Richard Ayoade interview: The Double and social awkwardness
As his latest film, The Double, appears in UK cinemas, we chat to director Richard Ayoade about its making, social awkwardness and more...
âMaybe Brad Pitt doesnât know what itâs like to be unpopular,â actor, writer and director Richard Ayoade tells me, his voice quiet and reflective, âbut most people know what itâs like to have no one interested, or to be lonely, or to be knocked back, or to regret.â
Ayoadeâs referring to his new film, The Double, a brilliantly surreal and poignant drama starring Jesse Eisenberg. Adapted from the novel of the same name by Fyodor Dostoevsky, itâs about a painfully shy young office worker (Eisenberg) and his polar opposite (also Eisenberg), whoâs outgoing and confident. Unfolding like a science fiction nightmare, The Double is like a visual representation of anxiety and awkwardness, a portrait of a man who feels utterly out of step and unable to connect with the world around him.
Itâs Ayaodeâs second project as director, and follows his stunning debut, Submarine. But where that story of a lonely outsider was an exterior, rhythmic film, The Double is all claustrophobic interiors and jagged sound effects and edits. Superbly shot and brilliantly acted, itâs an assured film from this still relatively new director â yet in person, Ayoade is softly-spoken, self-effacing, and always ready with a thoughtful answer. Hereâs what he had to say.
Speaking as a somewhat socially anxious person, I felt as though youâd read my mind when you made this film.
Well, thank you very much.
I thought of it as a kind of dystopia of the mind. Is that how you intended it to be read?
Itâs all from his point of view, so yes. It was trying to be very subjective and not to present it as objective reality. Youâre very much in his head. I think the book does that. Youâre emotionally taken to places that arenât very rational, and you almost canât work out where you are in reality â but [I was] trying not to do it in a way that was annoying or confusing, where youâre in no-manâs land.
I like very subjective films, like Taxi Driver, that have a strong point of view from one character.
Does The Double reflect your own worldview, or maybe your feelings when youâre in public?
I sort of felt, when I first read Aviâs script â and then we were working together on it â and the book, is that when somethingâs really well-written, you feel completely engaged and immersed in what that characterâs going through. Itâs the same in The Godfather â youâre completely following that character, even though itâs not the kind of behaviour where you might do the exact same thing. Emotionally, you feel completely engaged with it. A lot of times, people talk about their films as though itâs a selling point that theyâre relatable, as if you want to see a film about someone like you.
Thatâs something Iâd never seek out â oh, this personâs like me except in a film. Like, itâs more that something either feels right or not. You just sort of feel it subconsciously somehow. All the situations in the book where everyoneâs laughing at him. Itâs not that Iâve ever necessarily been persecuted or anything, but you know that feeling. I think people â maybe Brad Pitt doesnât know what itâs like to be unpopular, but most people know what itâs like to have no one interested, or to be lonely, or to be knocked back, or to regret. I think you know those things, even if it hasnât in this exact way to you. So I definitely felt it when I read it, yeah.
So when it came to the way The Double looks and sounds â which is incredibly distinctive and powerful â did you have those things in your mind from the beginning, or did those visual and aural ideas come later?
It always changes, and changes so much when everyone becomes involved, like the costume designer and makeup and cinematographer and the editor. All these people bring their abilities to it. There might be some people who can think of it and then itâs just a matter of getting to the precise thing they had in their head, but I feel I took so much from the people who worked on it.
From the story we had a sense that it should be in a specific world. Because thereâs something mythological about doppelgangers, and also that it needed to be at night all the way through, because there should be something nightmarish or dreamy about it. And that it shouldnât have too much realistic detail, so you can go, âOh, thatâs the office I work inâ. You have to accept it as an alternate world, almost like science fiction in a way.
I recently saw Her, and I really liked the design of that. I felt completely⌠I didnât really question it. It felt like a real place, and the technology wasnât important, in a way; it just provided a great context for you to go into the story and this interesting relationship.
I guess, in a way, [The Double] has similar aims to that film. And maybe the production design that David Crank did has similar aims, even though itâs gone in a completely different direction.
Doppelgangers arenât uncommon in cinema. Did you think about other films with doubles in them? For example, Double Impact?
Yes, yes. I havenât seen Double Impact, to my shame. But I think my editor did some work on that, I think. I him saying to me that he did some work on it in the 1990s. And I think he said it was quite difficult to get a body double for Jean-Claude Van Damme, because he has quite a specific physique. But I watched Dead Ringers, and just in of the technology â there are certain things you want from the person whoâs playing the double.
Because thereâs flat-out motion control, where you have Jesse Eisenberg and no one else there, and then another Jesse. Then you have the shots where youâre shooting over the shoulder of somebody, and thatâs a real-life double. And often, actors have one â Chevy Chase has a body double, so if heâs not available for an over-the-shoulder shot they can get the double in and he can appear in it.
