Greek filmmaker Yorgos Lanthimos made his debut, “Kinetta,” back in 2005, but it wasn’t until his second feature, “Dogtooth,” that he earned attention on the international circuit. The lion’s share of that attention is rooted in “Dogtooth’s” strong reception at Cannes 2009: solidifying its bright future, “Dogtooth” took home the prestigious top prize of the Un Certain Regard (sidebar: we caught up with the the austere, deadpan and comically dark picture at TIFF; you can read our review here).
“Dogtooth” didn’t earn an In Competition slot in Cannes, but unlike the buzzed about titles that did (Lars Von Trier’s “Antichrist” and Gapar Noé’s “Enter the Void” among them), it feels like provocative art for which appreciation will only build as time goes on. It’s a film driven more by its probing of psychological ennui and social stigmas than by stylistic excess, and its longevity has already begun to come into focus as more than a year after its Cannes bow it’s still being talked about (right now it’s ranked on IndieWire as one of 2010’s best films).
The picture concerns a comfortably wealthy family obsessively cloistered away from the outside world. Dad goes to work daily like your typical domestic provider, but Mom stays home with their three young-adult children, who are brought up to believe the world beyond their front gate is extremely dangerous and are forbidden to leave the family grounds. “Dogtooth” is a bizarre social experiment: an attempt at breeding domestic obedience (which, at least in one sense, accounts for the film’s title) and an effort to understand what side-effects this extreme form of child grounding may induce.
We caught up with with Lanthimos recently to discuss the looseness of his process, the influence of the sci-fi genre on “Dogtooth,” and his affection for the work of some of the biggest names at this year’s Cannes film festival. The picture hits theaters in limited release this Friday (June 25).
Your debut is very much about movement and the interpretation of body language, whereas “Dogtooth” is more about spoken language, and how that’s interpreted. But both movies involve conceits that lead to some kind of violence. What is it about the themes in these films that attracts you?
Yorgos Lanthimos: Actually, you put it in the best way possible. I have a hard time explaining what the differences and similarities are between “Kinetta” and “Dogtooth,” especially to people that haven’t watched them. To me, [“Dogtooth”] is visually different. It’s a very physical thing for me, even if we’re dealing with language. The choice to deal with language comes from a practical place, from the specifics of the story. What choices would you make to solve these problems? What choices would the parents make to be able to hide things from the children? So language would be the primary means of communication and would be a very important one. That’s why language has a more important role in “Dogtooth.”
The key is that I work with people very physically; whatever it is that we’re doing, we never analyze the movie or the script or the roles or what we’re trying to do. I just find it’s the more real way of approaching [filmmaking], instead of intellectualizing. We have an idea, we have a place, there’s these people, and then what I try to do is place them in these situations and these places. That’s why both films are about movement and body language, in a way.
You say “Dogtooth” is very “visually different,” and it does have a distinct look. What was your inspiration for that visual style?
There’s really no inspiration. What I tried to do is work my way there. I don’t really know what the film is going to look like when I have the initial idea, or when we’re writing the script or even when I’m selecting the actors — the non professional actors. So I take it a step at a time and I try to work my way through the visual style organically, by working on it after the script, with the actors. Then I try to realize what’s the best way of shooting the film. So it comes late in the process. Sometimes too late; in “Kinetta,” the first couple of days I didn’t really know what I was doing, but after a couple days, I realized how that movie should look. I try to figure it out while working on it, rather than imagining something beforehand and trying to make things work to what I’ve imagined.
Which filmmakers do you admire that may have inspired your style in that sense? Are there any contemporary filmmakers whose work you really get excited about seeing?
I do have Robert Bresson and John Cassavetes in mind all the time. Having been asked this question many times and really not knowing what to answer, I think now I can say that these two make me really not be able to understand how they made it, and be inspired by that. But yeah, contemporary filmmakers…..I do watch [modern] films, but it’s mostly films and not filmmakers. I’ve enjoyed films by Apichatpong Weerasethakul, and I’ve really liked lately Cristi Puiu’s “The Death of Mr. Lazarescu.”
Where did the story for “Dogtooth” come from? Was it factual, fictional, or something that sprung out of some other place?
It was just an idea. I was wondering about the future of families, and if it’s something that should be like it is or maybe in the future they’d be extinct or there would be no need for families anymore. Then I was joking with friends that were having families and having children that maybe it will end and it won’t be like they know it, and I saw them getting really upset about it, and really defensive and serious. So that gave me the idea of these parents that, if something like that was about to happen or if they felt the danger of something like that happening, to what extremes would they go to protect that. That’s how the story came about.
I’ve read some people talk about the film as sci-fi. Is that something that you really wanted to flirt with, the conventions or visual style of some sci-fi films?
The idea is kind of a sci-fi idea, the initial thought behind it: “What if, in the future, there were no more families?” In that sense, [sci-fi] kind of stays with the story, although I didn’t really try to incorporate it in many ways in the film. I thought [making a sci-fi film] would involve many more things than necessary to tell this story, and maybe it would make it go into a different direction. I tried to stay away from that. But I guess it can be perceived [as sci-fi] by many people because you don’t have a sense of time in the film.
