Norton responds to director Tony Kaye's actions from American History X. Around this time of the year, the Oscar buzz inevitably begins, and right in the center of the hubbub always seems to be Edward Norton. The young actor, who absolutely mesmerized audiences in his debut in 1996's Primal Fear (for which he won an Supporting Actor nod), has continued to wow with his memorable performances in just about every film he appears.

After a turn as Matt Damon's used-up pal in Rounders earlier this year, Norton gained 30 pounds of muscle for his portrayal as a reformed skinhead in the critically-acclaimed and controversial American History X, which opened in wide release this past weekend. But not even the film's directing controversy and unsettling subject matter can hide his acting talent or keep Oscar from, inevitably, talking.

Edward Norton

roughcut.com's David Poland

What happened with your muscles?

It was like someone let the air out of a balloon; it went right down.

You're not still training with director Tony Kaye?

Uh, no. We are still training, some. We'll always train. No, it took about two and a half months to get like that and then about a month to lose it all. It's just not my natural size. But, I think I lost about 30 pounds in two months after that, so it was fun for a while, but not to be sustained.

What kind of research did you do to get into the mind-set?

Well, there's sort of two levels that I went in from two different directions. One is this strictly, kind of sociological, on the ground reality of these kids and skinhead life, and I talked to a lot of them. And, I talked specifically to one guy who, although not a racist, I should point out, he was not a Nazi skinhead, he was an anti-racist skinhead. But he went violent and spent some time in prison without leaving Georgetown Law School, and he was a guy, who the emotional dynamics of his transformation were very much in sync with what we were trying to create. He was an enormously intelligent guy, who, ultimately, through his intelligence, reasserted himself over his anger and specifically on an emotional level, he was very interesting to talk to about that. Because a lot of the kids, you don't run into a lot of Derek Vinyard types, frankly. A lot of these kids are much less articulate or specifically engaged in the demagoguery of it. They're in it for the reasons that people are in gangs, generally. I think it's for the sense of belonging, out of a need for an alternative family and because of that, that sort of brings up the second way you have to go, on a character like this. That is, on a lot of levels, Derek is larger than life. I mean, he has sort of heroic dimensions, more in the tradition of dramatic heroes or of tragic heroes. And good tragic heroes, I think, sometimes have larger-than-life dimensions. It's not to equate this with particular drama, but in classic tragedies, like Oedipus or Othello, the character, the emotional impact of the tragic story, is enhanced by the character who falls, who is full of all sorts of potentials and talents and everything.

So, that's what you brought to your part in the movie?

Well, yeah. One of the things that Tony, (writer) Dave McKenna and I all connected on, very early on, was that we thought that this guy has got to be the king of the skinheads. And Tony used to say, very rightly, I think, that with the first scene of this movie, and the way that you're introduced to this character, that any skinhead kid sitting in the audience ought to look up at that guy and go, "Oh, my God, that's it." That's exactly how I see myself, how I want to be. Because then you proceed to entrap that person, I think, if you can give the character heroic dimensions then when he falls, when he goes through this process of transformation, it's like you have to contend with the fact that the ultimate skinhead is coming, if he's relating to him at all, then you have to kind of grapple with why does he go through this transformation. You know, it's almost like a trap.

Are you expecting a high attendance of skinheads to this movie?

I couldn't possibly predict, but one might think that given the subject matter, it would interest them.

Were you guys ever concerned that the message would overwhelm the movie?

No. In fact, I would probably say more the opposite. It's like you really, really want to be sure that the movie doesn't overwhelm the message, in a way. That the power of the imagery doesn't overwhelm, that you make sure, very sure, exactly what you've said, that this guy, in the end, however heroic he may seem and his subjective memories of his brother, that the present tense storyline gives a lie to any kind of glamour vision of his or any kind of projection that there's a positive outcome to this kind of behavior. And I think it's odd that we focus on the opposite, at least in the film, don't let the fact that it's 90 feet by 30 feet and white overwhelm the very, very clear delivery of message.

I know you get asked this 100 times, and I'm sorry that I have to ask about Tony Kaye's behavior around this film. I don't want to label it, but I just wanted to ask you one question about it. You've characterized the whole thing as being one thing.

Professional.

Professional. And I just wanted to ask you what was it about? How did you feel about this?

