Director and Pittsford resident John Curran (“The Painted
Veil”) brings a welcome intelligence to his political docu-drama
“Chappaquiddick,” which details the infamous July 1969 incident in which Senator
Ted Kennedy (played by Jason Clarke in the film) drove his car off a bridge and
into a pond following a party in Martha’s Vineyard. The tragic accident
resulted in the death of 28-year-old campaign strategist Mary Jo Kopechne (Kate Mara), while Kennedy himself walked away
unscathed and with only the slightest impact on his political career. The film
is an often damning examination into the corrosive power of privilege and
celebrity, but one that manages to find a modicum of empathy for those on either
side of the scandal.
Ahead of its
local premiere this Friday, CITY spoke with Curran by phone about the delicacy
required to bring such a potentially divisive story to the screen, as well as
the challenges of maintaining a filmmaking career in Hollywood while living
right here in Rochester.
CITY Newspaper: How did you get involved in
“Chappaquiddick,” and what originally attracted you to this story?
John Curran: I originally got the
script from Jason Clarke’s manager. I’ve worked with him before on another
film. I used to live in Australia for like 15 years and started my film career
there. And Jason was actually in my first film. I wanted to work with Jason
again for a while, so that was part of it. I knew it was about Chappaquiddick
and to be honest, I was worried it was gonna be a one
dimensional hit piece, but the script really blew me away. It was a much more
nuanced, compelling portrait of Ted at this time in his life and during the
incident. And it also created a fully dimensional character out of Mary Jo, who
had kind of been shafted by history to being kind of a background floozy.
And I’m a
fan of Teddy Kennedy. I mean, the whole creative team on this, we’re all kind
of left-leaning Democrats. But I read it in 2016 around the time of the primary
season, when I was calling out a lot of hypocrisy on the other side of the
aisle. But I recognized that I’ve always had sort of a blind spot about Teddy
and this chapter in his life. And it just felt like the right time to try and
take an honest look at these people who we support and repeatedly voted into
office.
The film’s depiction of events feels incredibly
authentic. What kind of research was done by screenwriters Taylor Allen and
Andrew Logan during the scripting stages?
They got the complete transcript of the inquest that was held
about a month and a half after Teddy went on TV and gave his speech. Taylor and
Andrew wanted to stick as close to the facts as we know them. Obviously there’s
invented dialogue and hybrid characters, and whatnot. But mostly they drew from
the inquest itself.
There are any number of ways this material could
have been played; in a sensationalized, “ripped from the tabloids” way, as a
satire, or a procedural. How did you go about finding the right tone for the
story?
What struck
me most about the script was my reaction to it as I was reading it. And how it
begins as this sort of tragedy, then evolves into almost a farce. I found
myself feeling for Ted, then I was sort of disgusted that I was feeling for
him. Then I was laughing at scenes, and being disgusted that I was laughing. That
sort of visceral response and the shifting allegiances that I experienced, I
wanted to capture in the film. And it was hard because I really struggled to
get a very non-partisan, balanced tone overall to the thing. But playing with
pathos and comedy doesn’t always work, so the finessing of that really came
about in the edit. Taking things out, putting other things back in, because in
some of the early edits it was tipping too hard into one direction or the
other.
It’s funny you mention the comedic element, because
that’s something that stuck out to me. The casting of Ed Helms [playing Teddy’s
loyal cousin and lawyer Joe Gargan] and Jim Gaffigan
[as Massachusetts attorney Paul Markham] underlines that in a lot of ways.
They’re not necessarily playing for laughs, but their incredulous reactions
reflect how the audience feels as well. What was your direction like for the
actors during those scenes?
For those parts, I definitely wanted to cast some guys that
brought that right kind of humor with them. When Ed Helms and Jim Gaffigan come
on screen, you tend to be open to them doing something funny, even when they’re
not. Probably because of how you know them, and how you’re informed by their
careers.
But what’s
great about those guys is that comedians just know instinctively more than
actors about how to use a deadpan look or pause. They’ve got that comic timing
even if they’re doing drama. Ed and Jim are really smart guys and I knew from
meeting them that you would believe them as highly educated lawyers, so they
had that. I’ve found in working with comedians on other things, that they’re
great dramatic actors below the surface. They just don’t get those chances very
often.
Jason Clarke’s performance plays such a big part in
how we view Ted throughout the film. We feel a bit of empathy for him, even as
we’re horrified by his decisions. What can you tell me about the casting
process for that role, finding someone who could play his contradictions?
