By Oliver Lyttelton | The Playlist December 6, 2012 at 3:23PM
One of the most controversial and acclaimed playwrights of the 1990s, Martin McDonagh -- the man behind stage hits like "The Beauty Queen Of Leenane," "The Lieutenant of Inishmore" and "The Pillowman" -- found equal success when he moved into the movies. He won an Oscar for his first short film, "Six Shooter," and a few years later wrote and directed the hilarious, soulful black comedy "In Bruges," which became a serious hit on the festival circuit and earned him an Oscar nomination for the screenplay.
This year, he returned to screens with the follow-up, "Seven Psychopaths," a giddy, glorious mess of storytelling involving Hollywood screenwriters, dognappers, murderous gangsters, vengeful Quakers, killers on the run, and much, much more. The film opened in the U.S. back in October, but arrives on U.K. screens this week. We got to speak to McDonagh at the BFI London Film Festival in October, and dug into his transition from theater to film, the genesis of "Seven Psychopaths," the genius of Sam Rockwell, and the music of the film. Check the complete interview out below.
It was always my first love, as a kid. I fell into the theatre because I felt I was doing it well, and I stuck to it for the same reason. That whole period, though, I was trying to write films, but they weren't coming out as well as the plays were, so it made more sense to stick to theatre. Also, I knew I'd need to be in a position to direct them, to keep some kind of artistic integrity.
You've never directed your stage plays, right?
Yeah, I never have. With a stage play, they can't cut a word, you can be in rehearsals every day, you cast it, you cast the director too, the amount of control for a playwright is almost infinite, so you have that control over the finished product. But in film, you're the lowest form of life. So that was half of the job of directing, was not letting someone else come in and fuck it up. And then the other half is to learn how the hell you actually do it, which is another kettle of fish.
Was there ever any interest, either from you or from other people in adapting your plays into film?
From day one, I had a belief that it should never happen. I think it's only ever done for money, they're usually awful, and it usually makes the play look shit in the first place, which was probably the case. And I think if you're writing a play, it should be its own end game, you'll never get to do a good one unless you know it's not a blueprint for a film, you're not going to get the action right, and the story right. So I felt that was more honorable, to say that those stories are only going to be told in that box, in that room. And in that respect you can make them quite cinematic, I always wanted to bring as much cinema on stage as possible.
Yeah, "The Pillowman" in particular was very cinematic.
Yeah, [director] John Crowley was quite a big part of that. That's as cinematic as you could get on stage. But even that I wouldn't want to have made into a film, even though it's the one that's closest to being possible. It's similar to "Seven Psychopaths" in a way, stories within stories.
"The Pillowman" I wrote in 1994, 1995. And it didn't go on stage until... 2002. "Seven Psychopaths" came much later. "In Bruges" was probably the third script I wrote, and this was the fourth.
Had you always intended "In Bruges" to be your first film, then? Or could this have gone earlier?
I had "In Bruges" and this ["Seven Psychopaths"] ready to go, and this felt too big, and cinematic, and involved too many pieces that I didn't have any kind of grounding in, as a first time feature maker. Whereas 'Bruges' was almost like a stage play in a town, just three characters chatting and walking about. So this felt too big, in terms of the geography and cast of characters, and shoot outs and car chases. But after making 'Bruges,' I felt like I had a grounding in enough of cinema to make the leap.
Was that the biggest challenge of this one, then? The bigger scope?
Yeah, just how to do a car chase, a shootout, how to tell a story that jumps around, with flashbacks. How to tell a story with images, because like the Tom Waits story, there's almost no dialogue in those pieces, it's all done through images.
I think "The Night of the Hunter" has always been a touchstone for me, and that probably shows itself in the Harry Dean Stanton story. Almost too much. You see music videos sometimes that have totally just ripped off, without any kind of acknowledgment, a film that they've loved. So I didn't want to do that, but maybe I did. For the Tom Waits backstory... I love film noir stuff, so there are probably details from old RKO film noirs in there. But nothing specific.
I think it does feel like its own beast, the film.
It was supposed to be something kind of wild. 'Bruges' is a pristine little box of a film, and this was supposed to be sort of mental and bonkers. Psychopathic.
In the film, Martin [Colin Farrell's character], starts with nothing but the title. Was it the same thing with you?
Exactly. I had the Quaker psychopath story as a separate story, from around the time of writing "The Pillowman." But that's all I had, and the title, and a desire to write a film called "Seven Psychopaths," but not to make it about violence and guns. So that was literally the third scene I wrote, when they're in the rooftop bar, talking about the kind of film he wants. And it sort of expanded from there.
How much of your process is up on the screen, then?
A fair amount. Certainly by the time I got to the halfway point, when they're driving off to the desert, even in the script, I thought "Why can't they just talk for the rest of the film?" So in that respect, yeah, those meta aspects weren't imposed, they just started springing out from the body of it. But at the same time, I didn't want to get so meta that it wasn't smart-alecky or smug. That was the biggest fear to be smug, to be smarter than your audience. So to walk that line, as smartly and joyously as possible, that was the idea.