Shane Meadows Interview 28/09/2004

[halfpint]

Wouldn't mind seeing Shane and Ewan McGregor on a project.

[RydCook]

chromebaby said:

From the interviews it seems to have been more to do with lack of artistic control than the actors' egos that hamstrung OUTITM.

Agreed, i think it was just the attitudes of the actors didn't help. It wasn't the defining thing that made Once Upon A Time... not as good as it could have been, it was a mix of things.

[Patty Dawes]

So what did people think of his take on Mike Leigh then?

[Gareth]

I'm yet to see any mike leigh films, can you recomend what I should watch in what order?

[anonlytwin]

andyneilwright said:

So what did people think of his take on Mike Leigh then?

well, mike leigh wasn't working class- i think his father was a doctor- but he was brought up in a working class area, so he definitely will have had some experience of working class culture... however i do agree with shane that his films reflect no insider knowledge of working class experience, the same could be said of his depiction of all social groups though... i find leigh films can be quite humourous but this humopur is very cynical and sneering and full of stereotype, which may have some appeal to some people, but its not for me

[Patty Dawes]

garethbowler said:

I'm yet to see any mike leigh films, can you recomend what I should watch in what order?

I would start with Vera Drake and go backwards - for my money Torpsy Turvey and Secrets and Lies are really great films

[Patty Dawes]

anonlytwin said:

andyneilwright said:

So what did people think of his take on Mike Leigh then?

well, mike leigh wasn't working class- i think his father was a doctor- but he was brought up in a working class area, so he definitely will have had some experience of working class culture... however i do agree with shane that his films reflect no insider knowledge of working class experience, the same could be said of his depiction of all social groups though... i find leigh films can be quite humourous but this humopur is very cynical and sneering and full of stereotype, which may have some appeal to some people, but its not for me

Interesting. I really like his work but can understand why it's not with everyones taste. My understanding of his background was that it was pretty rough (Jewish family in 50's salford) but may be wrong about that.

I thought Vera Drake captured perfectly an insider knowledge of that class at that time.

I think Mike Leigh does create a slight detachment between character and audience but I don't think it's through lack of knowledge I think it's a choice, so the audience ask different questions.

Sometimes people will watch a film and say that character is just like me, or has aspects like me where as I think with Leigh's films your supposed to feel 'I know someone like that character.'

Sometimes by looking at the ugliness of others we are forced to address our own. Does any of that make sense?

It's what makes films like Abigails Party work so well.

I've heard some people say they find some of the performances over the top - I object to this. You should have seen the weirdo I saw on the tube on Monday. If you put him in a film a guarantee someone would shout 'over the top - not real'

I think Paddy's performance in RFRB has the same level of 'theatricalness' as some of the performances in Mike Leigh films. But it's real and you buy it.

I know no one has said anything about OTT performances yet - but this is a pre-emtive strike!

I can totally understand why watching Mike Leigh made Shane realise there was a gap in the market, because they kind of go to the same place for inspiration but then look at it and present it in a completely different light.

I think they are both great. i like listening to your guys opinion on him though (Mike Leigh I mean - I think I know peoples opinion of Shane)

[Bill Edwards]

I like some of Leigh's films, I've not seen them all, but they do have a very different feel to Shane's movies.

For me, they don't possess that lightness of touch or intuitive quality that Shane's work does. In fact I'd go as far as to say that Leigh's work has a stagey, theatrical feel to them, as if they are adaptations of stage plays. Which is interesting because, as far as I'm aware, they are born out of an improvisational process that is comparable to Shane's methods. They also lack that cinematic, 'big picture', 'big canvas' quality that Shane's work has in abundance but which doesn't overshadow the stories or characters.

Definitely check out Vera Drake. It is a great film. If you want an unintentional laugh, watch Naked. I was giggling like a fool by the end. It's just SO relentlessly miserable that it comes out the other side and becomes side splittingly hilarious!

