By Craig Modderno
Photos by Stephen Vaughan/SMPSP

Director Paul Verhoeven on the set of Hollow Man

The final sentence in the press kit bio of the director of Hollow Man reads, "Paul Verhoeven's work reflects the 21st-century existence, with mixed messages, blurred lines between dreams and reality, and no neat resolutions."

With a credit list that includes Robocop, Total Recall, Basic Instinct, Starship Troopers and Showgirls the Dutch filmmaker, who was introduced to Hollywood via his critically acclaimed 1973 World War II epic Soldier of Orange, seems to have sought rather than avoided controversial material.

DGA Magazine spoke with Verhoeven about his films and his directorial methods.

When a producer hires you to direct, what are they getting in particular?

I think they expect more edgy stuff than normal and are aware of the fact that their movie will be more provocative than even they want. I think with Hollow Man the studio thought, "Giving him this project will be a bit dangerous, but if we contain him so that it's still mainstream, then it might be a good." 

I think we had a very good understanding that we all wanted to make a movie that was edgy but not impossible. I mean, that it should not be Showgirls or even Starship Troopers. Those are movies that are a bit esoteric in a way. They are loved by people that are basically not completely mainstream. The people that like Showgirls or especially Starship Troopers would probably think that this one is not extreme enough. I've heard that already. "Say, are you disappointing people that love your work?" And I've said, "Yes, but I cannot go on making movies that are expensive and are, let's say, not mainstream."

For an expensive movie like Starship Troopers you have to argue that the amount of money involved in some way should be recoupable by having the thematic material not so extreme. Movies are not only for a director's own personal pleasure. They're also an economic project. It's art and economy together, and there's a balance between the two. I don't want to work only for people that want me to make extreme movies. I like to do extreme stuff in my movies, but I don't want to fall out of the mainstream.

What do you consider an extreme movie?

Crash is an extreme movie. And [director] David Cronenberg does these types of movies for a certain amount of money that makes it possible for him to continue to do them. But Starship Troopers was made for an amount of money that is about five, probably ten times greater than Crash. You have to realize that you have an obligation as a filmmaker to try to make your money back. 

I felt that way when I started my career, when I was working with a Dutch producer who put his own money in the movie because there are no studios there. It's the money of the producer that you play with. I always felt the obligation because it was a personal thing. It's not like a studio with abstract money. You have the producer putting up the money. It's his money you're playing with. You can fail, but you should at least try to make the movie that fulfills your artistic dreams but is not so extreme that people don't want to see it.

How do you direct actors in special effects scenes?

You have to try to make the actors aware that all the mechanics around them and everything that could be distracting is still a function of their performance. To make them feel that it's not us working on special effects and that they are tools inside that. Hollow Man is about people, about a man becoming evil and the woman challenging him. It's not about special effects. The character's invisibility is a tool of the story. The fact that he's invisible convinces him that he is very powerful and because he's powerful he has this kind of hubris that he can get away with every­thing and he becomes evil. That's still a normal story.

Verhoeven prepares a scene with Hollow Man star Kevin Bacon.

Do you try to direct out the special effects with your actors, almost play what it would be, the sound effects, the visuals...?

To a certain degree, of course, only to help them. In the case of Starship Troopers I did that a lot because the animals were not there on the set because they didn't really exist. We had only one scene like that in Hollow Man. It was with the gorilla that appears in the beginning. We didn't have a gorilla on the table. So I tried to help the actors because they had to stare at an empty table while, of course, in the movie there are all kind of things happening on the table. The muscles are growing, the head is getting bigger, the ears and eyes appear, and the skin starts to grow. So I tried with all kinds of methods to explain to them during the shots so that they had a feeling of what was happening. I would be growling and yelling and screaming and giving sharp commands so that they would get into the mood of the scene. They didn't have the principal tool of the scene - the gorilla - becoming visible. They had to imagine it.

What attracts you to a script?

In this case it was the deterioration of an individual to power. I felt that was an interesting theme. It's an old theme that was first mentioned, as far as I know, where Plato writes about it in his book, The Republic. He wonders what would happen when a man becomes invisible. That theme is really interesting because he says man is not born good, man is born evil but society restrains him. So if you take the restraints of society away - in this case because he's invisible and so he can get away with everything - he will deteriorate into evil.

