Inside the Mind of Director Jesse V. Johnson

Jesse V. Johnson, the brilliant director behind "Charlie Valentine", gives an intimate interview on the making of the film from conception through completion.

Q1. You said a motivator for writing “Charlie Valentine” was “a fear of repeating yourself”. What were you trying to create (and not repeat) in “Charlie Valentine”?

A. Well, I wrote and directed a film called “The Butcher” with Eric Roberts which involved an aging gangster and the L.A. underworld. I didn't want to do the same thing again, so, without it being a big deal, I tried to be cautious. It was really only a consideration in the script stage, each film takes on a life of it's own once you cast and start to build it.

In a character breakdown I wrote for myself, Charlie and Merle (the lead characters in “The Butcher”) knew each other in passing. Before Charlie left for Chicago, he was involved in a planned "hit", but Merle, who was a little younger and eager to prove himself, made it to the victim ahead of Charlie - the scene that Charlie walked in on is the "gory" act that warranted Merle his nickname of the Butcher.

I almost had this as a voiceover, when Charlie is explaining why he left California , but it felt top heavy and awkward, so I only kept the part about "the morality of others", which now plays over the end titles.

As it happens, I have two more projects involving hoodlums past their prime trying to scratch out a living in Los Angeles, and I don't think any of them repeat material. I like this genre, and if I was born 50 years earlier, I would be making westerns if I could. I would love to have been Anthony Mann or Bud Boetticher working with Gary Cooper or Joel McCrea.

Q2. There were plenty of scenes that displayed close-ups of the characters in the film, even slow motion shots that allowed the audience to really get a good look at the gruesome massacres that took place. How much input did you have regarding wardrobe and makeup?

A. The script for “Charlie Valentine” was very specific in what it called for, with detailed description of what various characters were to be wearing. The practical interpretation of this description involves a fair amount of creative ingenuity of course, and the wardrobe designer, Stacy Ellen Rich is someone I have worked with before and trusted. She has really stylish, had creative suggestions, and she certainly helped bring the characters to life with respect to what they are wearing and how their past life, chosen work, or sense of life-style influenced what they wore.

Stacy found a particular men's clothing shop in Los Feliz called JAKE, which specializes in retro and original antique clothing, the owner has a greased DA hairdo, and a vinyl record player blasting 60's era tunes, specifically the 1960's style Brat pack suits, all day. We decided early on that that was going to be our style choice for pretty much all of the male characters in the movie, the owner of the store was thrilled to have us there, and we brought the cast by individually for fittings; they really got the opportunity to think about their creative choices. I think that this is one of the most enjoyable ways to put a character together. I believe it also cemented a certain style for the whole movie, the clothes were all handpicked for the store, and then we chose the most interesting from that selection; so it fits that there might be a distinct theme.

Would real criminals honestly wear these outfits or talk this way? Probably not; but in the world of “Charlie Valentine”, it is absolutely authentic and there was reasoning and forethought behind every decision. There's a beautiful quote at the beginning of “Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid”, which I will paraphrase - "Most of what follows is true..." - going with that philosophy, “Charlie Valentine” was always intended to be a film that represented the way it should or could be, rather than actually how it is.

It had to be a very organized shoot to make the most of everyone’s availability. So I had to be very specific with what was required of makeup, as this is not something you want to wing at the last minute; the makeup effects were described in detail in the script.

Q3. On the film’s website, Charlievalentinethemovie.com, it states that you have had a successful career as a stunt coordinator and performer. To what extent were you involved in the stunt coordination and choreography for this film?

A. There really wasn't a vast amount of stunt work in this movie. We worked hard to create an environment where the actor's themselves performed the greater proportion of the stunts and “safetying” them without restricting their creative urges was the most serious consideration we had to deal with - of course this is probably one of the trickiest kinds of stunt coordination there is, especially with firearms, fights, special effects, cars and roof top chases. Michael Weatherly was very gung-ho; my friend Vernon Wells was desperate to kill himself by hanging over the side of a building, but I had to beg him not to take so many risks and it was exciting.