Jason was already attached to [the script] when it came to
me. And I could see it: you put his face up against Ted’s, and he has similar
bone structure. And I knew that with the right hair — and then we made him a
set of teeth, because Teddy’s got such recognizable chompers,
and I felt that he could physically embody it. Jason’s a great actor, and
knowing him already, I knew that he had all those extremes in him. That he
could be very empathetic, but he could also be funny.
Jason also
didn’t want to pull any punches, so I knew that he would go at it and give a
warts-and-all performance. During filming, we tended to bracket scenes. We did
them the way our instincts said to do them, then we’d try extremes of going
either way over-the-top or pulling it way back. So in the edit, I had options
and could kind of craft the right moment. Because sometimes when you’re on set,
what seems right on that day — then you get in the edit room and wish you’d
done that one take that was a little bit different. We were really careful
going through it to make sure we had extremes in his performance so we could
tap into that in the edit.
You’d mentioned he was already signed on when you
became involved. Was it was a written with him in mind?
No, but he really chased it aggressively. The process of
casting, there’s always about five people that everybody wants in their film
because it guarantees you the most amount of money for your budget. Actors have
worth attached to them. And before I came on board there were a few other
actors that were considering it. But Jason was there from the beginning. When
he read it, he wanted it and he felt he should do it. Then he got it, and
really it made its way to me because of him.
We see the accident itself from different
viewpoints throughout the film. What were some of the challenges in shooting
that sequence?
Well, I wanted to shoot on Chappaquiddick. The bridge is
still there, but we had visual effects to alter it a bit because the bridge
looks different now. It’s got guardrails on it and some other stuff to make it
look like it did back then. I knew we wouldn’t be able to work totally on
Chappaquiddick, but I didn’t want to just find some other pond or some other
bridge. So we built the bridge to the original specs, completely to scale in a
water tank in Mexico where they filmed “Titanic.” In fact, I think
the facility was built for “Titanic.” So we did all the bridge
accident and underwater scenes down there in a water tank. The accident was
very specific, so I thought the hardest thing was going to be getting that
right. The car went off and did like a half roll and landed perpendicular to
the bridge on its roof. But I had this amazing stunt guy who rigged up the car
on a pulley system, and he did that accident in one take. It literally went off
the bridge, flipped, and landed absolutely perfectly. So what I thought was
going to be something I’d have to fix in post with computer effects or
something, He nailed it in one. That was a big relief.
And what about the sequences with Kate Mara in the
car after it’s underwater?
That was in a smaller tank in the same facility, and it was
more controlled. But it was still very harrowing for her, I’m sure. I don’t
know how comfortable she was, because she’s gotta
swim down and get in there and then she’s trapped inside with just a cameraman.
It was one of the last days of shooting and there was a lot of pressure again
because you’re running out of time, and you’re trying to get stuff done. That
was probably the most difficult stuff to shoot for all of us. Definitely for
her — it wasn’t a lot of fun.
With the nature of this story, people are bound to
come in with certain expectations, depending on their own political viewpoints.
And a lot of them may have already decided what they expect from this story on
screen. Was that on your mind at all as audiences started to see the film?
It’s a constantly evolving truth. Like a lot scandals, I’ve
read a lot of dumb conspiracy theories. But people are probably going to leave
with a lot more questions than answers, and that was the point, you know? People
are going to see it through the prism of their political allegiance so to
speak. Someone that hates Ted is probably going to be validated by the film,
and someone that admires him might now have a more complicated portrait that
they have to consider. But in the end, I think the one thing that should unite
all people — left and right of the aisle — is that we should all be taking a
harder look at the people we support. And not putting up with crimes from [our
politicians] that we would go to jail for. We certainly shouldn’t give them a
pass just because we’ve elected them into office. I hope that resonates, obviously
considering the president that we have today.
There’s an idea that in order to have a successful
career as a filmmaker, you need to be located in LA or New York City. But
you’ve managed it while living in Pittsford. How much of a challenge has that
been over the years?
Well, I did my time in L.A. From Australia, I moved to L.A.
and I was there for six years or something like that. It’s tough to break into
the film market anyway, regardless of where you’re living. And I wouldn’t have
come from Australia right back to Rochester. The reality of my job is that when
I’m working, I’m somewhere else.
I was going
off to China for a year and a half to do a film, and my wife and I had just had
a kid in Australia. My wife is from Rochester as well and she’s like, “well
while you’re in China, I’m going to go back home and spend a year there.” That
one year turned into all his entire time through school — he’s in college now
and about to graduate. So I spend more time now in L.A. since I’ve got to keep
one foot there. I’ll hopefully be dual coast soon, where I’ll have a place
there and go out for months at a time, but then come back here whenever I can.
“Chappaquiddick” opens on Friday, April 6.
This article appears in Apr 4-10, 2018.
