霍莉·亨特（卫报）

Holly Hunter
Holly Hunter spoke at the London film festival about her controversial new film Thirteen, and an actor's responsibility to her character. Here's a transcript

* Sandra Hebron
* guardian.co.uk,
* Saturday November 01 2003

Sandra Hebron: Welcome. Thank you so much for coming here. You can see from the clips we've just shown [from Raising Arizona, The Piano and Thirteen] that Holly Hunter's career is not only extensive but also very versatile, and I don't think we could possibly touch on all the films let alone the theatre and television work that she's done. So we'll talk about some key films and after that we'll open this out to you to ask her about films that I've neglected to mention.

Now, before we talk about specific films, perhaps you could start by telling us how you started, whether acting was always a passion with you?

Holly Hunter: Well, I think that initially, I was most passionate about music, and particularly about playing the piano. I started playing when I was nine and I was obsessed with it, really. I wouldn't even go spend the night at a friend's unless they had a piano. But I didn't have the chops, the extraordinary talent to be able to play the piano professionally. But I've remained extremely involved in music for my whole life. I found acting when I was 14, when I got cast in the chorus in a high school play, The Boyfriend. In my high school, we did mainly musicals, so I just started doing nothing but musicals for years and loved it. I started doing repertory theatre in upstate New York when I was 15, went back when I was 16 and by that time decided that I really wanted to study drama seriously and go to an acting conservatory, called Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh. So that's where I went for four years, and moved immediately after to New York because it had always been my dream to be a professional stage actress in Manhattan; that was my goal.

SH: So when you graduated and you started working, you were doing so mostly in the theatre. And you met Beth Henley around that time, too?

HH: Yeah. I moved to New York in 1980 and I met Beth Henley, who's a marvellous playwright and who I have a real personal and professional association with, in 1982. I met her in a stalled elevator - we were the only two people in there - and she's been one of my very dearest friends since. We've collaborated on maybe eight different plays. So that relationship has been very fruitful for me. I made my Broadway debut in 1982 in Crimes of the Heart and then followed that with another play that she wrote called The Wake of Jamey Foster.

SH: And aside from all the work that you were doing with her, when you were first working in the theatre, did you have a very clear idea of the kind of roles that you were interested in, or were you just simply trying to get as much experience as you could?

HH: I was trying to get as much experience as I could. But very early on, I was always extremely particular. From the beginning, I was never desperate. I did other things for money; you know, the normal, boring stuff - I temped, I did waitressing. But I actually quit a play early on in my career - it was one of the first things that I ever got cast in, but I quit because there was something about it that I didn't like. I didn't think the director was the right guy to be directing it. So I've never felt that every situation was great for me and therefore I would have to stay. To me, being creative is a very fragile thing, the environment in which one can create is a very particular one, and somehow I've always felt the need to be very protective of that.

SH: You trained to be a theatre actor, that was your ambition. So could you tell us about how you made the transition to working in film? How did that come about?

HH: Raising Arizona was the major transition. I'd been doing theatre and Joel and Ethan Coen were casting Blood Simple when I was doing Crimes of the Heart in New York. And they happened to come and see Crimes of the Heart. It was a serendipitous thing. Crimes of the Heart had been running for a year in New York, and I was the first replacement in the original cast, so they came late and saw the play and met me the next day and offered me the role of the female lead in Blood Simple. And I couldn't do it because I'd already committed to doing Beth Henley's next play, The Wake of Jamey Foster. So they ended up meeting my roommate, and casting her instead. Frances McDormand.

[Laughter]

HH: So Fran and Joel and Ethan and me - well, Fran and Joel ended up getting married - they all became very good friends of mine. So in 1985, we were all living together in Silver Lake, just outside of Los Angeles, with Sam Raimi, who wrote Evil Dead. So it was Sam and Joel and Fran and Ethan and me, and Ethan's girlfriend - we were all living in this house. And Joel and Ethan had just finished the script of Raising Arizona, and they asked me to read it and said that they'd written this part for me and would I be interested in doing it? So that was the beginning of my feature film career.

