Fangoria Interview: Wolfman‘s Hugo Weaving Wishes Film Press Would “Get Their Shit Together”

A. Quinton — Aug. 24th 2009

hugo-weaving-wolfman

In a recent interview with Fangoria, Hugo Weaving talks about his experiences playing Scotland Yard detective Aberline in the new Wolfman movie. Weaving has consistently been one of my favourite actors (come on, the guy has played a drag queen, a murderous computer program and an ageless elf king). In this exclusive interview he talks about bringing life to a character that wasn’t in the original 1940’s Wolfman, his enthusiasm for a well-written script, and what it was like to work with (and be a subject of) special effects artist Rick Baker. He also comments on the negative effect that press and distribution delays can have on the public’s enthusiasm for a film– something we’ve all seen with the repeated delays The Wolfman has been subject to. But with the recent trailer generating a lot of excitement, The Wolfman is starting to generate some positive buzz again– hopefully that will only increase as the February release date approaches. Thanks for the link, ArcLight!

  • Roukwolf

    I don’t know much about Weaving at all, but he won my respect with his opening comment:

    “I like things that are well written. If the script is good then I’ll enjoy it. If the script is bad or loose or silly then I can’t get into it. However, I think genre pictures such as horror films should be allowed to have a sense of freedom in the writing. But sadly I think genre pictures tend to be looked down upon or overlooked as serious pieces of art. The western, the musical, action films, horror films, fantasy films; I mean they are the founding and starting point of great American cinema yet even though commercially successful and a lot times critically well received, they are never given the proper respect they deserve just because they entertain. There’s a weird resentment toward escapism in intellectual circles which not only happens in film but theatre, too.”

    This alone is a good starting point for a discussion about what art (specifically the horror/terror genre) is or is supposed to be. I enjoy lycanthropes getting limelight as much as the reader probably does, but I’m caught up on Weaving’s “escapism in intellectual circles” comment. There is certainly an escapist crest to the huge wave of movies that are released every year, and I think that’s due to two main reasons:

    1. Money.

    2. Escapism and the sensations it instills is like a drug. It takes you out of this world, but it doesn’t really give you much to bring back once you touch down on the runway again. Hence, the crest has to continue and subcultures need to be maintained like faithfully running top-level engines. In this respect, I think that movie viewers and makers sadly put too much stock in art without realizing its limitations. So what are artists and art-lovers to do? I think that the best movies / books / whatever have been created by people willing to reach outside their discipline and personally confront the issues of death, love, mortality, origins, and God. All good artists from the Starbucks-sipping Shakespeare to the sarcastsically punk-rock Twain have done this in their own way. Even George Lucas did it in his heyday, and Ennio Morricone seems to practically embody it.

    Damn. Well, before I conclude this unintentinonal sermon, I suggest acquainting yourself with Morricone in “The Mission” and his classic “Ecstasy of Gold” piece!