These kinds of nearly comic book things have always fascinated me since I was a child. I loved comic books and I started to work as a comic-book writer. I drew a lot of comic books that I never finished. Ultimately, I felt that comic books were too restrained and they would never be, at least at that time, an art form. They are a bit now.

So I segued into painting for a couple of years. Then I had the feeling that I had no movement in painting so ultimately I moved to film. It was a process really. Let's say the influence of comic books was always there for me. That got me into the arts.

Because of your art background, how extensive do you storyboard your films and do you actually do any of the drawings yourself?

This one was completely storyboarded. And I do it in two ways and two phases. I storyboard everything myself. I make all the drawings very fast and they're really not elaborate sketches. I sketch everything out, every shot and some shots with three, four drawings so you can see the progress of the shot because the camera always moves. Then I work with the storyboard artist. I give him my drawings and say, "OK. Now you make this do something that looks like a storyboard, completely, with nuancing, shadows, light, and all that stuff." 

But you expect to storyboard with a special effects film because you need people to see what you want. The process has to start so early and you cannot deviate from storyboards too much. 

Verhoeven with Hollow Man lead actress Elisabeth Shue

In Showgirls I storyboarded everything the evening before shooting. I just went to my room after shooting and storyboarded it in my script precisely - more or less - what I thought I would be doing the next day. I didn't have a storyboard artist for Showgirls.

I did have a storyboard artist for Basic Instinct, not so much for action, but for all the erotic stuff. All the scenes between Michael Douglas and Sharon Stone, especially the big, long sex scene that they have on the bed. I storyboarded that completely because I wanted to show the actors exactly what I was going to do. I didn't want them to be surprised on the set by my asking them to do something. I wanted it to be all on the table. That scene works so well because the actors were completely confident with what they were doing. I had shown them every shot. I had drawn them all in the most precise way so they were not placed in the position of doing something they were not ready to do.

When they saw the storyboards for the first time they basically freaked out because of the extravagant explicitness. These were scenes you would never have in an American movie. But then I discussed with Sharon or Michael and they would say, "Well, this angle, I don't think that's the best for my body. Can you change that?" So I worked with them until they were fully confident. Then we shot it. It was like a choreographer would do. We could just go, "OK, now we do this, then we do this." There was never any, "Wow, what are you doing with me? You know, I am naked here, what are you doing?"

 And yet Sharon Stone has said of the famous scene in the interrogation room where she crosses her legs that she was surprised that the camera was aiming between her legs.

Yes, that is basically not true. I don't think she will repeat that nowadays. She knows I didn't cheat her at all. And Joe Eszterhas didn't write that scene either. He pretends that he wrote it. In his new book he says that he wrote that scene where she opens her legs but that was never in the script. If you look in any script that scene is not there.

Then how did that scene come about?

What happened is, I had dinner with Sharon and we were talking about the movie before we started to shoot it. I told her about a friend of mine, an older female when I was a student. She would go to parties without underwear and would open her legs all the time. My friend went to her - I was too ashamed, probably, to do that - and he said to her, "Are you aware that we can look right up your dress? You know, you shouldn't sit this way." She said, "Of course I know that. That's my purpose." I said to Sharon, "Wouldn't it be great to do something like that in the movie? Would you dare to do that? When we do that scene. Copy that scene and put it in the middle of that interrogation so all these people are drooling and you'll feel that the power of her sexuality bashes them down. She is victorious merely because of that. They are so thrown off that they basically lose control."

And she said, "Well, it's a great idea, you know? Of course I'll do that. Yes, we'll do that. Let's shoot it." And we shot it. She knows that what she's saying now is nonsense. Sharon is fine and great and can do great stuff, but she talks very well too and she's not always telling the truth. 

Michael Douglas has said that for actors sex scenes are the most difficult things to do because they're so mechanical. How do you direct a sex scene?

By being extremely open. Like with the storyboards, being extremely direct about what I want to see. I try to tap into my own life and say, "OK, these things were great, wonderful, interesting or different or whatever stuck into my mind. This is what this woman did that was so special." Bong! Let's try to use that. So I try to be as personal in sex scenes as possible. With the actors, to be as honest as possible, to tell them every detail about what I want to see. I think a lot of American directors would probably have a hard time saying to the actor, "Now you have to put your lips around her nipple and suck it." I don't have a problem saying that. And so the element of hypocrisy is gone. I want to discuss this all before, sitting in the trailer and discussing it, and looking at the storyboards and talking to them. I say this is what I want and this is the reason I want it. I think it's sexual, it's interesting, and convince them that it has to be. There should be no discussion on the set when people take their clothes off because that's the worst time to get into such detail.