I’m trying to remember if there’s any objects that signify a certain time period…
There’s a sticker on a car that a couple of people have noticed. (Laughs.) To me it takes place in the present, but we didn’t go to any extent to justify that. It didn’t matter, after we got the story. We did try to keep things in the house dated to at least 20 to 25 years old, because they were things they would have in the house since the children were born — they wouldn’t be bringing new things into the house every now and then. That’s another clue, but it doesn’t mean anything really specific.
At Cannes ’09, there was an overriding theme of movies that were provocative in one sense or another — like “Antichrist” and “Enter the Void” — and in conversation I heard “Dogtooth” lumped into that. How do you feel about that trend and do you think it reflects a kind of mindset of world cinema at this moment?
Well, I have to say I don’t find my film very provocative. Especially in the sense of the other two films you mentioned. But I don’t know what that means exactly…maybe people are in a state that they need to show they are shocked by things? I don’t know exactly why this is happening. I can only speak for myself and I just did what I felt was necessary — to have people think about the things that I was wondering about and to keep a certain balance between the tragedy and humor in the story, and the violence in it. To not shy away from showing certain things that would make people realize what the whole thing is about. I just tried to maintain that balance, and not to show too much, not to be too much in people’s faces. But, on the other hand, not being shy about certain things — because we’re exposed to so many things these days and there’s no real reason to be shy. But I wasn’t trying to exploit that either.
Do you sympathize at all with the parents and their decision to keep their kids away from the outside world, or did you feel like their intention was more just to raise obedient children?
I can’t say I sympathize with them, but I do have that in the back of my mind — that they had the best intentions, although horribly stupid and unrealistic. I think to have them in such a beautiful environment — with a big house, a garden, a swimming pool — it shows that they’re trying to provide for their children what they thought would be best. Of course, everything is so tragic and so wrong that it can’t work, so I can understand that, but that doesn’t really justify them in any way.
Audience reactions to “Dogtooth” really differ. Some find it very real and sad, others find it extremely funny in a very dark manner. Were you trying to generate a response?
I’m pretty open to interpretation in general, and I try to make my films as open as possible so that people can engage and be active, and really think about them in their own terms and according to their own experiences and personalities and background and knowledge. What we tried to do was keep this balance between tragedy and comedy — and to me many of these scenes are funny — and to be able to laugh but then ask yourself if it’s okay to be laughing about these things, because they are also very serious. And I find that through the balance of tragedy, humor and violence and all these things…this is the best way to be really involved and to allow yourself to think about them rather than make a simply violent and tragic film which would much more guide you into thinking only in a certain way.
“Dogtooth” could also be read as symbolic of certain countries that censor their citizenship, or at least censorship in the media to such a degree that it’s dangerous. Is that ever a suggestion you were going for, or has it just been coincidentally ascribed to this film?
I wasn’t “going for” it in the sense of making this film and writing this script in order to convey that. But, as I told you, I really like to make open films: I think that, while you’re making [a film], you should be concentrated on the one idea that you had and really be faithful to that, and if you manage to make an open film, and allow people to get involved, then they could start thinking about all these different issues that come from that. The political side I understand…I’m very happy that this happens and people speak about totalitarian state or media . but we didn’t start making the film about [those ideas].
You’re also a theater director. What would you say are some key differences between directing theater vs. directing film?
It’s a very different thing (laughs). I guess there’s a sense of greater freedom in theater in terms of how far you can go with people’s behavior, Because there’s a certain acceptance that this is theater and not real life. It’s much more obvious that there’s an arrangement between the viewer and the people in the theater, whereas I find in film you kind of have to be grounded at some level. It doesn’t mean you have to make realistic films, but it works in a way that some things need to be truer. And of course it works very differently, the fact that you actually shoot something and the camera changes everything, that makes it very different. So the performances could be different…you could just shoot a person doing nothing, and that is transformed through the camera and through editing, and sound.
Do you have a preference between the two?
My first love is definitely cinema. That’s what I’ve studied and that’s what I was aiming for. Theater just happened by chance. But it was really helpful in finding the ways I can work with actors, because you don’t really get that much time with them when you’re making a film. It was really helpful having those experiences in theater.
Do you have any other ideas for films at this point, or movies that you’re thinking of getting involved with?
I’m writing another script with the same writer I wrote “Dogtooth” with. I’m hoping we’re going to do that quite soon. I’ve been traveling with “Dogtooth” for a year now, so it’s been a while since I was really involved with something. I would like to get down to it.
What’s the new script about?
Well, it’s quite a different story really. It’s mainly about death and substitution in a way. If you can substitute people that have died with other people and how difficult that can be. It involves the stories of many people, and I guess it has similarities with “Dogtooth” in its tone, because it’s quite dark as well, but is also funny and violet. It’s contradictory, like “Dogtooth” is.
I saw a video where you talked about how you like working with a smaller budget and having those constraints. But would you ever consider, if invited, making a “Hollywood Movie” in the United States?
Yes, I’ve been thinking about all these things, and I’ve had some talks as well, and I’m really open to it. I mean, I don’t want to stop making these films — these more personal films, in Greece probably — but I’m searching to find other projects that would be interesting for me to do. It would be a very different thing for me, and it would be very interesting — but it’s not like I want to move on to that. I’d like to do that as well.
That’s reassuring. Maybe they’ll set a Bond movie or something in Greece and you can do that!
(Laughs.) That could be fun.
“Dogtooth” hits theaters in limited release Friday, June 25. Watch this incredible trailer to get a better sense of the disturbingly funny, dark and odd tone of the film.