SH: And they did write that part for you?

HH: Yeah.

SH: So did that mean that you had some kind of input into the script?

HH: No, no. The deal with Joel and Ethan when they write a script is, that's it. The script is magical, it's every single syllable. I mean, their dialogue is impeccable. It's not even that it's right, it's magic. And there's nothing in the world that you would ever want to change about their writing. I would never want to improvise a single line of theirs because the line reads like poetry. It scans beautifully.

SH: So that was your first entrance into the world of film acting. Very soon after that came Broadcast News. Did that come about as a consequence of the part in Raising Arizona? How did that happen?

HH: In fact I was doing nothing but plays at the time, then I did Raising Arizona and went back to the theatre and was doing regional theatre in Massachusetts. And a friend of mine was going up for this role [of Jane Craig] in Broadcast News. That was June 1986, and I'd done Raising Arizona but it had not come out yet. By December 1986 the role in Broadcast News had still not been cast. And I had been turned down - I wanted to audition for the role but had been told that I wasn't right. So six months later Jim Brooks, the director of Broadcast News, had still not cast the part. At this point, they were like "Let us see anybody. Just bring them on". So the floodgates opened and I got in to read for the part. And William Hurt was at the audition, which I thought was unusual. And Bill and I proceeded to read the entire script for Jim Brooks. My audition lasted two hours. And at the end of it, Jim said "I want you to come back tomorrow and meet Albert Brooks at my house". So I went to Jim's house and Albert Brooks opened the door with a bottle of champagne. And they just said "Congratulations, you've got the part, we start tomorrow".

[Laughter]

HH: And we started rehearsals on Monday and I almost had a nervous breakdown because I had very little film experience and I had to play a person who was smarter than Bill Hurt, and he's a very smart guy. I was extremely intimidated by the entirety of the experience of having landed the role but thinking that I might not be capable of doing it. It was the most afraid that I've ever been.

SH: But I was struck, watching it again recently, by what a great ensemble the four of you were - William Hurt, Joan Cusack, Albert Brooks, and yourself.

HH: That's never to be repeated. That was an extraordinary experience, and one regardless of the fact that it did happen to connect with a massive audience. It was one of those movies. But even without that connection, it was an unreal experience in my life.

SH: Talking about the more indie films like Raising Arizona that you've worked on and a film like Broadcast News which is a much bigger and more commercial film, is that a distinction that ever enters your head? Or are you just always looking for the best roles in the best films?

HH: I'm just always looking for the best stuff. And also, there are things I want to do that I can't get - they want someone else. Often, in the movie business, they need somebody who will garner box office because they need to pay for the movie. So the people who are in movies that make a lot of money are the people who most often get cast in studio pictures. In my career, I've never been a box office name. Granted a couple of my movies have made a lot of money but I'd do other movies which make very little money or they're not seen that much. Actors are beggars and gypsies, that's just the way it is. And in many ways, I take what I can get. But I do search high and low for stuff that interests me. And I'm very willing to read a script by a first-time director and a 13-year-old girl, made for no money and that pays me no money. I'm very willing to look into it.

SH: If you don't mind my saying so, it does seem that you have been very smart and savvy about knowing the directors you really wanted to work with and basically spreading the word that you wanted to work with them.

HH: That's happened to me a couple of times. One was Cronenberg, most specifically. David Cronenberg is a director who I've always wanted to work with, and I'd be very verbal about it. Like in a forum such as this, I would say his name, many times. And it got back to him.

[Cheers]

HH: And it didn't hurt that my agent called him once every six months to say "Yo, Holly wants to know". So at one point, the harassment worked and Cronenberg called and said "Okay, okay. Please be in Crash".

SH: And how was it with Jane Campion and The Piano? Were you approached for that?

