At 67, Clint Eastwood still has lots of surprises up his sleeve. The hard-working young actor who parleyed looks, a classic squint and an inimitable air of soft-spoken menace into one of Hollywood’s most enduring star careers has become, in the 1990s, one of our most admired and adventurous actor-filmmakers.
His new movie, “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” — in which Eastwood produces and directs, but doesn’t act — is a striking example. Based on John Berendt’s best-selling chronicle of 1980s Savannah, Ga., and the Jim Williams murder case, it’s an intelligent and daringly offbeat drama, full of colorful and complex characters, acted by a top-notch cast.
It’s also a movie that makes no concessions to most current box-office formulas (including a few partly established by Eastwood himself): big stars, car-chases, constant bloody action and state-of-the-art special effects. But “Midnight” fits right into Eastwood’s career arc since 1988, when he startled many by producing and directing “Bird” — a dark, moody and eloquent bio of troubled jazz great Charlie Parker that won two major awards at that year’s Cannes Film Festival. “Bird” revealed the other sides of Eastwood: the longtime jazz aficionado (and part-time pianist), wide reader and knowledgeable film buff who digs Akira Kurosawa and Vittorio De Sica as much as John Ford and Howard Hawks. And the ultra-savvy, self-made, independent-minded artist whose true personality is a world away from the taciturn, explosive gunmen he has played so entertainingly.
I’ve interviewed Eastwood a number of times — and have always found him one of the most charming, articulate and hip conversationalists in the movie community.
Here he is, ’round “Midnight”:
How did you get involved with “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil?”
Eastwood: It came to me kind of by accident. John Lee Hancock (“A Perfect World”), who wrote the screenplay, wanted me to give him an opinion on it. Warner Bros. owned the property, but he . . . didn’t think they were going to go ahead with it. So I read it, and I liked it. I called (them) and I said: “I don’t know if you guys are planning on making this picture. But if you’re not, would you mind sending it my way?” So they said: “Oh, no. Yeah, go ahead. That’d be great.”
The original producer (Arnold Steifel) said he had wanted either you or Sean Connery as Jim Williams.
Eastwood: Yeah . . . but I kind of liked Kevin (Spacey). I thought he had all the right notes for that part: a good chameleon way . . . this seductive voice and attitude.
He’s also kind of opaque, enigmatic, difficult to read.
Eastwood: You absolutely hit it on the nail. . . . That was exactly why he was cast. Jim Williams had that quality in life . . . Berendt talks about it all the time. Everybody who knew (Williams) down there, said he had these dark eyes that you couldn’t quite penetrate into.
(John) Cusack, on the other-hand, is more open-faced.
Eastwood: Right. Exactly. . . . He has that kind of thing some of the older guys had: Fred MacMurray, Ray Milland, Cary Grant. He has nice reactions in the comedy situations. Everyman reactions.
Did you ever draw any conclusions about the truth behind the killing?
Eastwood: Yes. But I liked the ambiguity of it. I tried to do it a little more “Rashomon-esque” . . . where Spacey is equally convincing when he tells both stories.
Did you enjoy just directing, without having to play the lead?
Eastwood: The last time I’ve given myself that luxury was on “Bird.” And it was enjoyable then; it’s enjoyable now. It’s just nice not to have to contend with that (extra) responsibility.
How much rehearsal time did you have?
Eastwood: I didn’t do any rehearsal time. I just kind of wanted everybody to come together . . . and react freshly. . . . I like spontaneity. I’ll do whatever amount of takes it takes to get it (right) — but, by the same token, I like to try for it. I guess that’s left over from my Don Siegel days. Don (Eastwood’s director on five movies, including “Coogan’s Bluff” and “Dirty Harry”) was always trying for it. . . . I say, “Let’s run it and see.” And if it’s looking good, I’ll say, “Let’s try it on film.” There’s something about the fact that the camera’s running that makes the actor concentrate more. These actors all liked that. . . . With Lady Chablis, that is her. That is her life. She’s rehearsed her act for 40 years.
Did she do any improvising?
Eastwood: Yeah — a lot of improv. I would tell Cusack to just go ahead, enjoy the banter and improv along with her. Just don’t let it go too far off the track.
Did you do the main casting?