Well, I should be really clear. I don't have any negative feelings toward Tony. The process of making the film was one of the better things that I had, and I know it was for him, too. Because more than almost anybody, he was celebrating and grateful for - almost effusively -- the dynamic that we went through making this film. We had a very, very intense creative verve and wonderful collaboration between Tony and David McKenna and myself and with, I think, the producers and the studio supporting this process. Enormously. I mean, I have to say, if there's anything out of the ordinary that's gone on in the entire post-production of this film, it's how long Tony Kaye got from a major studio to edit a first film. I mean, 18 months is completely unheard of. I mean, I never, in my experience, heard of anybody having that kind of indulgence on a first film. And it was wonderful. You know, the only thing that dismays me about any of this is, really, we all ought to be sitting around together, sort of participating in the discussions that this film is provoking. And him, as much or more than anybody else, because I think his work is wonderful. You know, it's provocative and visually unique and it just shouts him all over the place. He didn't come from a narrative or commercial film background. He comes from sort of a theater background, and I think that unfortunately, he let himself get more wrapped up in the melodrama of the perception of Tony Kaye as an artist, with a capital A, than he has a certain focus on the more grounded job of making a film and delivering it and ultimately just, in a mature way, just contending with the practical realities of making a film with a release schedule. And ultimately, I think [Francis Ford] Coppola said, "You never finish a film, you abandon it." And I think that is true. You're at a certain point and you just come to grips with the fact that you can't be scared. You've got to throw it out there and let it go. And the irony is that the film that you deliver to them, which is the film that everybody's seeing, whatever else he wants to represent, got such a tremendous response, and I just think he panicked. I think he got scared to let it out and he wanted more time. They gave him more time. They gave him another two and one-half months and he didn't do anything. Nothing happened in those two and one-half months. He didn't change the cut, fundamentally, from his last cut. But, and all that really points out is that, I think, Tony just kind of couldn't let go of it.

Didn't he call you a bad name?

It's like anything else. The consequences of sort of letting things be dictated by rage; it's not productive. I've got too many terrific things going on on too many levels, personal and professional, to expend the energy that rage takes. I don't feel that way about Tony, and I'm really tired of this film focusing on that. I have the complete faith that after, you know, as in many cases, like Apocalypse Now -- you guys remember what went on before Apocalypse Now came out -- it wasn't exactly this kind of thing, but if something comes out, it takes a life of its own. And it exists for people completely out there, on its own and your average mainstream audience doesn't give a sh-- about any of this stuff that we're talking about. And they won't experience the film through the prism of it. It will exist and I've been focusing on that because unanimously the response we've been receiving has just been tremendous. Everything Tony and I and McKenna and everybody else hoped for when we set out, which was to provoke thoughtful discussion about the issues and dynamics and emotions, and we've succeeded in doing that. And Tony has succeeded in doing that, whether he wants to claim it for himself or not. And I mean, as kindly as I can say it, not with anger, I do think Tony is victimizing himself with his professional immaturity. Professionally, it's just immature to not enter into your first film, to sign a contract that doesn't give you final cut and then to not deal with the practical realities of it, in a healthier way, that involve a perspective on how terrific it is to be involved in something like this, period. And we've all got ambitions and drive and you wrestle with these things fervently and, at the end of the day, you always turn around and shake hands and go see what we've made. It's great.

Have you learned any interesting things from your girlfriend, Courtney Love?

Yeah. I've learned things from every person I've ever worked with, especially someone as talented as her. Somebody asked me if I would ever do something with her. I'd do anything with anyone again, but we've all talked with people about it. You want it to be organic, you don't want to force it, just because you want to work with someone. You don't just want to pick something and force it. It has to be the right thing. But, yeah, I've learned things from her. Again, I've been really fortunate to work with outrageously creative people.

You've also been through the Oscar-hype cycle once before. Do you have any feelings about your performance on its own or all this stuff going on around it?

I have been working so hard. I haven't gotten a break from filming Fight Club and kind of emerged to deal with, you know, ushering this film out, which is really fun. It's been fun to reconnect with it. But I've only really just begun to get a sense of people's response to it as a film and it's been very gratifying.

Do you see the world that way? Do you see the world and the Oscar nominations and all that stuff?

No, no. I don't think, fundamentally, it's to the degree that those things reflect people. I mean, I wouldn't even begin to pretend that isn't thrilling. It's totally thrilling and that's everything you're trying to do - achieve in terms of getting people to respond. But specifically, does it change things? Not a lot. I mean, do you remember who was nominated for Best Supporting Actor last year? You can't and neither can I. I probably couldn't have told you five days afterward and I don't think people even remember who won Best Supporting Actor last year. And I don't think people do two weeks later. I think it's an event that serves itself on a lot of levels. It serves the industry. It's an event that's fun. It's a little loopy. It's like, you know, it's just a fun circus to, like, duck into, but I really think it kind of exists within its own bubble, and then I think it's ultimate, real impact is just about that big.