You might expect a legendary director like Werner Herzog to have an intimidating presence; after all, Herzog often seems to be drawn to incredibly outsized lead characters, and his films like Aguirre, the Wrath of God and Fitzcarraldo are volatile feats in themselves. When I met with Herzog this month, however, he was friendly and charming, quick to smile and even eager to tease. His newest film is the Nicolas Cage starrer Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans, and if that title recalls the 1992 Abel Ferrara film Bad Lieutenant that inspired it, rest assured that Herzog has made a loopy crime drama that stands on its own.
During our conversation, Herzog had plenty to say about drugs, film school, casting, Cage, and women, and he said all of it in his own delightful, inimitable way. For as much fun as Lieutenant is to watch, it's even more fun to talk to its maker.
It struck me while watching this film -- and while recalling your others -- that you often have a lead performance that asks a lot of its actor, and at the same time, Hollywood doesn't often ask much from its actresses. I wondered, have you considered making a Werner Herzog film where the demanding central role is female?
I have two feature films pushing me at the moment -- they always come like uninvited guests in a home invasion -- and it's strange that you're asking this question because in both films, a woman would be the central character.
Can you tell me anything about them?
No. [Laughs] Too early. Tomorrow, I'm actually leaving to scout the possibilities of one of the films. It may turn out very quickly that it's undoable, so if I start to talk about it, then everybody's waiting for it and the film doesn't come. This happens enough that I'm cautious at the moment. I've done some films with women as the leading character, like Wings of Hope or Land of Silence and Darkness, but not a narrative feature film. Why it's like that, I don't know.
When Bad Lieutenant was announced, a lot of people had no idea what to expect, especially because of the original film--
No. Wrong. Why do you say "original film"?
I should say, "the first film to have that title."
Yes, but when you look at the Jesus film from Scorsese, you do not say that Mel Gibson's is a remake and Scorsese's is the original. I caution to use this term.
I know how frustrating it's been for you--
No, it's not frustrating at all. It's wonderful! Now that the film is out and it's been seen, it's obvious to everyone that the films have nothing to do with each other. It's good that there's a discovery to make!
I was always surprised that you were stuck with that title, because I never thought the first film had the sort of mainstream awareness that would launch a franchise. The producers weren't willing to drop that element in the title once it was clear you'd gone in a different direction?
That was my battle from day one, but I did not prevail. I wanted to have it simply be Port of Call New Orleans. Now we have sort of a hybrid title.
As it started to be seen at festivals, it developed a reputation as an outlandish comedy. Is that a read of the film you actively encourage?
We were working hard at that! I think that's what's most surprising for audiences, that it's so hilarious. As it gets more and more vile and debased, Nicolas Cage enjoys himself even more. I said to him, "There's such a thing as a bliss of evil. Go for it and enjoy it, and that will be the joy of the audience."
I know you had fun provoking Nicolas while he worked. Did he provoke you?
Well, we had a wonderful platform of complete trust before we even started working. Nicolas crafted a character where he knew I would allow him wild moments. Much of it is disciplined work, but very often he knew he had complete liberty, like in jazz where the instrument plays solo and improvises. I don't even know how we created all this, but it's just wonderful to work with someone as imaginative as Nicolas Cage.
You often ask your actors to go out on a limb for you. Do they ever freak out and second-guess themselves?
No, no, never any freaking out. I wouldn't say that, but I would say that when I was so convinced a scene was wonderful, I would stop it after two takes. The crew would ask, "Where is the coverage?" And I would say we don't need it, it's so perfect. Nicolas said, "Finally, someone who knows what he's doing!"
Eva Mendes told me that she loved how often you used a two-shot. She thinks the close-up is overrated.
Probably, however there are always close-ups when we are really fascinated by the moment of what's going on inside a person. It really depends. I think the film is well-crafted and has a good balance. I don't even know how I'm doing it because I do not plan in terms of storyboard, for example -- it would have been a useless instrument here in our case. Very often, I'd rather move in close with the camera for a detail that fascinates me instead of cutting to a separately shot element because I want to set the rhythm, the inner flow of the film, while I'm shooting. I do not delegate it to editing. I do not delegate it way down into post-production.
You cut back on some of the drug culture in the film because you dislike it so much. Has Hollywood not inured you to that by now?
Well, I do not like the culture surrounding it whether it's Hollywood or the streets of Hamburg, Germany. Of course, it often happens that I am sitting in a round of people and they pass a joint to me, and I immediately pass it on without comment to the next one. I don't mind that they are doing it. I'm not in the mood of policing it or adopting a moral attitude about it, it's simply that I do not like the culture surrounding drug-taking. There's not a single friend of mine who's close and important to me who takes drugs.
Were you very familiar with New Orleans before the film?
I'd never been there before. I had to hit the ground running because there was a very short time for pre-production. I had to cast 35 speaking parts and find 40 different locations. I had to put a crew together in a very, very condensed amount of time. I tried to avoid all the cliches of shooting at Mardi Gras, French Quarter, jazz clubs, voodoo ceremonies. However, New Orleans, in a way, is one of the leading characters in the film.
Your first introduction to the city was post-Katrina. Can you feel the history there, the sense of how it used to be?
I think a city like New Orleans will never lose its spirit, this musicality and fluidity. It's surprising -- you think, "This cannot be the United States! This is almost like a different place, almost Caribbean, French, African." It's a phenomenally vivid culture there. A hurricane cannot wipe it out, and that's a wonderful thing. I didn't expect what I found.
Michael Shannon has a small role in this film, and then you went on to make your next film, My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done, with him in the lead.
I contacted him and said, "After Bad Lieutenant, I'm planning to do another feature film with a complicated role and you would be the right one. I would like to put this on your shoulders. Would you be ready to carry this?" And he said yes. I asked him, "Why don't you join us for the shoot of Bad Lieutenant? I have only a very small part left, unfortunately, but you could somehow feel your way into how I work and how I deal with situations." He was very pleased to come and I loved to have him around for three days. He warmed up a little bit to me, and then half a year later, he was nominated for the Academy Awards [for his role in Revolutionary Road]. I was very, very proud, I really am proud for this. His performance as the central character in My Son, My Son is really sensational.
So you knew you wanted to cast him even before he broke out in Revolutionary Road?
I had an eye for it. If you don't have an eye for someone as phenomenally gifted as he is, you shouldn't be a director.
What film had you seen him in that convinced you?
Oh, I had seen not more than thirty seconds of him in something.
And that was all it took?
That was all it took. I knew he was the right one.
Our readers are very excited about your film school.
Yes, the instructions are up on the website for people who want to apply. You have to write about yourself -- I want to know with whom I'm dealing -- and you have to send in a DVD. I'm looking very, very carefully at everything. I really take it seriously because I want to condense the huge amount of applications to a very small group where I can really address every single one. It's going to be completely rogue and guerrilla-style. Wild stuff! If you want to learn about filmmaking techniques, you'd better apply.
Once upon a time, you said that if you were to start a film school, you'd make every applicant take a long, hard walk through their country and then write about it. Have you relaxed your standards?
Yes, that would be a good thing that I would encourage, to travel on foot. Of course, this is a consequence of so many young people converging and looking at my advice, seeing that there's some sort of hope out there. I just want to give something back to them.