Damned Vantage
This is the final entry of my Jean-Claude Van Damme anthology. In the April 1996 issue (No. 62) of French Impact, classic director Peter Hyams was interviewed about reuniting with JCVD on Sudden Death (1995) after TimeCop (1994). Editor-in-chief Marc Toullec asked Peter if he insisted on working with JCVD again. Peter said: “Things didn't work out that way. Producer Moshe Diamant sent me the manuscript of the screenplay by Gene Quintano. It was only later that Universal agreed to finance the project. Then it was Jean-Claude Van Damme's turn to take an interest in Sudden Death. Since the film was not written for a particular actor, I had to revise a whole section of the dialogue based on his presence. I modified them significantly like a tailor adjusts a garment to his clientele. It is obvious that Jean-Claude Van Damme cannot formulate the same dialogues as Michael Douglas, already because English is not his mother tongue and his acting depends a lot on his physical presence. With the exception of these few minor adjustments, Sudden Death has hardly evolved. We stuck to the story of this former firefighter, traumatized by the death of a child for which he feels responsible. If Jean-Claude was hooked, it is precisely because Darren McCord, his role, reveals his emotions, his anxieties, his flaws above all. More than the action itself, this aspect of Sudden Death particularly motivated him.”
Peter Hyams addresses the elephant in the room - it’s another Die Hard clone: “I told myself that Sudden Death would be perfect after a few rewrites, in order to remove it from the influence of the film by John McTiernan. You know, when I dive into a screenplay for the first time, I am not very tempted by the analysis of the manuscript. I visualize the events described, I project the story. Sudden Death was rather exciting, and not stupid at all. I immediately realized the mass of work requested. I would have could make my life easier by watching Two Minute Warning and Black Sunday for the principle of a stadium filled with spectators taken hostage, but I categorically refused. To avoid plagiarism, it is worth resisting temptation, not slipping cassettes of films that are similar to yours in the VCR! I know myself if I find something good in there, I can't help but copy it. A reaction which I consider more logical than dishonest intellectually. Any comparison makes me paranoid!”
Peter talks about working with actors: “I am the type of person who has to appreciate the people I work with on a human level. When you work with an actor every day on a set, for long weeks, you can't just have cold professional relationships. For this actor to stick to his character, the director has to have a warmer relationship with him. A large part of my job is to know my actors well, to become close to them, and to be there for them. I think, without pretension, that if Jean-Claude gives the best of himself in TimeCop and Sudden Death, it is because of his presence. By working with him for a long time, I realized that he possessed qualities that other directors had never revealed on screen. These are kindness, vulnerability, gentleness, humor... They accentuate his difference from other action movie stars, make him more moving. So more attractive, especially to women. They love him! The Van Damme you know hits, punches, and draws. On the contrary, I wanted to portray him as he is in everyday life, as a man.”
Editor Marc Toullec reminded Peter Hyams that he directed Sean Connery, Gene Hackman, Roy Scheider and Michael Douglas. Peter replied: “Individuals change and you adapt to them. I suppose you don't question me as you would question Jean-Luc Godard, assuming you wanted to talk to him for hours to paint a real portrait. In that case, you would scrupulously document yourself on him, you would spend time preparing your questions. You would study his work in depth, his way of being. You are supposed to be an observer who, subsequently, will give his own definition of the character through your article. If I tell you all this, it is precisely because the function of a filmmaker confronted with an actor is not so far from it. Directing an actor means that you enter his universe to try to impose your points of view on him on the role, the film in general. What you get on screen is the fruit of your differences. You have to exploit the difference, use it as a weapon to multiply the power of your actor's performance. The director is only there to determine his personality and use it optimally.”
As for specifically talking about JCVD, Pete said: “Jean-Claude's accent, for example, it would be foolish to acknowledge it or even ignore it. Okay, we asked him to work on his diction, but only so that American spectators could understand him better. This does not mean that we tried to eliminate this accent. The accent is part of the actor. Cary Grant spoke with the typical English elocution. However, the public always considered him an American. As for Arnold Schwarzenegger, he speaks with the strongest Germanic accent there is. Without that particular timbre of voice, he wouldn't be Arnold Schwarzenegger!”
The actor who played Brandon Lee’s sidekick in Rapid Fire (1992) was cast to play the villain in the latest JCVD movie, but Powers Boothe was a powerhouse in his own right. Frenchman Marc Toullec was concerned that the powerful Powers would make JCVD feel out-acted. Peter Hyams said: “The best action movies systematically have a funny and charismatic villain. Look at Tommy Lee Jones in Under Siege or John Malkovich from In the Line of Fire. To an actor like Jean-Claude, it is wise to oppose a cynical and refined villain rather than a brute. For this role, Powers Boothe met all the necessary conditions. Opposing muscle to muscle is really not a good solution. It is imperative that the villain inspires intelligence, class, despite his criminal greed. In fact, he must have all the qualities but no conscience and no scruples!”
