In 1965, Stanley Kubrick assembled
a brilliant cast & crew as they embarked upon what has been heralded
as one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time. Three years later
the production ceased and 2001: A Space Odyssey hit the
theatres. Jack Reher recently had the opportunity to ask star Gary
Lockwood a few questions.
Jack Reher: Hmmm…where do I begin? Mr. Lockwood—if Stanley
Kubrick was alive today he would…?
Gary Lockwood: Definitely he would be preparing a picture
of some kind --With the real possibility that it would be Napolean.
We had discussed that over several years. In detail… we discussed
what would be the best way to go about it… I mean it's all guess but
that would be my bet.
JR: What
do you think he’d have to say about the current selection of films
in our cinemas?
GL: Stanley
was a very unique person so it's very hard to speculate that.
JR: You’re no stranger to science fiction. In fact, you did
an episode of Star Trek before embarking upon 2001. What was it like
working on the original series?
GL: Well,
it was really kind of humorous since I did the whole thing blind. It
was a dreadful job from the physical point of view, painful on the
eyes. Those contacts sucked. With today's technology it would be a
much easier task. I was sadly mistaken about the future of that
project…I had no idea it would become such a cult phenomenon.
JR: Do
you think the Star Trek franchise has run its course? Or is there
life in it now that JJ Abrams has signed on to direct the next
installment?
GL: I
have no idea. There are always new people who seem to be interested
in Star Trek.
JR: 2001
is quintessentially one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made. At
the time it came out, people seemed to have been divided regarding
Kubrick’s vision and the film itself. What was that like?
GL: Um.
I was a bit apart from the crowd on that one. I thought it was one
of the all time best things I'd ever seen. Obviously I had an axe to
grind since I was in it…and I …I was quoted as saying "it was one
of the best films ever" and in a derisive manner at that… and my
rebuttal to that is: I just came back form a trip to Australia where
I was on a 3 week lecture tour talking about the movie with Kier
Dullea. I've never been on any film that did that. None. Not even my
pictures with Elvis. That says something. Don't you think?
JR: Of
course. It says quite a bit. How about the process of the film
itself? Divulge anything and everything you desire that no one
knows.
GL: I
was dating one of the secretaries. No one knew that.
JR: Ha! What
was your experience like as Kubrick directed you?
GL: I
don't recall him ever actually directing me. But then, the good ones
don't do much of that… that will just piss everyone off…that's the
way I feel about that. I think the better directors make most of
their decisions in the casting. After all, when an actor appears on
screen and he or she looks right and carries him or herself right
for that particular character that's the bulk of the work right
that. I'd like to quote one personal experience of … he cast me in
the TV version of Bus Stop the old Marylyn Monroe and Don Murray
movie… he said "when you walked in the room, you were Bo Decker"
then he said he thought "now if the guy can just talk." As I've told
my daughter Samantha once-- it's just a matter of the right time on
the right day.
JR: I’m
sure the material was dense for your first read, but what was your
reaction to the script for 2001?
GL: It
was not a normal script. In the sense of what we consider a
screenplay, it was not a normal script. It was more like a headline
at the top of the page and then the rest of the page was blank. We
pretty much filled in the dialogue along the way. And the movie on
occasion followed the meanderings of our improvisations. What
remained a constant was the geography of the set.
JR: In
hindsight, did you ever think the film would become such a benchmark
and cinematic phenomenon that it has turned into?
GL: Absolutely.
My answer to that is a very simply one: You have two situations
running parallel that met in the brilliance of this film: one was
the genius of Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark and two Science
Fiction. Up until 2001 there had never been such an astute science
fiction film. There's been some nice science fiction since then but
it's normally based on cowboys and Indians. And if nobody gets that
then they probably shouldn't be reading this article anyways.
JR: You’ve
been a part of some great television series over the years. From
Bionic Woman to Gunsmoke to Mission: Impossible to The Six Million Dollar
Man. What are your thoughts on the current crop of television?
GL: I
dare say I don't watch it. I really don't it's not my thing… I like
movies. So does my kid.
JR: What’s
your favorite show on television right now and why?