And so it was interesting to see how it was shot, and because you know as youâre watching it that what youâre seeing is a physical impossibility, youâre watching it more closely than you would normally watch coverage in a film. So youâre going, âAre they really looking at one another? Does that really look like his shoulder?â Those are questions you wouldnât normally ask, so you have to be more precise about it. And also maybe more sloppy about it, because films always have mistakes in them, and in a weird way, thatâs what makes them feel real. Because films are shot in a certain way, you canât have correct continuity. And I think that what gives certain films their energy â for example Martin Scorseseâs films â is the lack of continuity, so something that makes you aware that itâs been made almost feels more real.
So for example a documentary, where you feel the cameramanâs presence, and you know itâs artificial, makes it seem more realistic. You have all these counter-intuitive things. But thatâs a long answer. Itâs something we were very mindful of â how do you make sure we know thereâs two of them, and how do you move the camera in a way that you would with two actors rather than one. We donât want it to look as though we shot it for effects, I guess.
The reason I mentioned Double Impact was because, to differentiate between the two Jean-Claude Van Dammes, they had one with slicked-back hair and one without gelâŚ
Right! Well, thatâs good. Thatâs as much as you need.
Itâs a good visual shortcut. So how did you go about subtly differentiating for the audience the difference between the two Eisenbergs?
It was important that there shouldnât be any visual difference between them at the start. Because part of the premise, or the joke, or whatâs sad about it is that theyâre identical, but everyone likes one more than the other. And thereâs no reason whatsoever why. Well, okay, Simonâs got a better haircut, or his clothes are better, or heâs speaking louder, or he has a deeper voice. But really, thereâs no reason. And itâs that nightmarish aspect that appealed to us.
The only thing that really differentiated them was Jesseâs performance, and the different attitudes he brought to each character. What was amazing was, in the edit, we always knew which character he was, even though he was wearing the same clothes. He modulates his voice between the two, but not in a really caricatured, obvious way. But instantly youâd know.
So yeah, all credit to him.
Itâs a stunning performance. This film is very different from Submarine in look and tone, even though it has certain aspects in common, like the outsider protagonist. But as a filmmaker, do you think youâre the type of director whoâll want to do something absolutely different with each film?
Itâs so hard to imagine that youâll get to make another film [laughs]. I was so grateful I got to make this one. It seems to me so amazing, the prospect that you could make another film, and itâs hard to know what it will be. I donât know exactly. These were two very different sources, though, I guess. Joe [Dunthorneâs] book is really good, but very different to the Dostoevsky book. So theyâre always likely to be very different.
I canât imagine doing another film like this because of how singular that book is. But I like being in that world and being involved in it, yes.
Can you imagine doing something quite big and Hollywood-like if the opportunity were to come up?
Iâm very happy to have made these films, and Iâd be happy to make films like this if I were able to. Itâs not like a specific ambition at all. And in a way, the scale of something isnât really in your mind when you read it. For example, I wasnât reading Joeâs book and going, âOh, well this is this budget rangeâ. Maybe later when you start thinking about it more, you go, âOkay, well this is a different kind of thing.â Itâs more how you respond to it, or have an idea that you like.
I think people who direct big films have a very difficult job, because you really have to please a lot of people, probably in a way that wouldnât come very easily to me, I donât know. I canât imagine being asked, really!
Itâs quite unusual for a British film to deal with a characterâs psycho-geography, if you like. Do you agree with that, and if so, why do you think that is?
No, I agree. I suppose thereâs a strong social-realist tradition in English cinema, and that has a more objective lens on it. A more documentary type of lens. Which is interesting, because there are other directors in that tradition, like Kozlovsky, who end up going along an objective line of filmmaking.
Iâm interested in that question, but I donât know the answer. Also, maybe⌠maybe the kind of big, English novels existed at a time before novels went really interior. And that interiority is more of a feature of the American 20th century novel, and European novels. And maybe that isnât the English tradition, which is more descriptive and in a social tradition. But when I think of first-person novels and that colloquial address, itâs more American, perhaps. I donât know, what do you think?
I think youâre right. The Double reminds me of European writing and filmmaking. I havenât read Dostoevskyâs novel, embarrassingly, but the film reminds me of Camus and Kafka. Existential and absurd. But also it reminds me of American filmmakers. Its sensibility doesnât necessarily feel British.
Itâs not a country of existentialism, England, is it? Itâs more a kind of reasonable, or satirical culture. Iâve often thought that since Powell and Pressburger, thereâs been a kind of crisis of protagonists â which sounds like the most pretentious title for a dissertation ever, âThe crisis of protagonistsâ. [Laughs] Itâs hard to have an everyman. I was amazed when Ewan McGregor was in Trainspotting; I just thought, this is the first time in ages thereâs been a front-foot everyman who doesnât have to drastically apologise for their own existence, like Hugh Grant does.
The idea of an English Tom Hanks isnât conceivable. I think itâs hard to have a first-person, because who would be that first-person that people could feel theyâd relate to? Do you know what I mean? Being an English person, and also being the centre, itâs not a very English attribute. Theyâd rather be on the fringes.
Well, it looks as though I have to go now. But could you tell me whether youâre going to make a Garth Marenghi film? Please tell me you are!
I donât think so, unfortunately, no!
Damn! Well, I had to ask. Richard Ayoade, thank you very much.
The Double is out in UK cinemas on the 4th April. You can read our review here.
Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.