Peter Hyams is asked about whether he thinks that a second collaboration with JCVD is a sign of repeating financial success. Peter answered: “You have to ask my producer! I don't know. I sincerely believe that any formula is the enemy of creativity. There are no reliable recipes in cinema. We don't make cakes! We make films. We never know, until the day of release, whether the public will rush in mass. You only have one thing to do, without guarantee however: make the best film possible, work hard, very hard even. We worked hard on Sudden Death, that doesn't mean that the film worked in the United States. So, the Van Damme plus Peter Hyams formula is not infallible. It doesn't exist. However, I believed for a long time that Sudden Death would be a hit, especially after the test screenings which were really excellent - the most positive of my entire career. The spectators loved the film. That gave serious hope for its commercial career. Sudden Death came out at Christmas and it flopped. Why? I just think we released it at a bad time, at a time when the screens were jammed with big titles. People just couldn't buy tickets for every film!”
The legendary mascot fight had an autobiographical relevance: “I absolutely wanted this fight to be different from the others, to be remembered. That it also appeared as the strange combination of a very vicious fight and a source of gags. Witnessing a fight between an ordinary man and an opponent hidden in a two-meter yellow penguin, that doesn't happen every day! Important that it be funny but also very violent, that a large company kitchen suddenly becomes a a veritable museum of horrors. This is not innocent of me. As a father of three children, the most innocuous utensils, especially in a kitchen, often take on terribly dangerous aspects. A serene place can turn into a minefield! I adopted this point of view in Sudden Death, by integrating an extravagant element, this ultra-mean two-meter penguin!”
Peter Hyams also said: “How can you remain serious with a villain disguised like that? Impossible! So I decided to take things lightly, while maintaining the tension, amply helped by Jean-Claude Van Damme. His qualities as a martial artist having been confirmed many times, he could afford this little slice of self-mockery! But be careful, on the set, we did not laugh much since, despite the precautions and the professionalism of the stuntmen, all this crockery, these stoves made the task difficult, even dangerous. However, if these few minutes reach this burlesque dimension, it is probably a consequence of my passion for Chuck Jones. I am a fan of Will Coyote to such an extent that several of his portraits decorate the walls of my house!”
The balance between balancing the human factor and logistics in big productions: “I make demanding and physically ambitious films. But the challenge is not quite there. The whole difficulty is to take a story that people feel they have already seen on screen and inject it with emotions, real tension. A good way to involve the audience, to touch them. Abandon feelings, suspense, and your film will be nothing more than a string of explosions and stunts. No point. Placing the action film on a human scale is the most difficult thing in projects like Sudden Death. I don't mean to say that, technically, the film was a piece of cake. Filming the sequence on the roof of the stadium was, for example, a challenge for safety reasons, with all those guys hanging from cables, this gigantic crane dropping the carcass of a real helicopter several dozen meters above the ground. Complex and long, but it's just a question of logistics. The hardest part is elsewhere.”
A personal observation: “If my friend the director James Brooks asks me how I manage to shoot films like Outland, I call him to ask him how he manages to end up with a work as sensitive and true as Endearing Love. The quality, whatever your field, is the least easy to achieve. Credibility too, especially in an action film. It is essential to ensure realism without it becoming an obsession. Too much realism kills the dream, prevents flights. Too much lightness prevents the audience from joining in. It is necessary to measure the effects.”
Peter Hyams answers to the notion that being director and director of photography allows him to double his income: “Fulfilling these two functions simplifies things. Technicians do not have to ask the same question to two people who may not necessarily give them the same answer! In addition, I do not have to wait for the set to be lit; I do it myself. Having been a photographer, I express myself above all through images. Even before writing, I draw! I don't change my behavior on set. I visualize things and I film them. What could be simpler? A filmmaker must very often transmit the images he has to a director of photography who, himself, unbelievably controls the camera crew. I don't need this intermediary in mind; I already speak the language of image composition. I don't understand all these filmmakers who refuse to take into account the technical aspect of their work. Imagine that an artist is hired to paint a fresco and that he asks another person to draw the faces! Neglecting the work of the camera is more or less the same thing. How can we make cinema if we don't understand this medium in its most important form?”
Final thought: Making Sudden Death was a mistake. This movie may have put off Jackie Chan from doing his firefighter project. JCVD was perhaps better off replacing Steven Seagal as the sidekick of Keenan Ivory Wayans in The Glimmer Man (1996), especially since 1993 was when JCVD was going to do a movie that was also about two cops chasing a serial killer except it was with Damon Wayans as his co-star. In theory, the original story was redone as The Glimmer Man but the story was not only a comedy but one where the central gimmick essentially became White Chicks (2004). This was directed by Keenan but didn’t involve Damon despite the involvement of Marlon and Shawn Wayans.