Interview: John Madden -“She’s actually doing that and not defined by all the things a woman is usually defined by” on Miss Sloane

John Madden first worked with Jessica Chastain in 2010 on The Debt. Forward six years, and they’re reunited for his latest project, Miss Sloane. An intense thriller about a Washington lobbyist who takes on the toughest opponent of her career. It’s a powerful performance from Chastain, and Madden explains as soon as he read the script he knew she was the perfect choice for the film.

We sat down to talk about working on the film and what the challenges were for him in bringing the look of Miss Sloane to the big screen.

Awards Daily: It’s such a great film. It was so empowering to see something like this on the big screen.

John Madden: It speaks very loudly to women doesn’t it?

AD: Yes. It’s great seeing a strong protagonist female in the form of Jessica Chastain.

JM: At last!

AD: It’s been so long since we’ve had her in a role where she’s driving the film.

JM: Absolutely, in a film where she’s actually doing that and not defined by all the things a woman is usually defined by.

AD: How did it get to you?

JM: You know Jonathan’s side of the story? It’s the stuff fantasies are made of if you’re a writer. Then he got the impression that there might be interest in that project. He actually didn’t meet the agents and representation because he lived in Asia.

Filmnation sent it out to see who would respond, and I did. I responded emphatically. I was interested in the material and the subject. I also thought it was an extraordinary gig. I said, “I needed to be with the writer as the script has a way to go.” They told me where he was, and I was happy to Skype with him and build something, but I also mentioned that I couldn’t create that relationship over Skype and that he needed to be with me, in my presence so we could get in each other’s head.

The relationship with the writer is crucial to me. I believe in making the film first, on the page so all the actors can understand where exactly I think the film should be going.

He came over, and I was the first person he ever met who had anything to do with the industry. He’d never met his manager, his representation. He created those relationships over Skype. He’d never met anyone who optioned his script, so it was a really interesting process. He’s incredibly open, engaging and didn’t necessarily have any idea about the process that was involved.

I didn’t know if he could re-write as he’d just rewritten, but he was open and it was fruitful and we took it onto the next iteration about her character.

AD: you’ve worked with Jessica before in The Debt. At what point did you decide you wanted her to play Miss Sloane?

JM: Between page 5 and page 10 or earlier. It’s true. She and I have been trading material since we worked together. I loved her. She wasn’t known when we worked on The Debt, it came out two years after we made it. We had wanted to do something since then. She would send me material asking if I’d be interested in projects, but for various reasons that hadn’t borne fruit.

I read this, and almost instantly, I knew. She’s so unique as an actress, and I knew she’d have the verbal dexterity to deliver this part. She’s so fast and powerful that you needed an actress who could accommodate that and one that had underlying fragility, which is something Jessica always has, and can always call on. I thought she’d be interested in the material and subject, and she came back saying, “I want to do this with you.”

It happened really quickly.

AD: Gugu is absolutely brilliant.

JM: Her spectacular talent is great. I love the physical contrast between them. Gugu is rounded, soft, and sensual. Jessica can be those things, but in this, she is sharp, angular and very white. They are polar opposites of each other, in the film, and this is the point of connection, they have erased some part of themselves. In Gugu’s case, that character as it were, has detached herself from the experience which defines what she’s doing.

Jessica has also cut herself off from some interior life, whatever that interior life is. That is actually where Johnny and my collaboration was all about, it was about that relationship and how that became the spine of the film.

AD: Did you have a problem with the topic?

JM: I didn’t. It’s an issue that deserves airing and it seems extraordinary that it’s not being dealt with. Being closer to the ground, I understand that, I understand that its passionate on both sides of the argument. The film is not about the gun issue. It’s about the political process which is fascinating not just in this country, but to the rest of the world, especially with a woman at the center of it.

I’m aware of how hot that issue is, and so is Johnny, but his instinct was a proper storytelling one, which was, it’s going to be a very interesting film if the stakes are going to be very high in it. There are a few issues and that’s obviously one, it also goes into a visceral level of response for people which are horror, revulsion and disbelief on one end, and a fundamental right which has to do with individuality which has to do with the other argument. That’s just going to create passionate views.

I met someone in Prague who ran a theater company, I told him, and he said, “I don’t think an American can make that film,” meaning I think they would feel targeted immediately.

As I stand outside it, I have views on the subject, but they’re not my views to have as I don’t live in this country.

AD: How did you come up with the look for Miss Sloane?

JM: It was an interesting challenge because it’s a film that takes place in unpromising landscapes. Conference rooms are not necessarily the stuff of compelling cinema, but I felt that there was a very cinematic landscape that could be explored in this film.

The cinematographer and I worked carefully on thinking about how those places would work. Glass is an important part in the way the film articulates itself, but as much as anything else it has to do with a shooting style and a rhythm.

One of the things that attracted me when I first read it was the sheer exhilaration of a film that works at that speed where the brain is working so fast. I love smart film, and if you can do that in a way when the audience can keep up with us, that’s great. In this film, you have ten or fifteen minutes where you wonder if you’re going to keep up, but then it clicks into place.

It has to do with momentum, choreography, and speed. It has to do with the way different ideas intersect.

I’d always conceived it in a particularly visual way and how the camera was moving. Also in editing, the movie is shifting in time and place all the time. We managed to carve out a language that gave it a cinematic presence and feel because I wanted it to be something that belonged on a big screen rather than a small one. I think that and the fact that the film is a portrait of a very extraordinary character who is also a woman is key to the whole thing about making it feel a satisfying cinematic experience.

AD: That’s what I found so refreshing seeing this great character on screen.

JM: Also not sentimentalized. She’s terribly flawed and terribly lost in some ways. Not in a clichéd way that she’s someone looking for love, or damaged in childhood. She’s somebody who has completely carved out a powerful position in the world and knows how to conduct herself and knows how to clear men out of the way when they’re not helping her cause.

There’s something fascinating about that. All the key relationships are with women, with one notable exception but that’s an odd relationship and unusual one, a two ships passing in the night kind of thing. There are many inversions there that make it very fascinating.

AD: Thank you. I can’t wait to see it again.

JM: It’s very satisfying because once you know where it’s going…[laughs]