HH: No. That was a movie that I campaigned for. And I was lucky in that some directors don't care for a campaign. Some directors prefer to dance the dance of hard-to-get. The seduction with the prey, and then eluding them. That's the truth, and that says a lot about what that director's dynamic is, if that appeals. In this case, it really appealed to Jane Campion that I pursued the role so fervently. And I really did because I'd never read a script with that kind of power, and actually, have not read one since. From page six, I wanted to do the part. And when I got to the end of it, I just felt that I would be devastated if I couldn't do it. And that happens almost never. But it was such a private investigation of the psyche of a person. It's still probably my most fulfilling experience. I really felt useful and used through the course of the film.

SH: But it must have been an incredibly arduous and challenging process to play that role. Are you someone who generally likes to do a lot of research and preparation? What's your way of working? Do you have a typical way of getting into a role?

HH: Not necessarily. For The Piano, I did a lot of work because it was absolutely necessary. I don't do sign language, and there was no sign language in 1850 - there was no sign language anywhere that was formal. There were alphabets but there was no American Sign Language or British Sign Language. There were elements that were already happening, so I had to make up a sign language. And I hired an American Sign Language interpreter, and she and I together created these signs that looked good in my hands that I felt I could master, so that I'd look like I'd been signing all of my life. And then I had to take piano lessons and learn the music that Michael Nyman, the composer, had written. So between those two activities, for about three or four months before shooting, I was engaged in a daily process of learning music and learning another language. And through those means, I felt that I was bringing the character out and that I was going more and more into that world. Just by virtue of the externals, by learning these two skills, I felt when we started shooting that I was ready. But in the case of Thirteen, I didn't want to do a lot of research. I wanted to do imaginary work. I wanted to just imagine myself in the situation that a mother like that could be in and what that would do, how that would provoke me.

SH: We'll talk more about Thirteen in a moment, but I just wanted to ask you this. Obviously, your role in The Piano was significant. You were winning awards and you were very visible as a consequence of that. What did that do to your career - did it mean more offers, different offers, what happened as a consequence?

HH: Well, I think that an Academy Award has a certain kind of business shelf life. People have different speculations but definitely for a couple of years, your price is raised and there are more plentiful offers. Which only makes sense - it is a business. And the Academy Awards is a business, it enhances everything when you win one. But I think the most significant thing for me was, one, it was presented to me by Al Pacino, which I just loved. And two, that it was given to me for a role and an experience that I felt was a profound influence in my life. I know this because I was nominated for The Firm that same year and I don't feel the same way about The Firm that I do about The Piano. So if I'd won for The Firm, it would have been a whole different deal for me. I never actually saw The Firm, so for me it would have been like... [grimaces]

[Laughter]

But always, an Academy Award enhances your sense of place in a community. It's something that not very many people have in the world, and it gives you a sense of yourself in a community that perhaps nothing else can. Because it is so well known, I think that it probably does permanently enhance an actor's self-esteem, somewhat. It's an honour into perpetuity. I think any actor would concur with that. There's no downside to it.

SH: And it's an important validation of what you do.

HH: Yeah. Actors do movies because you want to make a connection, you want an audience to recognise themselves in what it is that you're depicting. The portrait, you want it to be a reflection of some aspect of humanity that people understand, that they see in their own lives. And so, when a movie makes a connection like that, there's simply nothing better. And in some ways, an Academy Award does validate that actual hook-up.

SH: Thinking about some of the directors that you've worked with, like Jane Campion and Cronenberg, they have a sort of fearlessness, and you seem to have that quality, too, in your performances. Are there limits to that; are there things you wouldn't do?

HH: I don't know. There're plenty of things I've said no to, stuff that I wouldn't want to do. You'd have to be talking to me about a very specific thing. But there's no blanket rule for me.

SH: I wanted to ask you a little bit more about Crash. Not least because when it was due to be screened in the festival here, it caused a huge furore and there was a massive reaction and it was banned. Were you surprised by the level of response?

