IN CONVERSATION WITH CHRISTOPH WALTZ

interview TIMOTEJ LETONJA
words NATALIE-ANNE GAL

Christoph Waltz, a face so many of us recognize from cinema screens, has long captivated audiences through his unforgettable collaborations with Quentin Tarantino and his haunting performances in the James Bond films. As part of our series of interviews with the cast of the new Frankenstein movie, we were thrilled to speak with him about his views on the film industry, the creative process, and the ever-evolving relationship between artist and audience.

images courtesy of NETFLIX

You’ve previously worked with director Guillermo del Toro on his adaptation of Pinocchio. How did it feel to reunite and collaborate with him again?

Different, because Pinocchio I was a voice and he was an image on the screen when we did the recording. So now it was inevitable that we ran into each other in the flesh. I've known Guillermo before and for a while and this process was probably one of the most joyful and laid back shoots that you can have without the negligence of dropping your attention and focusing on what it is that you're supposed to be doing.

Your character comes across as quite mysterious, we don’t know much about him yet. How would you define him personally and what can you tell us about him? Were there any real-life figures or historical inspirations you drew from while shaping the role?

No, I didn't draw from them, but yes, it's unavoidable to think of certain oligarchs who believe because they are richer than most other people, they are entitled to more than other people. And especially in this context, when it comes to health and life and illness, why would a rich person claim to have more rights than someone who can't afford it. 

You’ve starred in numerous period films, exploring many different eras. How do you personally connect with the gothic? What draws you to it, and how did you approach portraying a character within that aesthetic and time period?

Authenticity is a little bit of a front – because how can we be authentic if we don't really live in the time? We can just project our ideas. We read, go to the museum, we use whatever source we can get our hands on to get an image, an idea of the period. It will always be our perspective. It's unavoidable. So the claim to authenticity is a little hypocritical – it is how we would perceive the era. That's more correct, because that's really what we see on the screen. I'm sure that the elegant Victorian times were much dirtier than we would like them to be. In every respect, by the way. Then again, we come back to imagination at this point.

image courtesy of NETFLIX

You’ve previously described filmmaking as a “living process,” something that constantly shifts and evolves. Did you feel that this production, an adaptation of such a classic story, gave you the space to shape and form your character in your own way?

It was not a new discovery of mine that filming is a process, everybody knows that. I wish it would be a little more in the constant awareness of people who are involved in making movies, that yes it is the result of the process. You cannot just leapfrog over the process straight to the result and say: “this is what we need, this is what we get, this is what we want, and this is what we sell” – because that's what it comes down to. You have to live through it and take care of all the details, and maybe if you're very lucky you get to a result that is out of your control.

Your character carries the weight of an illness in silence for much of the film. How did you approach portraying something so deeply internal, making the audience feel it without revealing it too soon?

I'm afraid today the approach to watching a movie veered off the direct and immediate way, now the industry tries to raise interest by pretending to give the audience an insight in how it's made. I personally am of the conviction that it's none of the audience's business. On the contrary, I think it distracts from actually watching what's on screen because that's what the audience's task is, let alone privilege, that they project themselves onto the screen, not onto behind the screen. So I find it counterproductive when actors explain their characters because all of a sudden I impose my view on you and I tell you what to see. I want you to see yourself.