You will be redirected back to your article in seconds
Back to IndieWire

Emily Blunt Talks Keeping It Real in ‘Looper,’ ‘Your Sister’s Sister’ and ‘All You Need is Kill’ (VIDEO)

Emily Blunt Talks Keeping It Real in 'Looper,' 'Your Sister's Sister' and 'All You Need is Kill' (VIDEO)

Yes, Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a great job of playing the young Bruce Willis in Rian Johnson’s superb time-travel thriller “Looper” (September 28). (The actor talks to Time here, Johnson talks to TOH here, the animated trailer is here.) But the performer who anchors the movie and turns it into something deeper than a hardboiled sci-fi actioner is Emily Blunt. (Here’s my review.) I grabbed the in-demand actress between rehearsals on Doug Liman’s “All You Need is Kill” for a brief telephone interview.

Anne Thompson: You’re making another action movie?

Emily Blunt: It is, it’s an action movie with Tom Cruise. I play a highly decorated soldier who’s kind of a bad-ass.

AT: You’ve been playing some strong women of late.

EB: I’m lucky enough to have played some of those roles, I’m playing one now who is the baddest of the bad. I know a lot of tough chicks, people who are protective single mothers, who build a fort around themselves. I feel lucky not to be doing the girl tied to a tree in a corset or the girlfriend at home. It’s empowering to play the one wielding the gun.

AT: What was the toughest thing you had to do in “Looper”?

EB: Learning how to chop wood, that took like a month to really get good. I had logs delivered to my house.

AT: In “Looper,” you turn up in the second act and the entire dynamic of the movie shifts.

EB: Rian wanted there to be en emotional shift when she comes in, where the heart of the movie kicks off. We talked about the movie “Witness” a lot. In “Witness” you have that alien presence coming in and disrupting and upsetting their way of life. We wanted to create that same feeling. Sara didn’t want anyone coming into her world, she wants to protect her child in a controlled, isolated environment.

AT: You’re withholding information.

EB: I wanted to maintain the mystique of my character as well as the mystique of her child. Unfolding the character happened in baby steps, I was lucky with the little boy. I so fell in love with him found working with him was ultimately the most rewarding part of doing the film. I was devastated saying good-bye.

AT: “Looper” also doesn’t head in an expected romantic direction. There’s a sexual connection…

EB: Any kind of connection–like the scene where there isn’t anything romantic between the characters–is about a need these lonely isolated people have, who are disconnected emotionally from so much. It’s about a need, more than a romantic notion.

AT: You were a strong and romantic lead in “The Adjustment Bureau” with Matt Damon.

EB: She was a strong girl, she knew what she wanted, she was streetwise, irreverent and funny. I expanded on that and Damon and I got along like house on fire, we improved stuff, risked stuff. The chemistry felt specific to us, people responded to the love story because it felt specific. We wanted to get away from classic boy-meets-girl scenes, be more spontaneous. The director [George Nolfi] allowed us to riff and play.

AT: The director you are working with now, Doug Liman, is known for running a loosely improvisational set.

EB: Liman does like to work that way, we have yet to start shooting, just script meetings. All of that we will find out on the day on this big expensive action movie as we practice riffing and improving stuff, so that you can find a sort of spontaneity and reality to the scenes.

AT: You also did a lot of that on Lynn Shelton’s “Your Sister’s Sister” with Mark Duplass and Rosemary DeWitt.

EB: We totally improvised, it had a freewheeling organic sense to it. A great deal of responsibility was put on the actors to come up with the good, the exciting, throw-a-bunch-of-stuff-against-the-wall and see what sticks. Shelton was good at editing and being specific on the days, encouraging us to be safe enough to try anything. I loved doing that movie, it was so invigorating.

AT: You started out your career working opposite Judi Dench. What did she teach you, right off?

EB: The thing I remember more than anything was her kindness and generosity and work ethic. If anyone gets to have a sainthood, if there is one give it to her. On my first day, I was 18, so green. I hadn’t trained, I don’t know what the hell I’m doing. She said “Darling you are going to be great. If anyone gives you trouble come to me.” She hadn’t lost sight of how that felt. I have never forgotten the ease with which she approached the job. She had fun doing it, she was not taking it too seriously.

AT: And with Meryl Streep on “The Devil Wears Prada”?

EB: With Meryl I learned guts and spontaneity. She changes it every single time.I had to keep up with her, she made me change so much, she was doing double duty for the both of us. I saw the benefits of mixing scenes up, staying in the moment and staying loose.

Videos below include a New York Times interview with Rian Johnson, Wired with Johnson and Gordon-Levitt, a Blunt clip, and a super-cut of “Looper” star Bruce Willis looking confused.


This Article is related to: Interviews and tagged , , , , ,



First and foremost, it should be noted that this was a co-production with the Communist Chinese government, so, of course, communist Chinese and Communist China could not be not be portrayed in a bad light. And, right on key, that's what we get. A movie about time travel in which Communist China is the center of the universe in the future, and America has descended into a dystopian hell hole. Gee, what a surprise.

I guess that is what we can expect more and more of in the future from blockbuster films: after all, China only permits 34 foreign-made films to enter its film market; only films made in China as co-productions and subject to Chinese censorship are exempt from that number. Does this sound familiar anyone? China expects foreign companies to transfer their expertise to domestic Chinese production companies, while demanding that more and more Western studio films portray Communist Chinese and Communist China in a positive light. So, domestically, we'll continue to see good, bad and indifferent portrayals of America, but only positive portrayals of Communist China

And, the film? Frankly, half way into the film, I realized that my movie ticket was subsidizing authoritarian Communist China's censorship, and walked out of the theater. That's the first time I've ever walked out of a movie.

But the half I saw? Dreadful. In spite of an interesting time travel premise, and innovative visual design, the movie was confusing and focused far too much on images and sounds of guns killing people. Very loud bangs of guns going off again and again and again. Very loud bangs of doors closing and objects falling. A very poor attempt of creating suspense through loud noises.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who I usually like, was covered in weird prosthetic make-up (which was distracting), and was trying to channel Bruce Willis: it was not an effective performance. Bruce Willis, the co-star, well, I'll just say that he has never been one of my favorite actors.

Also strange was that in a movie of over 25 credited male roles set in Kansas City, America, and Shanghai, China, only one male actor was of a race other Caucasian. What is up with that? Can the Communist Chinese not stomach depictions of African American or Asian American males? Or, possibly the Chinese version had more roles for Chinese males (people in China get a longer Sino-centric Director's cut of the movie than we see in the West). It should be noted that in the half movie I saw, there were three women depicted (a blockbuster film with hardly any women in it –yet another surprise): a charming African American waitress in Kansas City, an idealized loving Chinese wife living in Shanghai, and a somewhat callous, materialistic Caucasian prostitute, also in Kansas City. So, the filmmakers seem fine with depicting women of racial diversity, but men get short shrift. If you're male, you're Caucasian, or you're not in the film. Weird.

And, finally, this movie received excellent reviews (94% positive review on Rotten Tomatoes and 8.3 out of 10 on IMDB). The great new movie "The Master" with Phillip Seymor Hoffman only got 85%. If I were a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist, I'd bet that the Chinese-American Co-Production company that made this film put the squeeze on Rotten Tomatoes, and hired people to post positive reviews on IMDB. Because that's the only way I can see this God awful mess getting such glowing reviews.

This movie is a dog. Don't go and see it. And, don't subsidize Communist Chinese censorship.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *