So omnipresent is the good Mr. Stone at the moment that you can almost construct a wondrous and contradictory conversation from various interviews with and profiles of him. For instance:
"I would make jokes like, ‘You’re not going to get avant-garde with this, are you? This isn’t "Natural Born Killers." ‘ But Oliver wanted it to be almost — the words he used were ‘cinema verite.’ ”
Stone himself, with Shawn Levy at The Oregonian:
In that spirit, we present the following interview collage of Oliver Stone, director, writer, enigma, big talker:
Via William Arnold at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
Stone thinks he’s been unfairly pigeonholed as a director. "My films
are all different from one another, and my approach has varied with
each story. ‘Salvador’ is nothing like ‘The Doors’ or ‘Any Given
Sunday.’ But because I tend to speak out on issues, my movies are
regarded with … suspicion. It’s frustrating. I’m a citizen, why
shouldn’t I be able to speak out?"
Via Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune:
"I’m not that political. It’s not my game. Where I shot
myself in the foot was between the films, when I was quoted on politics
because I have this rebellious side. … When people say, `What do you
think?’ I feel like John Q. Citizen; I have the right to answer. I’m
not just a filmmaker, I’m also a guy who served my country, had
families, paid taxes. … I know America in a certain way, and I have a
right to [expletive] say something."
Via Sam Allis at the Boston Globe:
"I would describe myself as an independent centrist," he
says. "I admire slower change in society. I believe conservatism is a
good thing in many ways. Change is a big thing. The ’60s shook me. I
went from very conservative to exploding war veteran."
Via Stephen Whitty at the Newark Star-Ledger:
"Why can’t I be seen as a filmmaker who tried new styles,
someone who — everything he did, whatever subject he did — was always
provocative and interesting?," he asks, a look of genuine bafflement on
his face. "Why am I always a controversial person?"
Via Rush and Molloy (twice in one day â€” trashy!) at the NY Daily News:
But he scoffs at talk that Paramount execs pressured him to keep politics out of "World Trade Center." "I was trying to tell a story that moved people," he said. "I wasn’t trying to make people happy or be a good boy. I’m a bad boy."
Via Ruthe Stein at the San Francisco Chronicle:
"It’s sad, but true," he acknowledges. "If I could change my name like John le Carre does when he writes books, I would have done it years ago." He’s even picked a pseudonym — Alex Miller.
So, a citizen, not that political, an independent centrist and misjudged source of controversy who’s also a bad boy who longs to free his inner Alex Miller. We’re seeing the film tonight (thanks, Aaron) â€” who knows what mysteries lie in wait? Word so far is pretty good, and we’re not quite sure why the film’s clear sentimentality seems so much more palatable to us than Greengrass’ dry-eyed briskness.
+ A HERO’S TALE (SF Chronicle)
+ Oliver Stone talks about "World Trade Center" (Oregonian)
+ Oliver Stone focuses on the good that came out of 9/11 (Seattle Post-Intelligencer)
+ OLIVER STONE’S MIDDLE GROUND (Chicago Tribune)
+ No longer a roiling Stone? (Boston Globe)
+ What’s weighing on Oliver Stone? (Newark Star-Ledger)
+ ‘WTC’ isn’t dawn of new Stone age (NY Daily News)