The fight choreography was worked out by the cast and the fight coordinator, Luke Lafontaine. Dominiquie Vandenberg (who plays Dominiquie) is one the stand alone, best fight guys in the world, so we were extremely fortunate, as I think it was the least amount physically he has ever had to do for a role. They would bring me their ideas in the form of a rehearsal, I gave my input, they disappeared and either incorporated my feedback, or came back with something completely different, at which point I was either overwhelmed by how creative they had been, glowing inwardly or lost my temper and threw coffee cups at them.

Raymond Barry would do anything that was asked of him in the script. He committed 100% and was ready to do anything that was required. I am still impressed by his energy and resolve; he would outpace many younger guys, but it wasn't an ego thing. Raymond is the kind of actor who commits totally to the role; to him having a stunt double do a stunt he could do himself would be unthinkable. I have a lot of respect for him, especially considering his very peaceful nature as a human; he is a painter and play-write, and cerebral, he loathes firearms, but committed himself to studying them anyway. He trained in knife fighting with a friend of mine, was tutored in IPSC fast pistol shooting my Dutch Merrick, and took Opera and shaving lessons that would be lessons in the use of the open razor, which are still given, surprisingly enough.

Overall though, the idea was not to have an action or stunts motivated film. Those elements are there, of course, but I hope they play a distinct second fiddle to the characters, the story. I really wasn't terribly interested in the mechanics of the action on this movie, I wanted to focus on the cast and what they were doing, thinking, or how they felt about what was going on.

This was a first for me, in that respect, and really quite liberating. Charlie Valentine (the character) has an interesting and complex relationship with firearms - he hates them, but realizes that he can't live without them, he isn't a good shoot, but will run up close and jam the gun in your ribs, to be sure - he's different to any other character I have written to this date, and it took some discipline not to revert to the superficial satisfaction of a shoot out without consequence, which anyone can do. Who knows if I pulled it off, but it was a step in an interesting direction, more honest, real. Those aren't nameless bodies falling, but dear old friends and associates.

Q4. In your biography (on the film’s website) it states that you are fascinated with the themes of crime, punishment and redemption. You also stated in another interview that your inspiration for this feature film has been drawn from the films of "Melville and Goddard" as you began writing your script in the South of France. Are these themes only partial to your inspiration for “Charlie Valentine”?

A. My whole life I've been haunted by the same nightmare: I'm hiding a body rolled up in a Turkish rug, and the sun is coming up and everywhere I put this damned body it's going to be discovered. Criminals fascinate me, I can't sleep if I cut someone off in traffic and it upsets them, these guys blinker themselves to the misery they cause (or are immune to it), and choose to do what they do and sleep at night, it all fascinates me. I like talking with these guys. I know a lot of ex-criminals, I think criminals are in tune with who is a potential sympathizer and who has no empathy for them, it's a part of their survival instinct. Maybe they tell their stories to anyone who'll listen, but they certainly seem to single me out as an ally and coconspirator. Most of the characters in “Charlie Valentine” were based on actual persons or incidents from stories related to me, which I'm sure were exaggerated or often outright fiction, but entertaining nevertheless.

The French crime films of the 50's and 60's appeal to me, I think because they were made by Europeans in love with American gangster movies, and the results were a blending of two sensibilities. In the U.S. gangsters have always been obsessed with fairly simplistic goals, money and power for example. I felt this was a rather boring common denominator; French gangsters often had far more complex motivators, often not understanding why they were doing what they were doing, and why they had been doing it all their life, was enough.

Stylistically I find the French new wave very fresh, fresher inspiration than a lot of modern cinema, they have certainly influenced me in that respect. Melville particularly, created a world in his movies that really never existed anywhere, but worked and felt real because of the care that he gave to the work. Bob le Flambeur was an enormous inspiration, and if Charlie was ever likened to anyone in cinema, I would love for it to be Bob the gambler.

I prefer to write while travelling; my head is just more fertile when it's being bombarded by new sensations, locations, food, people, and languages. Paris has probably a more distinct thumbprint on this movie than the south.