HH: Unbelievably surprised. I mean I was not surprised that the movie was deemed to be incredibly provocative and shocking because the book is, and the subject matter of sex and death and technology is an extremely potent combination. But I never expected it to be banned. I thought that was sad, actually. It was banned in London and Argentina.

[Laughter]

SH: It was eventually unbanned here. Don't know how it went in Argentina, though. Let's talk a little bit about Thirteen, because that's the film being screened during the festival. And another film that has, for slightly odd reasons I think, generated a degree of controversy. Could you say a little bit about how Thirteen came to you?

HH: Catherine Hardwicke, the director, offered me the role. I read the script and it was a very visceral experience. It's extremely raw, it was not a filled-in picture. It felt more like a feeling than anything else. And that's unusual for a script to communicate like that. It sort of declares itself, it comes at you. And the movie does, too. And that's unusual, for a movie to be able to have the same impetus on the screen that it has on the page. That's a great translation, because often things get Lost in Translation.

[Knowing laughter]

HH: So Catherine flew to New York, I had a few questions and some suggestions for minor rewrites - she did them in 24 hours and faxed them to me, and the next day I said yes. And we were shooting in a month and a half.

SH: And you have an executive producing credit in the film. What was your involvement on that level?

HH: I wanted to be involved creatively. I had no interest in the financial aspect of putting the movie together. But putting the movie together creatively, with casting particularly, I didn't want to have consultation. I wanted to be in on it. And I didn't want to have to thank people for being allowed to be in on it. I wanted it to be just, by virtue of my title, my involvement and responsibility in the movie, I wanted to be included in that process. So that was fantastic. And on the set, I wanted to have a slightly more valid voice for saying "Hold on, I have a question. Here's what I think". Once again, I wanted to not have to be grateful that I had that kind of input but for me to be able to have that input without apology. It was shot on a minuscule budget in a minuscule amount of time, and I wanted to be the one to always say "We're not shooting the schedule, we're shooting a film". I realised the pressure of having to move on, but I wanted to make sure that in moving on we were not leaving the scene behind, too.

SH: Now that you've had that experience, that kind of involvement, is that something that you would look to repeat in other films?

HH: It was a fantastic experience, to be involved in Thirteen at that level. So I would say yes, and it was very gratifying. No one was threatened by it. Catherine Hardwicke welcomed my input, and so did the other producers, and my point of view was very different from anyone else's on the movie. So it seemed very rewarding for all involved.

SH: I know that Catherine Hardwicke has a lot of experience in other roles in film-making, so to be a first-time director and to have Holly Hunter advising and being very involved, I can't imagine that being a bad thing.

HH: It was great. Catherine was terrifically prepared, absolutely as prepared as a first-time director can be. And it would have been impossible to do the movie without that. She could not have skated by on this. Not on the schedule that we were on.

SH: Were there any surprises for you in working with the younger cast members, particularly with the two young women?

HH: I was so used to working with adult actors who are very much in the realm of the scene before you do it, so there's a certain amount of focus in the room before you shoot. With the kids, there's no focus, no concentration. They just don't do that. They're very scattered, very impetuous, very spontaneous. They're on the phone, they're singing, they're having a fight with somebody, they're joyful. They run around and then they come to the scene, and it's incredible. Evan Rachel Wood was phenomenal in her ability to have access to herself in deeply emotional ways when she had been thinking and doing many other things right before.

[Laughter]

SH: I'm interested, too, in how you achieved the authenticity in the family relationships and the relationship between the two girls. Given that you shot it in such a short time, what were you doing off-set to make that so convincing?

HH: We had a week of rehearsal - granted, that's not a lot. For Broadcast News and for a movie I did called Once Around and a couple of other movies... and The Piano, we had a month of rehearsal, which is incredible. But this, we had five days, and once again, Catherine made full, 100% use of the time in a way that many, many directors do not. She really did not shy away from what she could accomplish with us in a week. And it was imperative that we did that. I mean, some movies I walk in, "Hi, nice to meet you", we get in bed and we do a love scene. And that does happen. That happened with me with Billy Crudup on Jesus' Son. Actors talk about that a lot, but it's not uncommon. And we could not have done Thirteen that way. It would not have worked.

