Had Frank Oz never directed a single frame of film, his place in the pop-culture pantheon would still be secure. Oz was the voice and hands behind some of the 20th century's most beloved characters, from Star Wars series guru Yoda to The Muppets' Miss Piggy and Fozzie Bear to Sesame Street's Bert, Grover, and Cookie Monster. But since emerging from Jim Henson's outsized shadow in the early '80s, Oz has also become a dependable comedy director, with a string of well-received hits, including 1986's Little Shop Of Horrors, 1988's Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, 1991's What About Bob?, 1997's In & Out, and 1999's Bowfinger.
In the '00s, Oz has opted for more unexpected projects, like the flawed but compelling 2001 caper film The Score (one of Marlon Brando's last movies), the muddled 2004 science-fiction comedy The Stepford Wives, and most recently, the dark-hued, relatively low-budget British comedy Death At A Funeral. The A.V Club recently spoke with the legendary puppeteer and opinionated director about the hazards of working with Brando, the Muppets' stint on the first season of Saturday Night Live, and why he's perfectly fine with Yoda's evolution from puppet to full-on CGI.
The A.V. Club: After doing two very complicated movies with The Score and Stepford Wives, were you looking to do something more—
Frank Oz: Not The Score. The Score was extraordinarily satisfying and self-contained. The Stepford Wives was too big and it was unsatisfying to do. Not that it was unsatisfying to do, but it was unsatisfying as a result, because as much as I loved parts of it, and I'm really proud of so much of it, the entire movie wasn't what I wanted it to be. It's my own fault, I didn't follow my instincts. So I was really looking to get back to years ago, how I started having fun, just on these low, low, low, rather than big, big, big budget movies. This happened with Death At A Funeral, which only cost $9 million to make.
AVC: What do you mean, not trusting your instincts?
FO: Well, Stepford Wives got to be very big, partly because the actors and actresses were very big. When you do that, you get more of everything. You get more makeup people, more makeup people means more drivers, those drivers become Teamsters. It's not I'm against that; it's just what happens in a big movie. I'm used to it, but on Stepford Wives, for the first time and through nobody's fault but my own, all the actors were great, but I was too beholden to the budget —I felt too responsible if the budget was getting higher. And I don't like to work with that high a budget, and I tried to play it safe in decision-making, as opposed to following my gut, subversive instincts. And it was a mistake, my mistake totally. It wasn't a bad movie, I'm very, very proud of aspects of it, but it wasn't the more intimate movie I wanted to make.
AVC: It was kind of pitched between social satire and horror/science-fiction.
FO: It wasn't clear. That's 'cause the director didn't have a clear thought. Totally my fault.
AVC: You went through the focus-group testing process with—
FO: There are focus groups with every movie. Sometimes I listen to them, sometimes I don't.
AVC: How do you feel about the process as a whole?
FO: I think the process is great, as long as you don't use it as gospel, as long as you go with your instincts at the end of the day.
AVC: Do you think you have a British sense of humor, or a British sensibility?
FO: I have no idea what a British sensibility or a British sense of humor is. [Laughs.] I have no concept of what that is. I have no concept of what American sensibility is. I was born in Great Britain, but I was only there for six months, and we moved to Belgium, where I grew up. I love Britain, I lived there for nine years doing shows and things, but I don't know what a British sensibility is. I'd like to have someone tell me what an American sensibility is.
AVC: Well, from caricatures or stereotypes—
FO: There are stereotypes and caricatures in American movies, too.
AVC: The idea is that a British sense of humor may be a little wryer, a little darker, a little more highbrow, perhaps, though there's certainly a kind of door-slamming farce to it.
FO: Maybe. I bet you I could find movies in the United States that fit that definition too. Nevertheless, I'm not challenging you, I just don't know.
AVC: It's not a negative thing at all.
FO: Maybe I am challenging you, because I don't like to have these words banded about, like "British sense of humor," "American sense of humor," though I'll be damned if I know what they are.
AVC: If we could narrow it down…
FO: Yeah, I can buy certain of those elements. In Death At A Funeral, I needed archetypes, because it's a traditional farce. I needed to do that on purpose. And I needed it to be in a country that had a sense of propriety and class, because of the secret from that movie—if it was a secret in a funeral in the United States, I think we'd know in 10 minutes. And in Britain, or say, Japan, where you also have to maintain a sense of propriety—at all costs, you've got to keep that propriety. Here, we don't have to keep propriety. It was important that it was in a country like England, and it certainly was written for British people, because it was written by a Brit.