Q5. Most gangsters in films usually seem to have a flair for food, as did the character of “Charlie Valentine”. Was the idea to include that detail a given or was there a different reason for it?

A. Charlie's aim is to cheat Danny into trusting him and letting him stay. Charlie passes himself off as a chef, an opera aficionado, a great dresser, a story teller, a man of the world. He's interesting and represents everything Danny isn't - later we find out it's all a bit of an act, and truthfully, Charlie is a rascal and a coward, who really only knows the footnotes to what he's quoting, and can cook only one or two dishes, he's wrong about almost everything he quotes intellectually, and is immoral and faithless.

The fact that food is used in a lot of crime movies is probably more to do with the hedonistic lifestyle that free money supposedly allows.

Q6.Was any particular role in “Charlie Valentine” more difficult to cast than the others?

A. I agonize over all of the casting, especially the key roles. It's rarely easy, rarely proceeds without a hitch. I have a very clear idea of the character when I write the script, what he looks like, how he dresses, how he responds to certain stimuli. However, the moment I start casting, I find it easier to blank that slate and watch how the actors interpret my writing on their own, specifically without additional direction from me - I make the whole script available online to anyone reading for a role, no matter how small.

It was a tumultuous casting period, and none of the roles were easy to cast. But this is often the case, and casting is really one of the more creative and exciting aspects of movie making. Ted Warren (Tondino/Warren Casting) one of the casting directors on Charlie Valentine, was also a producer, effectively my boss, so this was a reverse dynamic and not necessarily the way I would chose it to be. He is, however, very thoughtful and educated and knows the business back to front, so we saw a lot of great talent. Two fantastic auditions that really stuck with me were Michael Pare and Louis Mandylor; I will definitely try to work with them in the future.

The role of Charlie was very difficult to fill, and we couldn't really hire the actor to play the son until we had secured the father. One of my favorite actors is Keith David. I had put his name forward for a while and I was quite excited about that prospect. Raymond Barry came in early for the role of Becker, and sold himself as our Charlie, we allowed him to show us what he had prepared and in fairly short order we found ourselves returning to him as the standard to beat.

Q7. Which role was the easiest to cast and why?

A. Dominiquie was written for my good friend Dominiquie Vandenberg, so it was not a matter of casting it, per se, but it was the quickest role to be filled. I wanted someone who could represent an incredible malevolent, unstoppable presence without talking much at all; it was obvious it should be Dominiquie when I wrote it. Dominiquie was a great supporter of mine when I was cutting my teeth, and is quite a character in his own right.

Q8. Michael Weatherly seemed to be the perfect choice for the role of Danny. Did you have him in mind for this particular role from the beginning?

A. Not at all. The part was written for a very different physical type. Also, I had never seen “NCIS” so I wasn't at all familiar with his work prior to casting. We were looking at a few different names; Michael just looked more like Raymond Barry than the others, and had shown an ability to portray character traits that I thought would work for Danny. Danny is a little insecure, troubled, physically handsome, but always seems a little uncomfortable in his own skin. Michael seemed to get this aspect of the role, and worked at it. He is fantastic on set, a dream to work with, the crew loved him and he is always coming up with interesting suggestions and ideas, many of which were incorporated into the movie.

Q9. “Charlie Valentine” has won several international awards thus far. As a result of this response, what are your overall expectations for the film?

A. I did not expect Charlie to get into any festivals, let alone win anything. I certainly didn't set out to make a festival movie. My view of festivals had always been a rather sour one, based on past experience, so I was speechless when we cleaned up at the AOF in Pasadena, then a screenplay award in Monaco, and the Silver Award at CCIFF was surreal. The film is still going strong on the festival rounds and I have been fortunate enough to have travelled all over the world with it and met a lot of very interesting and passionate film makers.

My aim, however, is still to have “Charlie Valentine” be a theatrical movie. It was designed and drafted for the big screen; the music and cinematography are there to be experienced, not watched on a laptop. Obtaining a theatrical release, even a small one is a matter of cast, finance, timing and luck.