SH: I think we should open it up to the audience now, or we'll run out of time. Please ask away.

Q1: A lot of American actors have been coming to the West End and generating a lot of hype. For instance, Jessica Lange and more recently, Matthew Perry in Sexual Perversity in Chicago. What's your view on this and would you consider coming to do a play in the West End?

HH: I have been offered plays in the West End and turned them down because I wasn't interested in the material. But I'd love to do a play here. It does depend on the situation with the play itself, the director and the theatre, if I felt that the theatre was appropriate for the play. But yeah, it would be very exciting because theatre in London is perceived differently than in New York. The audience is incredibly different - it's an audience much more comfortable with the classics and language. Of course it's commercially driven - they need to make their money - but it's not as commercially driven as Broadway theatre. Broadway is far less challenging for the most part.

There are exceptions, but... I was here a few months ago and I saw three Ibsens - one at the Almeida, The Lady from the Sea, and two in the West End, Brand and The Master Builder. And you know, this is an amazing thing. The only Ibsen that would come through in New York is probably A Doll's House. We've never heard of Brand, and Brand has been done repeatedly here. And all three plays were sold out when I saw them - that's a really encouraging thing. There was another play where there were three different productions in town at the same time here. That also wouldn't happen in New York because it's a riskier proposition. It's riskier because it's not subsidised and the really successful plays on Broadway are generally not very challenging fare. Really just for entertainment only.

Q2: Could you tell us something about how you like to work with directors? What are the processes you like to go through to bring out your amazing performances?

HH: Thank you. I've done movies where I work with the director not at all, where I work totally and completely alone. I did a movie like that called Living Out Loud, where I worked entirely by myself on the performance. I watched dailies religiously to chart the course of the performance, to see where I could do better, what I was missing, to see what needed to be toned down or brought up. It depends on my relationship with the director and how comfortable I feel with what the director is going for, what their approach is and what their thoughts are. That becomes known very early on, what the director's take is. And if that is different from mine, then I have to... I always feel that I am the advocate for my character. More than anyone else on the set, including the director. I'm there to protect my character, in a way.

There are so many things that an actor's inner ear has to be attuned to on a set. If somebody's asking you to do something that is a real compromise, or can you live with it? It happens almost every second right up to shooting: people are coming up and asking you if you can not do that, "Please don't turn the chair that way", "Don't cross your legs", "It'd be great if you never leaned up", or whatever it is to accommodate their job. Sometimes, these accommodations are great, they cost me nothing. But other times, I think, we may as well not photograph the scene if I do that. And so, I find myself being highly attuned to my own instrument in a hyper-vigilant way just to make sure that I'm not giving it all up so that there's nothing left at the end of the thing and I might as well not be there. I feel that that is the actor's responsibility and really no one else's, because no one else can know what your instincts are but you. At the same time, I do think that probably the most fruitful, rewarding relationship that I can have on a set is with my director. That is the relationship that, if it goes well, is the most cherished for me.

Q3: I loved your performance in A Life Less Ordinary. I thought it was a great film and you were hilarious. What was it like working with Danny Boyle?

HH: Fantastic.

Q3: And did you hurt yourself doing the stunts?

HH: No. He was really so much fun, and I had put it out there that I wanted to work with Danny because Trainspotting was so outrageous, it had a genius and an originality, kind of a breathless, breathtaking movie experience. I still remember how I felt when I left the theatre after having seen it for the first time. But he's a very playful director, very open, does not really judge actors at all. The set is an actors' playground, for lack of a better word. It was very free.

Q4: How about directing yourself?

