EverythingBillSkarsgård

The actor, known and appreciated for his transformation skills, plays Robin Hood's inseparable sidekick. We asked him about his experience on set and how he approached his character, drawing comparisons to his past experiences with Pennywise and the vampire Orlock. However, we weren't able to get him to reveal his highly secretive acting technique.

What prompted you to participate in this project?

«First of all because it was written by Michael Sarnoski, whose Pig I loved. As l read, I tried to understand the tone he would use in directing it. Michael is talented and he wrote a truly fantastic script. It's funny, intelligent, unusual, and as a project, it was clear that it would raise a lot of issues. Which is exactly what I look for as an actor. A character I'd never played before, in a film that felt like an early medieval fairy tale with a dark, gothic, and violent atmosphere. I knew I'd have a stimulating challenge ahead of me in creating Little John, and I knew I'd have to work hard, understand and create my character. The same goes for the others.

They all accepted immediately after the reading of the script, which never happens, because first you have to check who the other actors are and other factors.

Instead, for Robin Hood, we all immediately said yes.

What can you tell us about the film?

«The story is set in Celtic lands, circa 1247 AD. Robin Hood is an elderly hermit wandering the ravaged lands, haunted by his past and consumed by loneliness.

He awaits the end that should have come long ago. But then I, Little John, an old companion of his, arrive.

A sweet and amoral tale of pillaging and murder, which drags him into one last adventure, where he is seriously injured.

When he awakens, he finds himself in a remote monastery where Sister Brigid introduces him to this new community, including a leper and a traumatized little girl. Here he has plenty of time to... discover who he really is. It's not a new Robin Hood, but just a different take on the story, as if this weren't the hero the whole world has come to know. In the film, we try to discover nothing other than the man behind the myth.

Was there anything that particularly surprised you?

«When you think of medieval battles, you think of knights in shining armor galloping on horseback, but more often than not it was simply peasants beating each other to death while immersed or immobilized in the mud.

What type is your Little John?

«He hasn't seen Robin for about ten years, he has assumed a different identity and calls himself Edward. He is married, has a daughter and has taken over a farm to try and lead a peasant life, hiding from everyone, in a sort of exile. But someone discovers his identity, figures out who he is, and... they capture his family and hold them hostage. When we meet Little John, it's because he turned to Robin for help. As the story progresses, we learn more and more about him, including the fact that Robin took him in when he was just a boy.

Marlon Brando once said that it's not the size of a role that matters, but how big you make it, leaving your mark. In your case, we always expect wonders with your characters, whether it's Pennywise, Eric Draven, or Count Orlok. How do you prepare? And what about Little John?

«Each character is different and requires different preparation. I don't know if there's something they have in common, perhaps a thread of my creativity that I apply to them. It has to do with a technique of mine that I don't intend to reveal to anyone, though. [laughs] For Little John, I had to develop a language that I don't normally possess, an older English, the Northern dialect that Michael wanted all of us actors in the film to speak. I worked with dialect coach Brendan Gunn. I had to understand how my character spoke to practice and perfect, above all, the voice and accent. Then I wanted to make him believable, and give him a visual aspect, through the costumes, the shaved head, the unkempt beard, the scars. After all, he's a man who's had a much harder life than me.

While for the vampire in Nosferatu and Pennywise in It?

«Pennywise was a much more experimental character; in the first film, neither Andy Muschietti nor I knew exactly what we wanted to achieve, so we tried a lot of different things, and the character emerged from that process. With Nosferatu, Eggers had a very, very specific, meticulously detailed script, which even described how the character would breathe, the sound of his voice, and so on. It was more about trying to be precise and create something that was in line with his vision. It was very different, but in the end, you prepare and do whatever it takes to find the voice of a character, his cadence, tone, accent, and so on. You also try to understand the character's psychology as much as possible, but then, when you play him, the goal is not to think about any of that and just let the character come to life. To exist."

The film was shot entirely in Ireland. How did you find it?

«Ireland is beautiful, I loved it. We were in Northern Ireland. Our base was outside Belfast, and every day we had to travel about an hour and a half. The locations that interested my character were immersed in beautiful landscapes, on top of hills, with panoramic views of nature.

The country is beautiful, the people are fantastic. The only shame is that all my scenes were outdoors, and we were in Northern Ireland, in the middle of winter. So the weather was windy, cold, wet, and muddy. But that was also the beauty of it! •

—When I saw the film, I was very surprised by your performance, your interpretation, but I think you never choose quiet films lately. Here you're always in action, very expressive, and very tense. What attracts you to a project like this?

—Yeah, I don't know. I mean, I was thinking about that too. And I think, "But maybe I'd like to, maybe I should do something quiet and very subtle, passive, you know," but no, this certainly wasn't it. He's a very frenetic man, with a lot of initiative, and he's the one who sets the whole film in motion. And his behavior and his way of being dictate everything that happens in the film. You know, he's the kidnapper. And yeah, it was a lot of fun. It was a lot of fun. I don't know if I particularly like it, I don't know. It's hard for me to define what, I mean, it's not like I'm consciously looking for these kinds of roles or anything. It's just that they come to you and you approach them, and then you find that this opportunity presented itself suddenly. I love Gus Van Sant, and that alone was a reason to do it, and also the character was incredible, so dynamic and so complex, and funny, strange, and volatile. It's like so many things were happening that I was so excited to do it, so, yeah, I can't really pinpoint what motivates me, you know, but it's definitely things. And it also scares me a lot. I wasn't sure if I could do it; it had a lot of dialogue, and in a way, it's very region-specific. It's like an Indianapolis, Midwestern, '70s story. And so it was, it was kind of like: the character is so different from my own experience, will I be able to portray him believably? And all that, but those things, like when I'm excited and scared at the same time, that's where I want to be. So maybe the new challenge is to do something where I don't do anything at all.

—Or just being silent, simply resting in the scene. You have some connections with our country. Obviously, the Muschietti brothers, but you also participated in the remake of Four by Four. What connects you to Argentina?

"Four by Four is a great film. And we remade it with the title 'Locked Up.' I've never been to Argentina. I really want to go. I'm very close to Andy Muschietti and his sister Barbara thanks to the It franchise and the films. I consider them part of my family. So I should have visited them a long time ago. Because I want to visit them and get to know Argentina through them. I'm really looking forward to it."

—Well, we're waiting for you here.