Q10. How long did the entire film take to make from conception through final edits?

A. I think it was a year or so.

Q11. How long did you shoot the film and in what locations was it filmed?

A. It was shot principally over 18 days, 17 of those were at a warehouse in Downtown Los Angeles, Las Vegas and in the high desert. We shot a reduced unit after the first picture edit, for two days, on the run, picking up exteriors and travelling shots of the cars.

Q12. As a director, do you purposely cast the same actors for previous films you have completed?

A. Yes, when I find an actor who delivers consistently I try hard to keep him around. There are a good many actors that I am lucky enough to have worked with who are just extremely talented and good at what they do.

Q13. You have stated that you found yourself returning to Raymond J. Barry who initially auditioned for the role of Becker, the parole officer. Why did you choose to cast him as Charlie Valentine in the end?

A. He really matched what we were going for. It's instinctual for the most part; I liked the decisions he made in the auditions, and saw something of Charlie Valentine in a film he had done called “Interview with the Assassin” - that threat of violence just below the polite/amiable exterior.

Q14. Which character in “Charlie Valentine” can you relate to most? Why?

A. 100% Charlie; I like him the most. He really isn't greedy or so terribly evil, but the way he has lived life appeals to me. When Charlie reached that fork in the road where he could choose the selfish comfortable road or the generous harder road, he always chose the selfish road. I think it's to do with his mental programming; he's a great believer in the ultimate strength of the human species, meaning he buys into the view that people will look after themselves no matter how bad a position they are in when he decides to split on them.

He's an optimist in all things except his own fate. He has no conscience to speak of, no guilt, no qualms at night; he is a hedonist and a liar, but it's not a formulated attitude, it is just who he honestly is. Sometimes I'm jealous of him, but ultimately we are who we are. I'm not at all like him, but he is the character I most relate to. He is also the character I would like others to relate most to as well.

Haven't you ever thought about waking up at 3 in the afternoon, pulling on an Italian wool suit with handmade shoes, and strapping on a revolver, and after kissing your lover (many years your junior) goodbye, you plan to pull a heist, that may or may not set you up like a king for a year or two. No bills, no responsibilities, no rent, no car payments, no conscience, no problems; well perhaps not.

Q15. You’ve been quoted stating that “Charlie Valentine” is a film you have wanted to make for some time now.

A. I have been lucky enough to make a number of action oriented lower budget films, my stunt background no doubt helped in getting these assignments and as much fun as they are to shoot, the scripts were often weak, or were weakened by producers wanting to dumb down dialogue, or story. I was often not involved with the casting or editing, and often unable to alter the script. These works served as a great learning environment, and I'm thrilled to have made them, but I really wanted an opportunity to make a film that had some heart, being character driven instead of effects motivated. It was quite a decision and I am so pleased that people seem to enjoy the picture. I was really very fortunate to have Edward Robin as my executive producer; he was so supportive of the script, and really gave me a very free hand. He didn't make any script changes and basically supported my edit of the movie. It was a very unique position for me. I of course realize how incredibly lucky I was. Having a supportive producer, like Edward Robin, is certainly an enormous asset when it comes to making a satisfying film.

Q16. Edward Robin just bought another script of yours “set in a similar world to ‘Charlie Valentine’”. Is there anything you’d like audiences to know in anticipation of what’s to follow?

A. Edward Robin is an excellent producer and understands the artistic side of movie making. He is a singer and music aficionado, too, and really terrific to work for. That script does echo certain similar themes, but the two characters it follows are very, very different to either Danny or Charlie Valentine. The style of the story will be very different. We are planning to take a very modern technical approach, whereas “Charlie Valentine” was specifically designed to feel like a film from another era, down to the style of photography. This next one will feel very prescient in comparison, but the world the characters inhabit will perhaps feel just a little bit familiar.

It will be exciting, dynamic and character driven, you will be seduced, then betrayed, shot at and robbed, but ultimately you'll look back on it all as great adventure and feel privileged for having been there.