CraveOnline: Have you watched Alexander in Hi Def yet?
Oliver Stone: No, I haven't. We're having a premiere screening in a theater at CAA.CraveOnline: Are you set up for Blu Ray or HD at home?
Oliver Stone: No, I'm not. I'm going to, I'm going to. I have a very nice plasma screen.CraveOnline: Your Final Cut is designed as a theatrical experience with an intermission. Could you have done that theatrically?
Oliver Stone: You can't do it anymore. I think Ridley Scott's a perfect example withCraveOnline: Since this is a million dollar art form, what can an artist do?
Oliver Stone: You can't make big movies. You have to make smaller movies. You can't take on Alexander unless you figure out a way to do it for less than three hours which is possible. I couldn't do it that way. Honestly, it does cut down your ambitions. It does because some movies just do take longer and there is a breadth to them. You have to give it. Alexander's a great story. It's a big story.CraveOnline: Does that mean you won't go for that scale anymore?
Oliver Stone: Well, with DVD coming into it, if 75% of the revenue is coming from DVD, then you have to assume that there is a possibility of doing this, but you have to do it for DVD. You can't, unless an occasional theatrical will break through, but I don't see that happening because who would put up the money for these kind of things unless DVD becomes highly profitable.CraveOnline: If they had promised you a director's cut ahead of time, would that have made it easier to cut the theatrical?
Oliver Stone: It's a very good question. You don't set out to do a DVD cut and a theatrical cut but maybe perhaps because of the nature of circumstances now, we have to think that way. No, I would go for the best on theatrical. I had a very short, as he pointed out, David Lean was famous, if it's a true story, of course I've heard two versions of it. If Lawrence of Arabia is true, he himself says, "I did not start cutting that film until it was over." Other version's that it was cut during but honestly, when we finished this thing, I think we had about five months, four and a half-five months to get ready for mix. That's too short a time and it was my fault. I always thought I could pull it off and I just couldn't. I mean, I was happy with the film theatrically. I wouldn't have released it. I would have just called it. But it would have been a huge scandal to pull out. Marty Scorsese had done it the year before, two years before with Gangs of New York. He did take that extra year but it was a different situation. We didn't have the money to do that because of the interest rate. It would have been an enormous problem for us.CraveOnline: Did you approve of Sean's documentary before it went on the disc?
Oliver Stone: It wasn't that flattering at times but there was a special moment in our relationship because he was coming of age. It was the first time we really had truly spent time together in a working environment over a long period of time which was, I think, very good for him to see and for me to bond with him. He was there all the time so he was shooting at weird times. I wasn't paying much attention because he was my son. If it had been a documentary crew, it would have been more difficult for me. So he was in the hotel rooms, especially on the way to the set, on the way back from the set. These are key moments for a director to say things that he wouldn't normally say.CraveOnline: It shows you arguing about the budget. Do you have these talks on every movie?
Oliver Stone: Oh definitely. I would say even more intense. I'm glad he caught that scene because we've had several conversations like that. I happened to have a great producer on this show. He just left. Moritz Borman who was truly an independent. When Warners saw the first and second cuts here, I have to admit, I'm not talking about the DVD side because they've given me complete freedom, I'm talking about the theatrical side. They would have cut all references to sexuality and all gorier stuff, all the primitive warfare that you saw some of there. They would have cut that. They would have probably simplified the story enormously. The eunuch would have been gone. It was a very tough one to get through.CraveOnline: Since you're a well known media figure, does that make it harder for you to let people follow you at work?
Oliver Stone: It's very difficult, I think talking to actors especially because it's the most personal stuff. Each actor requires a different language. It's very personal. It's like sex so you don't want to be filmed sometimes doing that. But he got audio bites and if anybody's going to do it, I think your son, because I had committed to the idea that he was going to work with me. He started as a soldier in the phalanx actually. After doing that for a few days, he switched over and he was behind camera. So as I say, I committed to being as honest, to being really honest. I mean, he did cut out some stuff that may have embarrassed people.CraveOnline: Are you more "on" when you know cameras are there?
Oliver Stone: There were times I was irritated, yes. Things would not go well but as I said, it was a warts and all kind of thing where I knew this project was going to be a tough one. The chances of its success were very tough, so if you're going to sink, you might as well go down in all its glory.
CraveOnline: What do you do best and worst on set?Oliver Stone: I'm at my worst when I arrive. It's hardest when you arrive because so much has to happen. I think I'm at my best towards the end as I'm getting it. When you get it, you really feel it. Sometimes you get the essence of the day in the morning or late morning. Sometimes you don't get it until after lunch but the important thing is you get it. If you feel you don't get it, that's really frustrating.
