Oak Street Films

August 28th, 2008 by Jarrod Whaley — Interviews

Almost immediately after I finished writing my review of Alejandro Adams’ new film Canary–which, again, is in the final phases of post-production as of this writing–I decided that it might be enlightening to conduct an interview with one of the principal individuals who worked on the film. While an in-depth discussion with Adams himself is certainly in order (and in fact is likely to appear here in the relatively near future), I found myself particularly drawn to the idea of speaking with Carla Pauli, who plays the film’s leading role. Hers is a very subtle and nuanced performance, and it’s almost impossible to imagine a film like this working without that subtlety. Ms. Pauli was kind enough to respond to my questions in spite of the fact that she had no idea who I was, thanks in part to the urging of Adams. Her responses will be of interest, I think, not only to the (future) audience of the film in general, but also to other actors and to those directors–myself included–for whom the personal side of an actor’s process remains, to a large extent, a sort of mystical enigma.

Read the full text of the interview after the jump.

Jarrod Whaley: How familiar were you with Alejandro Adams and/or his films when you were cast in Canary? Had you seen Around the Bay?

Carla Pauli: When I met Alex I didn’t know his work, but I had a good feeling about the whole thing. Something told me that this project was worth giving a try. Our first meeting was at the audition, which was somewhat unconventional, I guess you could say. I could tell right off the bat from the way the camera was flying around the room that there was something unusual about all this. We later met at a café in the Metreon in San Francisco, where he explained to me the basic things I needed to know. It was really kind of funny because he said that the story would kind of develop itself…and that my character, although the lead, would not be speaking. I think that was the best part of the whole proposition. He also talked briefly about Around the Bay, the trailer to which I had seen on the Web. After putting the audition experience and the trailer to the other film together, I thought, this could be really awesome.

JW: The character you play is, I think, not only the “lead,” but in fact the single element of the film which ties it all together, and is in many ways the key to its structure–yet as you just mentioned, this is accomplished in spite of the fact that she doesn’t have any dialogue. What kind of preparation did all of that require on your part?

CP: I prepared absolutely nothing. Alex gave me nothing to prepare; he just said “show up.” So I did. I think all the actors got the same notes.

Alex had explained to me in our meeting that my character would be the only recurring character. She would be in all the scenes, but she’d always be on the outskirts. People would be aware of her, but not acknowledge her. Before production began, and even after, I really wondered how it was all going to work. I’ve got to say, I really didn’t believe him when he said that it would. How could I be a part of the film and not interact with a single human being? It went against everything I knew or studied about acting. I didn’t know anything about the scene with Chloe until the last minute, so for all I knew, the character would be alone throughout the movie.

JW: Not only doesn’t the character talk, but there are also long stretches where she doesn’t particularly do anything either. It must have been difficult for you to see what Alejandro was going to do with that kind of footage. While you were shooting those scenes, were you worried that they’d come across as “boring”? Did you feel an urge to try to “spice things up” a little?

CP: Absolutely. Especially in the beginning. He was basically saying, “Here’s your uniform, go in the van and live in there for a while. We’ll let you know when you’re done.” I was really afraid that it was all going to be so boring that Alex would just say, “You know what? I made a mistake. You can go home now.” I mean, I’d have to go into the van and just sit there and look around at all the stuff around me–which wasn’t much. So I started looking out the window, made my bed, unmade it, played around with little specks on the rug, anything. Then I just sat. The only interesting things that could happen were in my head, but I had no one to tell them to. Then slowly I started to get some “friends” in the van. That made it much easier. I finally had somebody to communicate with.

JW: It sounds to me like Alejandro might have been trying to get you to act that way–bored and listless–without explicitly asking it of you.

CP: Yes, I think that was his evil plan all along. It would have been hard to convey this idea, especially since there was no script; he just had to show me.

JW: Did it seem at the time like he didn’t have a plan at all, or was it more like you knew that he had one but wasn’t always sharing it with you completely?

CP: There was definitely a plan. You could see it when he was holding the camera. He never seemed scared or unsure at all. It was completely the opposite; he definitely knew what he wanted to get, he just didn’t share much of it, except with his conspiratorial camera man, Ali.

JW: Being a director myself, I know that an actor doesn’t want to be handed a character that is too rigidly defined (either on the page or in the director’s mind), because then there’s nothing for an actor to do. At the same time, an actor needs some amount of focused direction or else he or she is lost. How much of the character was there before you became involved, and how much of it is your creation? In other words, how collaborative was the process?

CP: I think that the “character” is just me. It’s me at my most introverted. And I can be very much that, which is why I guess Alex wanted me for the part. Alex created the world in which I lived and that’s it. As I became more comfortable in my “role” Alex would set up another twist or situation for me to deal with.

JW: Your performance seems completely natural and effortless, almost as if you aren’t acting at all. You must have been able to relate to the character on some personal level to have played her so convincingly–but this is a character who goes around chopping out people’s organs with almost no visible display of emotion. Did it feel strange or disturbing to see some version of yourself connected with this character?