HH: I often get asked to direct and I've never taken anyone up on it. It would be very interesting and I would learn so much. But it's a very confrontational job - I mean, directors are forced to confront themselves, and I don't think there's really a way to prepare for the pressure of directing. And I have seen quite a few good people crash and burn at the job. Nervous breakdowns, crying, screaming fits - people buckle, so it's always scared me. But it's intriguing. The thing that's always been missing when someone's offered me something to direct is, I've never yet said "Nobody can direct this but me. Nobody can express this piece of material the way that I can". I feel that way as an actress but I've never yet felt that way as a director, but perhaps it's because I've never done it.

Q5: But you could always then go back to acting.

HH: Oh absolutely. And I probably will do it at some point, just to learn something in that express amount of time.

Q6: Can you tell us a little about working with Richard Dreyfuss - you've worked with him twice already.

HH: Richard Dreyfuss and I did two movies together back to back. In fact, I've worked with very few people more than once and Richard's one of the only ones, certainly in film. I've worked with some people repeatedly on stage. Richard is one of the most intelligent people that I know, he is extremely well read, well educated, self-educated, politically involved, and he is involved in his community. He really walks the walk. He's a friend of mine to this day; I love Richard. I'd love to work with him again. He's a great guy and I admire him.

Q7: With Roe vs Wade, given the polarisation that the issue of abortion has induced in the States, did you have any qualms about taking the role of Jane Doe?

HH: It just seems that abortion rights never ceases to be a hot topic. It's a shame. It feels to me an anachronism. I mean, why are we still talking about this? Why is this not just a woman's right, period? I find it boring and very frustrating that it remains such a high profile subject. No, I didn't hesitate for a moment to take that part. I felt very strongly about Roe vs Wade, that it was a very honourable law that should not be compromised, certainly not today.

Q8: Since you started out in musical theatre in high school, and given the current vogue for movie musicals, would you consider taking part in one? And what part would you choose?

HH: I don't really sing. I was faking it in high school. I don't know, I haven't thought about that. I guess it would be fun to do an original musical - of course, if I could sing opera, I would love to do an opera. I would love to play one of those people who die suffocating from love, or where I tear off my gloves and throw myself off a bridge.

[Laughter]

Q9: Would you be prepared to get fat for a role?

HH: Oh yeah.

[Applause]

HH: Well, actually when I did this movie with Richard Dreyfuss I gained 25 lbs for the part.

Audience member: But you weren't fat. You were just normal.

HH: Ha-ha. It was really interesting because I had a really hard time keeping the weight on. I could lose eight pounds in one day. My body just didn't want it.

Audience member: Aw, you poor thing.

[Laughter]

HH: It was fun. And I think Renee Zellweger was so great in Bridget Jones's Diary. Did you guys buy her accent? Yeah, I thought she was really great, she looked fantastic, and she's doing it again. If it were a role as good as that, it would be a delight.

Q10: Have there been any roles that you've had to turn down because of scheduling or other commitments?

HH: No, I won't talk about those. I do not publicly display regret.

[Cheers]

Q11: I read a quote by James Brooks about working with you in Broadcast News, that you were shaking someone who wasn't performing at his level best, with tears in your eyes, trying to make them do better. I applaud you for this, and I just want to know what drives you to seek this perfection in your work?

HH: That's actually a true story. Well, I don't know. I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I still have this thing. I inherently knew it then, and I experientially know it still, that when you do a play you get another chance, but when you work on a movie, you don't. That chance will never come again, that moment's over. And it's always ironic to me that on a movie set, that there's all this build-up before you get onto the set - getting the lighting up, the sound levels, reloading film - and then they're ready for you, but there's no time for the actors. The actor has to take the time. The actor has to say "Please give me a few moments. I need 10 minutes. And please can we have the set quiet". And for me, it's been imperative that I take what I need.

But the difficulty in that is knowing what you need. Therefore you have to be constantly checking in - what is it, what's wrong, why don't I feel great, why don't I feel that this is the thing, the right thing, the next thing, the only thing. Sometimes it involves an acting partner, sometimes it involves myself. Sometimes it involves people who are standing in my eyeline, and you need to register that people are in your eyeline. Sometimes you make things okay for yourself, you think it's okay, and you don't want those people not to like you, so you don't want to put them out because maybe they'll start saying "Yeah, I worked with her and she had to have the set cleared. What a bummer".