CraveOnline: When did you stop doing a movie a year?Oliver Stone: U-Turn was the 11th film in 12 years. It was 10 films in 10 years. Nixon in '95 was the 10th film. We worked at a pace that was incredible. One film a year of that size, that energy. Imagine the details that went into those films. They were huge films. They were muscular and big. I do think we reached a natural exhaustion point. I went back, I wrote a novel. I edited the novel that I had written earlier in '96 and I really worked on the novel. I went back to writing. U-Turn was a smaller film done on a smaller budget. It was done quicker. So I was tired but when I did Any Given Sunday, I re-exhausted myself because that was probably one of the most difficult experiences, having to stage those football games. And then Alexander with the documentaries in between. I know the pace has let up but the intensity has not. Actually,
Oliver Stone: Listen, it's almost the obvious has been missed which is the conspiracy these days has been so overt. You don't need to hide it. There's no need for covertness. If the president of the
Oliver Stone: I'm not going back to
Oliver Stone: Well, when I'm working with another writer, I tend to make a lot of effort with him too. I collaborate with a writer. I'm not interested in credit but I'm feeding him all the time stuff that if feel is important, shaping the script, shaping
Oliver Stone: No, I haven't. I love writing. I love the act of writing. I like the quiet of it, I like the internal aspect of it. If I lose track of that, I couldn't direct the same way. I just couldn't be a director for hire. It’s just not my nature. I take that back because you're going to catch me one day because if there was a script that fit my sensibility to the tee, I would take it and I wouldn't change a word. But it hasn't happened yet.
CraveOnline: Do find parallels to the present when you make historical films?Oliver Stone: I think we can only see the past through what we lived in the traditions we live in in the present, so therefore we're conditioned. The past assumes the nature of the present. Certainly
Oliver Stone: I've tried. I've developed several sci-fi projects over the years. I wrote Demolished Man years ago. I wrote Conan the Barbarian sort of as a sci-fi. I think more or less, but I've never been happy enough to make the film. It's a high level field you're going into Kubrick-land and Ridley Scott. There have been some great sci-fi films. I don't want to make a half assed film. So it's not my area of expertise. That's not to say it won't change.
CraveOnline: Have you ever considered television for your longform interests?Oliver Stone: I produced films for television including Wild Palms back in '97 on ABC which was pretty advanced for its age. I would work in television if I had no choice. It's not a hot medium. It's a cool medium. People walking out of the room, the lights are on, your wife is talking or your husband is talking during it, or your kid. It's just mind boggling. It's a medium in which you can miss something and come back to. A film, ideally, is not. I make my films like you're going to die if you miss the next minute. You better not go get popcorn.
CraveOnline: You don't see Lost and Heroes forcing people to take more of a film attitude?Oliver Stone: Well, they have. Television has usurped everybody from film. So has commercials by the way. In a sense, we've democratized the image. We've taken the techniques. If you look at the techniques, for example, of Natural Born Killers or JFK, they're all over commercials now, all over TV, all over the place. I've seen it so constantly that I feel like it's a degeneration. There's no point or purpose for it. To the contrary, stylistically, I would go the other way like a
Oliver Stone: Oh God. It's very difficult. I can tell you, when I go to the movies and I have to sit through 10 previews of films that tell the whole story and they look alike, you know that we've reached an age of consensus. Consensus is the worst thing for us, the worst. We've reached consensus. We all agree to agree. That's where we lose it as a culture. We have to move away from that and I think that's part of what I keep doing. That's why I'm still trying, I hope he's trying for. I would like to see originality. It's so difficult.
CraveOnline: What's your relationship with Tarantino these days?
Oliver Stone: I've talked to him many times since then. We do get along. We're very civil. He was upset at the time. He was a young filmmaker and he was upset that we'd changed his story completely. Not his story, we changed his screenplay quite a bit. We put more emphasis on other things and he was upset. He came out publicly.CraveOnline: How do you look back on Scarface, another classic?
Oliver Stone: I always thought it was a satire. I never saw it as threatening to be reality. It never sought to be The Godfather. I think Brian was the right director for it because he has the necessary sarcasm. There is a lot of humor in the film. It was lost at the time because the bloodbath, the violence, the viciousness of the gangsters. My model frankly was twofold. One was Bertold Brecht's Arturo Uli and the other one was Richard III as I remember. This was 1982. So those were the models. They were not exactly reality models but the film was attacked for its literal, as Natural Born Killers was attacked for being literal and it wasn't. As you know Wall Street also, they took the Michael Douglas character and made him into a role model which was not intended that way. You can never judge how the film will be taken. You can only make your best effort and put out what you feel. How it's read you never can tell, how it's perceived or remembered for that matter.
