that.  He was very good with that.  And he didn’t yell.

WA: What was the most difficult part about not having preset dialogue and direction? Or do you prefer that?

JLT: I like going off-script in general, so the format worked for me.  The hardest part was, again, remembering to hit certain plot details during the improv.  ”Don’t forget to say this guy’s name” or “make sure you bring up so-and-so” – that kind of thing.

WA: How much of your Officer Fogerty is your own creation as opposed to what’s in the script? Did you draw on any real life experiences?

JLT: Well, Walsh held like a workshop at UCB Theater for all the characters to flesh them out. One-on-one interviews, improv scenes with other characters.  Not scenes that would end up in the movie, just fun, background stuff.  Riggle, Dylan, and I did one where the three of us go to a ballgame. I think Malone gets upset with Fogerty because I keep offering his son a beer.  Stuff like that. So like with any good character, it’s usually a collaborative effort.  I knew I wanted Fogerty in sweat pants with no pockets the whole movie, so he can use that as an excuse not to have to carry or hold onto anything.  And in real life, sometimes I do wear sweats, you know, for my “lay around” moments.

WA: As someone who has been involved in many comedy sketches, do you laugh out loud anymore? Or do you simply find comedy intellectually funny?

JLT: No, I don’t laugh anymore.  There’s just “paid smiles” in my life now.  Inside I’m dead.  It’s all been an act since Pineapple Express.

WA: Where can audiences see you next? What upcoming projects are you involved in?

JLT: I’ll be part of David Wain’s next movie, Wanderlust, that he wrote with my other comedy compatriot, Ken Marino.  That’s out in October I think.  I play a nudist winemaker who’s also an aspiring novelist.  Hopefully the indie I mentioned before with Walsh, Queens Of Country with my pals Lizzy Caplan and Ron Livingston, will be on some screens soon. I get to wear spanks in that one, playing a transsexual.  Then, this fall, I’ll be playing an oddball security guard in a show called Free Agents with Hank Azaria and Kathryn Hahn and a bunch of other really talented, funny people.  Very excited about all of it!

WA: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

JLT: Don’t forget to tip your bartenders, they deserve it.