Bertrand Bonello has directed one of the most acclaimed films of the year, The Beast. He speaks with Andy Hazel about loneliness, artificial intelligence and his audacious epic that takes in 2014 incel culture, Belle Époque Paris and a future in which humans erase sources of emotion to compete with AI for work.
Debuting at the 2023 Venice Film Festival, Bertrand Bonello’s The Beast became one of the most acclaimed, discussed and divisive films in competition. An adaptation of Henry James’ 1903 novella The Beast in the Jungle, Bonello and screenwriters Guillaume Bréaud and Benjamin Charbit turned a short story about a man lives with the paralysing fear that his life will be ruined by an undefined catastrophic event into a time-travelling science fiction romance. Beginning in 2044, when artificial intelligence has replaced most of the workforce, Léa Seydoux plays Gabrielle, a woman who undergoes a “DNA purification” process to surgically remove her emotions, an operation that will allow her to compete with AI for employment. This procedure sends her back 1910 and again to 2014. In each of these three eras she meets different incarnations of the same man, Louis, played by George McKay, who inspires powerful emotions. Since its auspicious Venice debut, The Beast has played in an array of other film festivals and been released as part of the Criterion Collection’s Janus Contemporaries imprint.
Streaming Availability:
What was it about Henry James’ novella that appealed to you?
Bertrand Bonello: For me, it's one of the most heartbreaking novels I've ever read. Henry James really captures the human soul. The story is based on something very simple, the fear of love, and I wanted to do a melodrama about this. Whenever you do a melodrama, you are exploring something much bigger, but I really stayed attached to these two words, fear and love. That's why there is also a fear part in the film, like a slasher tone in some parts, and science fiction in another. But the power of love is in the three parts of the film.
Where did the idea to split the film into three timeframes come from?
BB: I think three is a good figure, you know? You can sit with three. I needed the past, one of almost-present and one of the future. It was very simple, very mathematical. So, 1910 is a period that I really like because you're out of the 19th century, and still entering the 20th with the idea that it's going to be full of peace and wisdom and light. In 1910 there was a hope, and a culture built around that hope which I really like. I wanted the modern time to be before 2018, before the MeToo movement because of George McKay’s character. That section begins with his character making iPhone videos about his hatred of women and stuff like that. He is inspired by a real character called Elliot Roger who posted these videos in 2014. And 2044 is the future, but it is a future we can see. It could almost be tomorrow.
That section is quite visceral, almost like a slasher film, and you are literally using the dialogue from some of the videos Roger made. How do you go about using genre elements and genre rules and that sort of realism to make a personal film like this?
BB: I'm not using genre to make a genre film. My aim was to focus on the melodrama and keep it very intimate. You can use the tools of a genre movie and still be personal. I think that's why. For me this is a very personal, very intimate film.
A great deal of the film is driven by Léa Seydoux’s performance. How much was her character built from collaboration?
BB: She responded to the script when I called her. The script was finished and all done when she began filming.
What was it about her that inspired you to cast her?
BB: There are three periods in the film, and I think she's the only actress, French actress, that could be in the three periods for me. There is something about her. She can travel through time. There is something timeless about her face and attitude, but she is also very modern at the same time.
In the film, one of the characters says that risk is powerful. Do you feel like a courageous person who takes a lot of risks when you make films?
BB: Maybe it's not the opinion of everyone, but when I do a film, I try to go somewhere I've never been before, to try things even if I fail. Otherwise. Why?
Perhaps I am wrong, but did you feel like there was a connection between Season Three of Twin Peaks and some of the themes from the Henry James novella?
BB: I think Season Three, the Return… I mean, it was a real shock for me as a filmmaker and it has been very present in my mind since I saw it. Maybe the biggest influence of David Lynch on me is the possibility to be free. America is a little different because they will sometimes give a check, a huge check, to a director to do what he wants because they want to go to the Oscars, they won awards. But that only happens in America.
Do you think it would be possible to make a series like Twin Peaks in France?
BB: [laughs] No! No, that would be impossible, really, for a French director. David Lynch is very much admired in France, but if a French director gave a script like that to a producer the producer would say, ‘I don’t understand anything’.
Did you feel like you had artistic freedom when you were making this film?
BB: I am always fighting for that. It's getting more and more difficult, especially when the films are a little expensive. It's tough to keep the freedom, but it's the thing I'm the most attached to. It's a struggle.
Do you feel making films today is more challenging than when you began making films regarding what you can make films about and the stories you can tell?
BB: It depends on the subject. I think today the subject is being seen as much too important. For me, a subject is just a tool. The form is more important. But people are less and less interested in form. For example, I often hear people compliment a film because it is about this person or that subject. I don't care what the film is about, you know? The film is good because the direction is good, there are some good ideas, actors are good and stuff like that. But the subject is taking over and especially when it is becoming about being politically correct then yes, it can be a problem. I prefer that people leave the film with their own feelings or their own questions instead of me giving them an answer. I'm not here for messages.
Was there something about loneliness that was particularly speaking to you regarding the Henry James novel and the feeling to make this film now?
BB: Yes. A lot.
Was this to do with Covid?
BB: No, I think it's to do with my own melancholy, I guess. I wouldn't say that because it's not good for promotion, but if someone asked me what's the real subject of the film, I would say loneliness.
Do you feel less lonely for having made the film?
BB: No, but I'm quite happy that I could express it this way.
Do you think loneliness is the biggest problem of contemporary humanity?
BB: I think so, yes. And the more we are talking about being connected, the lonelier we are. I find it quite difficult to be positive. I think the world is getting very crazy because so many people are on ego trips. I mean, I don't know how you can regulate the world today, but the solution that the film is proposing, that AI takes power, is not a good solution.
In the film, you explore the idea of artificial intelligence having replaced almost all jobs. We’ve had a writers strike over AI, some news is written by AI now. Do you think a film director could be replaced?
BB: Technology, it's a tool, but if you're stronger than the tool, it is good because it helps you do things. But if the tool gets stronger than you, then it's getting dangerous. When it comes to filmmaking, it depends what film you want to make. For example, I spent a few days playing with ChatGPT and I asked it to write me a script like Bertrand Bonello would write. It took, like, five or six seconds and I had a ten-page treatment. It was not a film I would make, but it was not absurd, and that was a little freaky, so I understand why screenwriters are freaking out. It cannot make a personal film, but if you're doing like, episode four of a season two of a series, it's going to be perfect.
AI is changing so quickly that since we began this conversation, what AI can do has probably changed. Was there any sense of danger of making a movie about AI because it can date so quickly?
BB: When I started to write like four years ago, for me I worked with a scientist and stuff like that, so I knew a lot of things about AI, but for me it was like the future. Since we screened the film in Venice, AI has been like a huge subject. I couldn't imagine that it would be so contemporary. But it is contemporary also in a political way, ethical way, because we know. We know now what the good things and the dangers of AI are. If you're talking about medicine and stuff like that, it's a beautiful and useful tool. But the problems with AI are not technological problems, they are ethical, moral, political. And this will always be.