GL: Well…
admittedly I did watch the Sopranos. I first saw Gandolfini in True
Romance and thought.. "Alright… this guys' got some stuff". So yeah
I like that.
JR: Regarding
films of today in comparison, well, there’s no real comparison to
“back then”…but the quality seems to be going down and audiences
don’t seem to have the attention span for a slow burn of a
film-going experience anymore. Am I correct in that assumption?
GL: I
absolutely concur with your assumption. But I do believe that there
is a real reason for everything. And I believe that MTV type
filmmaking undermines story. But, there are exceptions as in Kill
Bill 1 and 2 -- great characters and a lot of fun to watch the story
unravel …absolutely brilliant characters. I have an old sort of
extremely left winged writer friend of mine who said to me they used
to site around and think of great characters and the stories would
kind of write themselves. I think that's pretty cool. Don't you?
JR: Most
definitely! What’s your favorite science fiction film of all time?
GL: That's
a split decision "2001" and "Blade Runner" are my runaway favorites.
JR: I
love Blade Runner…good stuff there. Do you think the genre is
slowly dying? The current slate of sci-fi films haven’t been
performing that well. Sorry, I don’t consider The Transformers to
be in that genre.
GL: Well,
my answer to that is that if somebody writes a good sci-fi story and
doesn't cop it out with a bunch of computerized action then maybe
ah...we can rekindle some interest. One thing I'd like to say about
going to the movies, is that, you know you pay your money, then you
go sit in a dark room with a lot of people. It's an intimate
relationship between your mind, your subconscious mind, the people
around you, and the movie … and when you're watching a movie that
really holds your interest a lot of things really have to come
together.. that is photography, characters, story, geographical
locations etc. I recently watched the "Bridge on the River Kwai" and
it's a long film and holds your interest every bit of the way with
beautiful shots, interesting character and nice dialogue. And it was
over I thought "my god how nice to watch something of epic
qualities" and we all know this is not available today. It's just
not available. There's a constant desire to hit to target the
nineteen year old male at the box office.. did you ever go to a
Starbucks and watch the nineteen year old male inline? Enough said.
It's sort of a chicken shit answer but look at how they behave at
that age -- they're out of it. There are exceptions-that's true, but
I'm not talking them. The main target is that young audience that
spends their money freely and is a fool for all kinds of trendy
merchandise. And if that remains the basis for motion picture
development, then what more needs to be said. I mean it's true you
can get in to all sorts of film schools… You can go to all sorts of
lectures and learn all your want about this director or that writer
but it's all bullshit … all of it is bullshit if the basis is
money. After all, if you are making chicken soup, somewhere in the
recipe it should call for chicken. For those who can't apply that to
something …fuck em… it's funny.
JR: Let’s
chat a bit about what you’ve been up to lately?
GL: Been
remodeling my house in Malibu. I get up in dirt and I go to bed in
dirt. For those of you who have done that.. you know what I mean. I
spend time with my daughter when I can and I go to the gym and
Starbucks everyday… (laughs) … in that order.
JR: I
have to be honest and say thanks to Tom from Myspace for making this
connection possible. Without that, I would’ve never made contact
with your beautiful and talented daughter Sam. Odd that Tom from
Myspace is so similar to HAL… I was curious to know your thoughts on
the entire Myspace frenzy?
GL: Okay
I really don't understand that question. I don't have a computer.. my
wife and daughter do that for me. The funny thing is I was the first
of all my friends to own a computer and now I'm sort of over that. I
know a lot of people my age are afraid of computers, and brag about
being computer illiterate but the truth it's no different from a
toothpick: A useful tool, a great invention.
JR: Final
thought…if Dr. Frank Poole were to rule the world, how would things
be right now?
GL: (Laughs)
Well, I think I have something smart ass to say about that. I
guess I would make it compulsory, because I'm fond of sports, that
all professional athletes would be required to have a minimal amount
of education. I mean we're just going to the ghetto, and I think we
should help educate them in the process, not just recruit them for
sports. Education in this country and around the world may be the
only salvation or saving grace. I love athletes; I want to see them
be smart too.
JR: Until
next time, Dr. Poole.
– Jack Reher
|
