Having established a reputation for herself as one of the most promising young filmmakers working today, we had the pleasure of sitting down with Mia Hansen-Løve in a Parisian hotel to discuss her latest project, Eden – which depicts the life of a DJ coming up through the ranks in the French House music scene – based on her very own brother’s experiences. She explains why she felt the story of an underdog worked better as opposed to chronicling the tale of Daft Punk, her experiences shooting in the US, and the dynamic in being married to another successful filmmaker in Olivier Assayas.
More often than not, in films of this nature we take the perspective of the those who did make it – so in this case, it would be Daft Punk, for instance. But do you think that people who struggle sometimes have more interesting stories to tell?
People who have a story that isn’t a success story, allow me to tell a more nuanced story. I relate more to the story of my brother’s life, than to that of Daft Punk. I admire them, I love their music and I’m a huge fan, as is my brother, but I do think, and the public probably wouldn’t agree as a film about Daft Punk would be more successful than Eden, but I deeply believe that making a film about somebody who has struggled, and isn’t perfect, who has weaknesses – that’s closer to the world that I see, to the people around me. This film is about those people. It might not the sort of characters the public want to see in films, a lot of people like to see people who don’t look like them, idealised people, heroes. People say to me that the lead in Eden should be more self-assured or determined in his way of living, but I still see his humanity and his depth and his poetry. I feel a necessity to show these characters, especially because we don’t usually see them in films, because in cinema we have more conventional, basic, positive heroes.
You shot in the US for the first time – how was that experience?
It was very hard. I enjoyed it and hated it at the same time. I love shooting in other countries, and all of my films have had days shot in different places and I’d love to make a whole film outside of France. I enjoyed shooting these huge crowds at real parties, and it was tough but exciting to film American actors with a different life and different architecture, so for that I loved it. But the one thing I didn’t like was the way people were working. It was also because we weren’t well-prepared enough, we really did it in a rush, only 10 days in the US and I couldn’t choose the team, I had to work with the people who were available. But maybe with more preparation and if you can choose the proper people one by one you can create it differently.
The film is subtle and without a great degree of conflict – did you have to fight for that to be the case?
Yes, it was so hard to finance the film because of that. It was one of the reasons why it was difficult, that people felt it was too much of a chronicle and not enough conflict. I didn’t even understand what they meant, it was like they were talking another language. It was tough, they wanted it to be like this or like that and the best thing I could say was, make your own film about it, maybe it will be better – but this is the film I am making, this is the only way I know how to tell a story. This is what seems most true and honest to me. If you want me to tell another story – you do it, but let me do my own in my own way. It’s very difficult during these discussions because it feels like we basically don’t speak the same language. I felt if I had listened to them I would have lost my faith in the film. I know so many young directors and friends of mine who have trouble making their film, getting the same reproach. Often they lose self-confidence because of that and so start to try and please people, but you can’t really, because it’s not you. They would make a second version, or a third version, and it still doesn’t please the commissioners and they don’t know why they are doing it anymore. So I think, and I’ve always thought, that it’s not that I’m so self-assured, but if you believe in something you have to at least protect and preserve that and try to stick to it, because if you let it go and stop defending what you propose as a way of telling stories and making films, then you get really lost.
You didn’t go to film school or read books on making films, so how did you approach and navigate you way around this industry?
Yeah, I studied German. But I was a film critic for two years and though it didn’t help me from a technical point of view, it still helped me think about about the way you put your feelings into words, which is something I still find difficult, so that was helpful. I’ve been living with a filmmaker for a long time, and I was lucky to have discussions and ask questions, and I guess it replaced film school for me.
What’s it like living with another director – do you influence each other?
I don’t know, I don’t think I influence him, you should ask him that! But he certainly influences me, sub-consciously. It’s inspiring for me to see the evolution of his filmmaking and sometimes I get the feeling there is a secret dialogue between my films and his, but I’m not sure he would say the same thing, but that’s how I feel about it.
So next up is Things to Come – what’s that all about?
It’s about a philosophy teacher, played by Isabelle Huppert. I will be shooting this summer if we get financed. I can’t wait to work with Isabelle, I have known her for ever, I even played in a film with her but only a scene, I played her daughter which is funny. It’s where I met her the first time so I’ve known her a long time, but the first time we’ve properly worked together. I’m very happy.
Eden has a personal connection – is there anything that ties you with this one too?
Well both of my parents are philosophers [laughs].
Eden is released on July 24th. You can read our review of the film here.