But the deal is, if it makes it better for you, do it. That's not advice, that's my own self talking. I have to have it that way, other actors don't. But I just happen to know myself extremely well in a professional environment. I know what I need, and I'm able to identify it almost immediately because it feels imperative to me, it feels almost life or death because unless you're doing a Woody Allen movie, you're not going to get another shot. Or hey, he might replace you. So if you're doing the movie because you love to be doing it, then if it means pleading with someone or whatever, it means that I've given it a shot.

Q12: Is acting the best job in the world because you get to live so many lives in one lifetime?

HH: If you like it, it's the best job. It's got a lot of downsides but the upsides are that and it's so great to be making stuff up. It's so great to feel something evolving at every moment. I like the evolution, rehearsing, the privacy and secrecy and ritual of acting. I feel that it's a sacred thing, and I think our commercial society denigrates the sacredness of it. But I do, it's something to be approached with a sense of honour. Because what you want and hope for is possibility. Actors are showing people "This is possible". What could happen now, we don't know, but not knowing and the possibilities of that are very arresting to me, and very exciting. There's nothing better than working with a director or another actor who one, honours that as well, and two, has the chops to contribute.

Q13: I love your voice. Have you been asked to do the commentary on DVDs of your movies?

HH: You know, I don't like that, actually. I don't like the commentary. It feels ruinous for me. People do love to know behind the scenes stuff, specifics such as what was going on in that scene on that day but that's kind of like interference. It gets in between you and your experience of the movie. There's a third party in there. It's too much information. It takes you out. That's exactly what it is, it's commenting on an experience. When I'd much rather have a straight shot at the experience, with no judgement. I mean, if I'm watching sports, I might not mind commentary.

Q14: I recently saw the TV movie about Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs. Was it made with Billie Jean's full cooperation, and what was it like playing a living person?

HH: That was daunting, playing Billie Jean King, because I didn't play tennis. And she showed up and gave me a tennis lesson, actually. She forced me to take a tennis lesson from her and I was afraid, seeing as she was all hip to have me play her, right, but I figured I would shatter that enthusiasm once she got me on the tennis court. But in fact, she is a born teacher and she gave me some good tips. And she's a dear friend of mine now, so I guess I didn't ruin it for her too much. But yeah, that movie was made with her complete cooperation; she was thrilled about it.

Q15: Please could you talk more about making Crash with David Cronenberg, with that script and the cast - how was that experience for you?

HH: Well, I love to talk about Crash and Cronenberg. The thing that's remarkable about David... well, there are many remarkable things about him. I think he's one of the most important film-makers that we have. Definitely. Every single movie that he makes kind of reiterates that and revalidates that feeling that I have about his career. But he's the most private film-maker that I've ever worked with. You know that thing that I just said to you about commentary and interference? In a way, what David sets up as a director is the world. And his worlds are very, very specific and very small and dark and creative. He creates kind of a female world; to me, his movies are very female. And he says almost nothing. He allows utter and complete freedom. It's almost as though he has no judgement of his actors at all. He just casts you and then he watches what you do and then he puts the camera accordingly to document it appropriately. He knows his world. I've said before and it's true about him, he is not a tourist.

David doesn't visit different genres - he creates his own genre and then explores it for the rest of his life. Because he did, he started out in science fiction, in kind of splatter-horror and then kind of moved into his own dissection of... well, it's like you go to a video store and there's the Cronenberg section. It defies description, and it includes no one else but him. He's a deeply creative man, and a deeply private man. And on some level you have to be a private person to create.

SH: Which unfortunately is going to be the point at which we have to stop. But it's quite a nice note to end on. Thank you so much for coming to talk to us and for being so generous and articulate in talking about your work.