Showgirls received an "NC-17" rating for the sexual elements in the film. Have you ever come close to getting "NC-17" for violence?

Yes, sure, on Total Recall and Robocop. Even on Basic Instinct I had to take out the stabbing with the ice pick for the MPAA. I had to take a lot of shots out that I left in for the rest of the world. 

Robocop had to go back to the MPAA nine times to get an "R" rating. It was all for violence because there's no sex at all in Robocop. The Criterion Collection has the original cut of Robocop and it is much more violent. 

In dealing with the ratings board as extensively as you have, what advice would you give to other directors who are going to be dealing in an explicit or push-the-corner-of-the-envelope shooting of violent or sexual scenes?

Shoot more than you think you need. Shoot other angles. Protect yourself. Don't be caught when you have to take shots out. Be sure that you can change to other angles that are less offensive so you can still get your movie the "R" but don't lose the scene completely. Protect yourself so that you're not mutilating your scene. You might have to mutilate the intensity of your scene. We do that all the time, of course. I can always come up with angles that basically repair it for the MPAA and they ultimately have to say, "OK, well now it's fine. Now we accept it." But I never had to sacrifice the scene or a part of the scene.

If your contact is for an "R" the studio will not let you get away with an "NC-17" in general. Especially in the case of Basic Instinct, where Mike Medavoy said to me, "Yes, I know, this movie could be an "NC-17.'" And Michael Douglas and I went to him and said, "Let's do the European version?" And Medavoy said, "OK, as an "NC-17' it might do $50 million or it might do $150 million. We don't know. People might say I don't want to go there because it's "NC-17.' But, if you do it as an "R" then I guarantee you that it will make more than $100 million." And as the studio, I have to say this is the safe road. I want my $100 million. And so it has to be an "R." So we did the "R" for the United States and what we call the "NC-17" for Europe. In Europe that doesn't exist of course. For the rest of the world this is all, let's say, more open and a bit more intense version.

Do you consider yourself an actor-friendly director?

Yes. I like to work with actors. I think it's fascinating. All my European work is in that direction clearly. It is always about acting. In the United States, because of the way I started, I got myself cast into the science fiction/ special effects genre. There the actors are always a little bit less important than if it's straight drama. But Basic Instinct is straight drama, all about actors. I'm actor-friendly, but you have to ask them. I do pay a lot of attention to the actors.

What issues would you like to see the Directors Guild address?

That it would not be permitted to have the studios cut your movies by 20, 30 minutes when they go to television. They do that to work it into the time slot. I got a report from some group that's following Total Recall. I saw that Total Recall and Jim Cameron's Terminator were cut by 20, 25 minutes. I think it's a completely idiotic thing, that people can just do that. To cut by 20 or 10, 15 minutes because it fits into a time slot is unacceptable really. They have to clean them up a little bit for television, I can accept it with difficulty. From a European point of view that is completely unacceptable too. But American society has these rules and I live in this country and I accept the fact that this country has its own rules. I don't want to put European rules over the United States, and I could not do that anyhow. So that I accept, but this kind of cutting for a time slot is completely unacceptable to me.

What kind of movie or story would you like to direct that you're rarely considered for?

The straight drama.

Give me an example you would have liked to have directed that nobody probably would have thought of you for.

Hmm. Lawrence of Arabia.

You would have been about two then, wouldn't you?

[laughs] But I would like to do something that is completely driven by character and by the acting - character and dramatic narrative. Something that is much further away from special effects, like Basic Instinct. But that's still a genre. It's a thriller. Something where there's more about life, about things, especially when it is something that happened in history, that is partially true, that is not invented. I mean, I cannot even read novels anymore because I'm so bored. The thing is, it didn't really happen. I much prefer to read books about history than about anything else.

Weren't you going to direct a film about Jesus Christ at one point?

I'm working on that, yes. But that's a difficult one. I've been working on this project for the last 15 years. I have been working for some time with a French writer, and we are working on an outline because after these 15 years of research I think I'm really ready to put it down. If it will ever be possible to make that, I'm not sure because it's very controversial, the idea to make a movie about Jesus. But I'm ready to do it, yes.

Craig Modderno is a freelance writer specializing in the entertainment industry.

Table of Contents     Top of Page