CP: It felt kind of funny, actually. People do whatever it is that they do. They do it for long enough and it just becomes something that they do. Sure, even ER doctors are sometimes disturbed by what they see, even when they see it all the time. They are not disturbed in the moment, though…it’s only haunting in retrospect. I think that for my character, everything is retrospect. Morality, or a sense of right and wrong, is not present for her in the way most people develop it, because there are no parameters to guide it. She only knows what feels good and what doesn’t. She looks forward to “meeting” people. And once she has done her job, she can interact with them without their rejection.

That was a very freeing feeling for me–to be around people and not be tied down to any social bounds and not to be afraid of any kind of rejection. What she did–take their organs–was not disturbing; it was just something she did because that’s what she did. The question of whether that was good or bad was not an issue for her.

JW: Was it an issue for you, though?

CP: Did it disturb me personally? Only in retrospect. Sometimes it would take me a few days to realize what had really happened, what I was making. It was kind of scary to look back on.

JW: Did any of your own psychological response to the violence in the material find its way into your performance?

CP: I don’t think so. Only in the scene with Chloe in the van. I think that was the hardest, because she’s a child. Making a movie is a game, but it’s hard to know if this child knows this is a game, and I don’t like the thought of being responsible for that. It also felt like for the first time, the character was no longer free.

JW: I wanted to ask you about that scene, and since you’ve mentioned it I guess now’s as good a time as any. It comes right at the end of the film, and like you’ve said, it’s probably the closest thing to a direct relationship between your character and another that we are explicitly shown. I don’t want to give anything away, particularly since almost no one has been able to see this film yet–suffice it to say that the scene consists of your character playing innocently with a little girl. There’s almost a kind of Frankenstein feel to it (though you’re obviously a lot cuter than Karloff). Did that moment redeem the character for you in any way?

CP: I think so. There was definitely a sense of responsibility and an urgent need to keep this child safe, in the psychological sense. That grew both out of me and the character.

JW: What was the shooting of that scene like? It felt very intimate, and I can’t imagine that there was a big crew hanging around.

CP: Like I was saying earlier, it was sort of sprung on me without any warning. Alex likes to do that. He knew I’m not comfortable with children, which I guess added to the need for connection between the two characters. There were five people in the van, which in comparison was pretty crowded. I believe it was also one of the last scenes we shot.

JW: Did Alejandro direct you differently with Chloe there?

CP: He did try to guide me a bit more through that scene. I was really sort of at a complete loss on how to interact with Chloe. But once we figured out a language, we were sort of on a roll. It was still a bit rickety, but we managed.

JW: Another scene involving your character that really stands out for me is the one in which she returns to the Canary Industries offices to drop off a cooler full of organs. All of the other employees are laughing and joking around and generally making asses of themselves, but your character sneaks into the scene completely unnoticed. There is literally no personal connection between your character and the others, and I think that’s the moment where we realize that your character is where the film’s heart is. How much of that did you understand before and/or during the shooting of that scene?

CP: I was pretty much in tune with what was going on by then. It had taken me a while but I eventually was able to piece enough together to see what was going on outside of me. That was one of the most fun scenes to shoot because I finally had something to play with. I was never allowed to get that close to people before, so it was a nice treat. Whenever I directly confronted someone, they tried to avoid me and not acknowledge me like their life depended on it. I felt pretty powerful.

JW: The character is very sympathetic (in the sense that we can easily relate to her) in that scene. She seems sort of vulnerable and lonely, but it’s not at all overblown or maudlin. What is it about that scene, do you think, that makes it work without overplaying its hand?

CP: Loneliness is a universal feeling. Not a single human being has ever not felt lonely; it is the human condition. But I think maybe it’s the “activeness” of the scene that makes it work. The fact that she tries, that she thinks this is the only place where she has a role. This is where she “works” just like everybody else who is there. She feels that she has something in common with these people. And every time she walks through those doors she hopes or expects to have that acknowledged, so she hangs around waiting for it and it never comes.

JW: It’s fascinating to hear you express verbally what was going on in the character’s mind there, because of course we don’t get that in the movie. I mean everything you’ve just said is there in the scene, but your saying it here just makes it that much more clear. It’s kind of odd that I’ve seen the movie (at least a relatively complete cut of it) and you haven’t yet, isn’t it? Given that, how happy are you in general with your performance? Will the project be too abstract for you to make that judgment until you’ve seen the film?

CP: I have my own ideas about what it will end up looking like, but I’m also completely comfortable with the fact that it will most likely be something completely different. When you’re acting for a camera, you have to just trust the people around you. It’s very hard for me to tell if my “performance” was good or not [ed. note: the "ironic quotes" there are Carla's own]. If I helped to tell the story effectively and truthfully, then I have done my job. That’s all I ask from myself. And I think I did.

Anything can always be better, and if something can be done better, then it wasn’t good enough. But I think that’s an overly logical point of view to adopt in discussing an art that has very little science to it, at least from the actor’s perspective. Plus, if I allowed myself to think that way I’d just as well shoot myself.

Tags: acting, actors, alejandro adams, canary, directing

If you liked this post and would like to be notified when new posts appear in the future, please consider subscribing to this blog's RSS feed. You may also get all new posts emailed to you automatically.

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 28th, 2008 at 5:28 pm and is filed under Interviews. The comments left in response to this post have their own RSS 2.0 feed. You can make a comment, or trackback from your own site.