Quentin Dupieux:<\/strong> Yes, I’ve been obsessed. When I was a teenager, I was obsessed with what we call now the B-movies — like any kind of dirty, weird and low-budget stuff, without knowing it was low-budget, of course. (laughs) I was renting movies and watching these kinds of movies all the time —\u00a0as well as mainstream stuff like “Back to the Future,” like any normal teenager. But I was obsessed with some movies like “Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” and I would try (to recreate) the same in my yard with my videocamera — like, by inviting some friends over, and trying to shoot scenes with ketchup (as blood), nice stuff like that. That was when I was 15 years old or so. And then a little later I got into writing stuff and shooting more structured short films.<\/p>\n ShockYa: When you talk about the films that you were obsessed with, like “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” did you watch them 10, 15, 20 times?<\/strong><\/p>\n QD:<\/strong> Yes, yes, yes, of course — but without trying to understand. I was not consciously looking at editing or framing or anything like that, I was just fascinated without even really knowing why, for some stupid reason. When you’re young when you see something that is maybe evil or forbidden, it’s pretty exciting.\u00a0So I feel like I saw\u00a0every movie from the 1980s, the good ones and the very bad ones. Like with ” A Nightmare on Elm Street,” the first one, I think I watched that 200 times.<\/p>\n ShockYa: I think one of the fascinating things about “Rubber” was the debate surrounding it. Almost as interesting as the movie itself was reading or listening to\u00a0different takes or reads on it. How do you most broadly describe your films — meta-horror tales, comedic thrillers, or — ?<\/strong><\/p>\n QD:<\/strong> To me they’re just comedies, but not in the current sense of what we call comedies these days. I’m just trying to have fun. And of course yes, my movies contain some other stuff, but my approach is most directly about comedy. I like to write funny scenes and make them work. I’m not trying to be too smart, even if I know that in the writing process sometimes I’m doing some more deep stuff, just because I think it should also be a part of comedy. To me, I’m a comedy man.<\/p>\n ShockYa: It occurs to me that with both “Rubber” and “Wrong” that there are scenes that you could take, break out and show in any given film class, [that] would stand alone as a short film. How do you process ideas — do you have a macro sense of the story you’re wanting to tell, or are you drawing from bits and scraps of maybe different notions you’ve had, if that makes sense?<\/strong><\/p>\n QD:<\/strong> I know what you mean. Basically I have no method. It’s very stupid, but it’s something like painting — when I’m tired, writing\u00a0comes by itself. I just write and feel inspired exactly like a painter. You just suddenly feel “it,” and then I have this vision about a scenes and everything works in my mind, which means I’m not thinking.\u00a0I know I’m writing something good when I’m not thinking too much or trying to be smart, trying to be clever, trying to build a story. I know when something sounds good, and when something doesn’t… I don’t know how to explain this. It’s a very simple process. (laughs) Basically when I know something sounds good, I trust my instincts.<\/p>\n
![\"Director](\"http:\/\/www.shockya.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/director-quentin-dupieux.jpg\" "\\"Director")
<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"