One of the striking things about "Possession" is how different it is from your other films - "In the Company of Men" and "Your Friends & Neighbours" particularly. Was that a conscious choice on your part?
On this and "Nurse Betty", I've worked with other writers. "Possession" didn't fall into my lap, I chased it down being a fan of the book. It probably reflects more of what my interest is as a director rather than as a writer. AS Byatt calls it a romance and I tried to stay true to that, but I've gotten hung for it in the States. I'm used to dividing critical opinion, but I didn't think it would be so split. Those who expected a hearty dose of irony from me came out thinking, "What the hell is this?" But I'll certainly return to those darker films, don't worry.
Was it a hard sell in Hollywood?
I guess so, this was around for ten years at Warner Bros before I started on it. And they are a company not known for this kind of material - they famously passed on "The English Patient". I understand their concerns, though, it is a demanding proposition to make a movie like this. They want to know they are going to get some return, so when they see someone like Gwyneth Paltrow, the lights start going on because she's had success in all the arenas this film touches. She's done the dialect, the period film, she's won awards and made money at the box office. With that kind of keystone, they start to see how this thing can be made.
When you work with someone as often as you do with Aaron Eckhart, are you casting him because you know exactly what he's going to do for you, or because he constantly surprises you?
I know what he's capable of, I never know what he's going to do. When you know someone quite well like I know Aaron, to be able to watch them transform and become someone different in front of you is pretty exciting. I've been hard pressed to find anything that he couldn't do. He probably could have played Gwyneth's role if I'd put him to the test and Warner Bros had been interested!