AVC: Why aren't more comedies set at funerals?
FO: It's not the usual place. [Laughs.] I think they're ripe for comedy, because everybody is trying to act a certain way. I don't know, I guess it all depends—it's all about script.
AVC: So between the first set of Star Wars movies and the second set, they started doing Yoda as CGI. You're very obviously associated with that character—how did you feel about that?
FO: Fine, fine. George [Lucas] wanted to have a big fight scene, and he could not do a fight unless it was CGI, it couldn't be a puppet. If we'd stayed to the way we did it in the first two, then we'd be compromising the movie.
AVC: So you didn't feel like there was a warmth or old-fashioned craft to puppetry?
FO: Sure there's a difference with puppet-craft—who cares? I don't care about the puppet-craft, I care about what works. Who cares about the puppet and craft? It's not about that. It's about compelling an audience, and touching an audience in some way.
AVC: You don't have a sentimental attachment to old-school puppetry?
FO: Not one second. All I wanted was for the story to work. It worked, and it couldn't have worked, there couldn't have been that great fight with Count Dooku, unless it had been done with CGI.
AVC: It seems like they expanded Yoda's role dramatically—
FO: Absolutely. Yeah, you don't want to stand still.
AVC: How was it, returning to a character after 13 years?
FO: Once you get a character, you lock it in your heart—it's there.
AVC: They just put out the first season of Saturday Night Live, which hadn't been available on video even, let alone DVD. Did you watch the first season?
FO: I haven't seen the first season for 25 years, since I was on it.
AVC: Has it been tempting for you to—
FO: I never knew the first season was out.
AVC: You haven't been getting royalty checks from it?
FO: I don't get royalty checks. I never get royalty checks.
AVC: But all the characters that you do—
FO: I used to, years ago, but now they're not my characters. They're physically owned by other people.
AVC: What are your memories of doing Saturday Night Live?
FO: It was great. It was wonderful to be part of something so fresh and new at that time. The Muppets were the only known commodity, except maybe for Albert Brooks, who did the short films. John [Belushi] and Chevy [Chase] and Dan [Aykroyd] and Jane [Curtin], nobody knew them. It was a wonderful experience every week to do the dress rehearsal and then the air. On the other hand, it was difficult, because we were on the wrong show. We were kind of punchy, cartoon-y comedy on a show that had Second City casual comedy, and the styles of comedy didn't mesh. And they were writing for us, and they really didn't understand how to write for us. Which is fine, it's very difficult to write for the Muppets. We were taking up airtime, and as much as we got along with all the guys there, the cast wanted more time for themselves. Personally, it was great, but professionally, it was problematic.
AVC: How did the Muppets become part of SNL?
FO: Bernie Brillstein was the manager of The Muppets' Jim Henson, and Bernie also managed John Belushi, he also managed Lorne Michaels, and at that time, we were the only people they knew. And so he thought we could help out and also be something of a draw, because of what we had done in the past.
AVC: We talked about The Score earlier. At what point did Marlon Brando become involved in the project?
FO: When I asked him to be. I went to Bob [De Niro] first, and Bob said yes, then we were going to—I forget who was first. Maybe it was Marlon next, then I think it was Edward [Norton]. So I wanted Marlon.
AVC: So everything fell into place once Brando was involved?
FO: Once Bob was involved. Without Bob, I could have never got them.
AVC: What was your first impression of Marlon Brando?
FO: Well, first impression is unfair, because a first impression of somebody is guarded, and you don't know the person. I think after I'd had a couple of two-hour meetings with him, personally and quietly in his home, and we worked for three weeks together… And it was a hellish time, very, very tough time for him and me. But I thought after a while, first impressions are the impressions that anybody gets, looking at Marlon Brando in a newspaper. So that doesn't help. The actual person inside, I think he was tortured. I think he was distrustful, and I think he was a genius, and I think he was wonderfully childlike and innocent and very tender and sincere and sensitive.
AVC: It was the first studio production he had been in, in many years.
FO: Yeah, and not 'cause of me. He didn't know who I was. I think it was because of Bob and the money.
AVC: Because of the stories about him, did you prepare yourself for the worst?
FO: I prepared myself too well. I told myself I would not allow him to turn this into The Island Of Dr. Moreau. I would not let him take over. And I was just wrong. I was not nurturing, so it is my fault, so we clashed very badly.
- Comments