[anonlytwin]

hi patty dawes, you are much better versed on the films of leigh than i am. and yep, he was brought up in a fairly rough part of salford, but within a very middle class jewish household. i wonder if being an outsider influenced his perception of his later subjects? i assume it did. i've had the chance to see high hopes, naked, secrets and lies and career girls and a couple of his tv films- meantime and abigails party. and i must admit my main grievance is the way others ( and this probably has absolutely nothing to do with the way poor old mike leigh choses to describe his own films) label leigh as a social realist director and place him in the same broad catergory as loach and ken clarke... for me he is nothing of the sort.. so, all in all, my criticism of his films is fairly subjective because it's overwhelmingly dominated by that viewpoint. that said, i don't really like his films, even when i seperate them from the social realist form, i remember watching abigails party at 15- long before i had ever heard of social realism- and wanting to throttle every one of the characters.. but hey, at least he had an effect and he has contineud to have that effect ever since. in this sense, i agree with what you say about, 'I know someone like that character', but he forces too much distance between audience and character for me to ever really want to learn anything from most of the characters. they turn me cold and leave me thinking- where is the love? i imagine that if leigh created the same level of tenderness and passion within the portrayal of his characters as meadows does, then leigh wouldn't be achieving what i assume he was intending to achieve...

however, on another note: leigh said on the south bank show, that 'all art was the synthesis between improvisation and order' and that really resonated with me, so i guess i should try some of his other films based in other periods, in which the ugliness and lack of spirit in some of the characters doesn't upset me quite so much

[halfpint]

What do people think of Pawel Pawlikowski's films in comparison to Shane's?

[jill]

Afraid I haven't gotten around to watching the interview posted by Ryd yet (splendid contribution to the site Ryd btw), so this is in partial ignorance...although I've read somewhere (maybe here) that Shane has made some less than flattering remarks about Mike Leigh. I see where you're coming from with the snide, cynical aspect of Leigh's films Anonlytwin, but on balance I would personally rate Leigh pretty highly.

I hated Naked. Sure, I see that it's a commentary on Thatcherism, hence it's dark, bleak, post-industrial feel and message. David Thewlis put in a great performance, but his character was so unremittingly arrogant and misogynist that I was really alienated by the film. Maybe that's the point, but even when viewed as social commentary (that shouldn't be taken personally ), I didn't think it was profound stuff and don't get why it's so hyped up in some quarters. Likewise, I hated Career Girls, partly because of the way that Leigh represented the two main characters (see below), but mainly because it was just unforgivably dull.

BUT, having got those gripes out of the way, I think Leigh's done some marvellous work. I think you’re partly right about Leigh’s characters being less warm and endearing than Shane’s, but in a way that’s the point imo. To my mind, Abigail’s Party is one of the greatest bits of TV EVER. It’s the fact that Steadman’s character Beverly is so relentlessly awful that make’s her compulsive viewing. It’s a fantastic piece of social observation and a pretty cruel, but very funny piss take of wannabe aspiring social climbers. Nuts in May is very funny-the reprimand to the smoker-‘if I was to cut open your chest, take out your lungs and show them to you, you’d be appalled’-still makes me chuckle (saddo that I am).

But, I think what I really like about Leigh is that he creates central roles for women in many of his films (which is still pretty rare among male film makers). True he does have a tendency to play to the women as vulnerable/victim stereotype to win over the audience (eg Secrets and Lies, Vera Drake, Life is Sweet) and I’d like to see a bit more nuance in some of the characters, but that said, he creates strong female roles too (Roxanne/Hortence) and, characters like Cynthia show that Leigh can do warm and sympathetic: I’ve seen Secrets and Lies at least half a dozen times and it still makes me cry. Trying not to get on my soap box here, but I also think he was quite brave to make a film like Vera Drake, which had a big US release and distribution.

I’m not really sure about this ‘you’ve got to live it to understand it’ line. It works brilliantly for Shane; but is it impossible to produce insightful stuff if all you can do is empathise? One for debate I suppose, but personally I’d say ‘no.’

[anonlytwin]

jill said:

I’m not really sure about this ‘you’ve got to live it to understand it’ line. It works brilliantly for Shane; but is it impossible to produce insightful stuff if all you can do is empathise? One for debate I suppose, but personally I’d say ‘no.’

On reflection i'd also say no Jill... i'm pretty sure that many wonderful films wouldn't have happened if there was a 'you've got to have lived it to film it' rule (my life would have been far less enjoyable if gladiator had never been made) ... but, it does help sometimes? and it is very interesting the way a director like loach (whose work has always appealed to me) has changed his approach slightly since the emergence of people like oldman and meadows and through his work with paul laverty who was a little bit more familiar with life in a desperate environment (e.g. greenock) he is imo much less of a polemicist these days and i believe this is for the best!