Eastwood: Yeah, these are my picks. Irma Hall I had considered for another picture, “A Perfect World.” I’ve always liked her. A friend of mine reminded me of that little picture she made in Chicago, “A Family Thing,” with Robert Duvall. So (we called her and) she sent in a tape of herself doing a scene from “Midnight.” She was really right on.
What’s she like to work with?
Eastwood: Oh, she’s fabulous. Very well prepared.
Could you talk about Gene Hackman (Oscar-winner for Eastwood’s 1992 “Unforgiven”)?
Eastwood: He’s another example of that same work ethic. He comes extremely well prepared . . . you can almost start photographing him immediately. He’s the fastest start I’ve ever seen. (In) “Unforgiven,” sometimes he’d start a rehearsal. And you’d say: “I’ve gotta stop this, because this is great. I don’t want to waste it and not have this on film.” That’s how fast a start he is. And when you have Gene and Morgan Freeman in the same scene, it’s almost like magic to start with. Meryl (Streep) is really quick, too. She’s worked with people who have done a lot of rehearsal. But in “Bridges,” I’d say, “Let’s run this a couple of times.” She’d say, “Can’t we do it on film?” And I’d say, “Sure. Absolutely.”
Who taught you about working with actors? Siegel?
Eastwood: I think mostly just working and observing. . . . Just kind of sensing what people’s peculiarities and insecurities are. . . . Siegel liked actors, but he wasn’t particularly an actor’s director, per se. He always appreciated a good professional who was ready to go. But if a person wasn’t very good . . . I don’t think he would work with them too much.
Is there one of your directors who was really exceptional with actors?
Eastwood: Watching Vittorio De Sica (who directed young Eastwood in the 1966 Italian anthology film “Le Streghe”) was fun. He was also a very fast director, but everything was built around the atmosphere. He didn’t talk to the actors much. He just set an atmosphere beforehand that everybody enjoyed acting in. And that’s all I try to do.
Was the Johnny Mercer song score (in “Midnight”) your idea?
Eastwood: Berendt brings it up in the book. . . . (So) I just wanted to use Mercer’s stuff. I wanted the movie music to be very subtle and affecting.
Whose idea was k.d. lang?
Eastwood: That was Matt Pierson’s (Warner Bros. records executive). He said, “How about some new people, contemporary people . . . doing classic tunes, classic Johnny Mercer?” . . . And I liked her. I liked her voice very much. We recorded her, and I kept her afterward, and I said, “Would you do me this a cappella thing where you just stand there and sing (“Skylark”) and no music? Do it like a poem.”
The whole movie is a little like a jazz ballad.
Eastwood: I was kind of thinking like that. They all have their solos. But the ensemble works like a good jazz group.
I would have liked to have seen more of your daughter (Alison Eastwood) in the movie.
Eastwood: I would like to have used more, too. I had a couple of other very good scenes with her. But I couldn’t make the movie any longer.
Are you going to be able to do more character pieces like (“Midnight”) now?
Eastwood: I feel comfortable in it. I like this kind of story. And I’ve always missed the days when there were a lot of pictures that were character-driven. . . . It’s amazing how few really good scripts there are out there. . . . It’s a never-ending search. A lot of times people will say, “Get a gimmick.” But I’m too old for that. Now you get a period where everything is made for juveniles. We live in an MTV mentality: great action sequences, but the story is secondary. . . . I’d like to be a voice for trying some of these other things, however successful they might be. Because otherwise everybody will be afraid to do them. And then movies will be only: Saturday night for 16-year-olds.
How do you feel about being dubbed a grand old man of the cinema after starting your big star career in the ’60s as a sort of spaghetti western outlaw and outsider?
Eastwood: (laughs) Yeah. Sort of a renegade. You’re always amused by where you are. You wonder: “The grand old man?” Well, maybe he’s still the renegade! Maybe they’re just wrong. (Chuckles.) It’s kind of an interesting position to be in. I guess you just age into it. I always joke about the fact that I just outlived everybody else. But I guess you just sort of mature into these things. Somebody mentioned (to me) just the other day, “What about the roles you used to play?” And I said, “Well, I can’t play the roles I used to play. Or I could, but it’d be a joke.” And besides, there are so many more interesting ones coming up . . . if I allow myself to enjoy them.
