AFIFEST 2007 November 1-11



    

ADAM RIFKIN (LOOK)

By JOHN WILDMAN, Contributing Writer

As you are reading this, there is a very good possibility that you have a surveillance camera of some kind aimed at you - and recording your actions. The truth is, from the moment you step out of your home to the moment you return, you could possibly be the star of your own daily "show."And depending on your own personal obsession with home security, that could be a 24-hour, seven-days-a-week series. Adam Rifkin's LOOK makes us think about how much privacy we really have left. And after you see how that fact affects the intersecting mundane and sometimes tragic lives of the people he chooses to show us, it will certainly make you rethink how you behave throughout your day.

Does our ever-shrinking personal privacy disturb you or do you see it as an inevitable product of better technology?

We're caught on camera 200 times a day. In some instances this 'round-the-clock surveillance can provide a valuable service, like when cameras expose police brutality, or when they assisted in catching the London bombers. In some instances, they're bad and encroach on our civil liberties. Did you know that 37 states allow hidden cameras in public dressing rooms and public bathrooms?! Do you feel cameras should be allowed in public bathrooms? One's knee-jerk response might be to say no, but how about in public bathrooms in airports? We can probably guess what Senator Larry Craig's stance on that one might be. Ultimately though, it's not such an easy question once you start to peel the layers of the onion. Do I personally think surveillance cameras are unilaterally good or bad? That's an impossible question for me to answer. The debate is far too complex for me to summarize with a simple thumbs up or thumbs down. In either event, they're here, and they're everywhere, watching down on us from every shadow, every hidden corner, and whether we like it or not, we all just have to deal with them.

What steps did you take in directing LOOK to ensure that the film wasn't simply a gimmick movie or more than an exercise in experimental style? First and foremost, in writing the script, I completely threw out the notion of how it was going to be filmed. Yes, shooting an entire movie from surveillance cameras was where the germ of the idea came from, but for it not to be a gimmick that would grow tiresome in minutes. I had to forget about that while writing it. I had to write a script that I would be just as excited to shoot if I were filming it conventionally. It had to have characters I cared about, and storylines that were compelling.

What is the best thing about having your film at AFI FEST? Being in any way a part of the AFI's 40-year history of film appreciation and film preservation is an honor. That, and the cool T-shirt we get!

Who or what inspired you to want to make films? Growing up loving movies is what inspired me to want to make movies. My first love were monster movies, mostly the old Universal classics, Frankenstein, Dracula, The Wolfman, I guess I always related to the misunderstood monster. This eventually evolved into a love of all kinds of movies. I figured out pretty early on, maybe 5 or 6, that for a movie to exist, somebody had to be behind making it. Once I grasped that notion, there was never anything else I wanted to do. I spent my entire childhood torturing the other kids in my neighborhood, making them work on my little films. I must have made hundreds of them.

Did any one character warrant more screen time once you were editing the picture than you envisioned when you first began shooting it? No. I always saw the movie as a true ensemble piece and each story makes up an equal part of the film. Certain story lines seem to emerge more prominently for people because everybody relates to a different character or subplot. Depending on who you, as an audience member, connect with most is in direct correlation to what plotline seems to emerge as being more prominent.

Was it important to cast relatively unknown actors in the film? And if so, why? It was essential that I cast unfamiliar faces in every role in LOOK for the simple reason that I wanted the film to look like a compilation of actual surveillance footage. When casting it we were very specific with all the agencies that we didn't want any names, just good actors. Of course, wouldn't you know it, as soon as we said that, the agencies threw tons of names at us. Big names! Seems they had slipped the script to many of their famous clients convinced that if these actors wanted to be in it we would surely change our minds. We didn't, I had to stick to my guns or the film's believability would be ruined. Luckily I was working with producers who shared my vision. In most cases, if a director wanted to say "no" to an actor that adds value to a movie, that director would be fired.

How many times did you have to give John Landis a line reading for his cameo scene? No line readings necessary. He knew exactly how to play a pissed-off director.

If you couldn't make films, what would be your second career choice? Gigolo.

What was the last film that made you cry? Laugh out loud? The last film to make me cry: I recently saw One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest again at the AFI 40th Anniversary Night Gala. Ten classic movies were shown on 10 different screens, each introduced by that film's star or director. My screening was introduced by Jack Nicholson, himself. Incredible! That film always chokes me up. The last film to make me laugh out loud: Eastern Promises. I busted up when Viggo (Mortensen) plunged that dagger into that guy's eyeball. The shock was so unexpected, my first reaction was to laugh. Does that make me sick?

Popcorn or candy? Both! Salty and sweet, two great tastes that taste great together!

DVD EXTRA: Honestly, do you have security cameras at home? I do. Lots! Someday I'll show you my highlight reel.