Tuesday, March 9, 2021

Celebrity Interviewing 102: Moderator Interview Styles (Part B - Steven Yeun)

                                                                            
                                                                            Steven Yeun

Searching YouTube for Steven Yeun interviews, I found one top result of approximately 30 minutes running time that has him sitting between two other male moderators (Rob and Geoff) at a table with mics for the Toronto International Film Festival’s interview series Long Take featuring Steven’s role in the Korean film Burning (2018). 

Before the interview got underway, my initial thought was that for two moderators sitting on either side of Steven, in a semi-circular shape without much personal space between them, would make for a somewhat awkward dynamic. I imagined that it’d be a 'too many cooks in the kitchen' kind of chaos, like how when one guest is being interviewed by multiple DJs on a radio show. That perhaps there would be an overwhelming number of interruptions, talking over each other, each trying to take the spotlight’s attention, and that Steven would barely be able to comprehend the question let alone answer it cohesively. Instead, I was sincerely impressed with how well Rob and Geoff would let the other speak in turn, with consideration, and allow Steven’s detailed answers to take its time. 

The first asked question as per usual is “how did you get involved with this project?” Steven says it was a “crazy story” and Rob says “Perfect!” Following the “actually not so crazy” story but still nicely told, they wanted to know what kinds of films he is drawn to, having come from Korea and growing up in America, and then what may have influenced him to become an actor? For Steven, it was whatever was on television and in the theaters like Fresh Prince of Bel Aire and Terminator 2 but by the time he got to high school and college, he “start digging around to Korean film”, seeing Old Boy but “mind exploding” seeing Poetry

Geoff asks Steven if doing a Korean film was something he wanted to do? He answers that it wasn’t really something he “sought after” but the opportunity to work with Bong Joon Ho for Okja (2017) was with full knowledge that he’d be playing a Korean who had been in America and came back – a role with qualities that he could more comfortably portray rather than “act on top of acting”. “And then when this opportunity came along it was more ‘you gotta work with Director (Chang-dong) Lee' (who did write and direct Poetry)…” but initially he was nervous to take on the role of Ben for Burning because “I don’t want to ruin your movie”. Rob then takes the opportunity to interrupt Steven within that reaction pause to say, “Can we push on that though? Why would you be afraid of ruining the movie?” This is a really bold question despite being politely asked because it means having to ask Steven more about his insecurities as an actor. It’s sort of like saying the better 'How are you still single?' instead of the terrible 'Why are you still single?' but it’s still asking about your singlehood. 

Even the most lauded actors fear they can’t take on certain roles. They say they are scared to do a project so important but also use it as the reason for playing the role. Whether because the character is so different from themselves, based upon a still living person or highly known historical figure, or for any other reason they find in the script, an actor uses that intuition to determine their career choices but also their career goals. If an actor drastically changes what kinds of roles they take, it could have a positive or a negative effect on their image, and thus on whether they are capable of taking such chances again. ‘Not only are they brave enough, but are they good enough?’ 

Steven has a choice on how to answer this very intimate kind of question. He can be honest or he can play it off. He chose to go with honesty, and the full answer is very much indicative of him as an actor, as a person, and the criticism he can face in Korea playing a Korean, that was all very smoothed over by the comfort of discussing the character more with the director in that Ben is considered more worldly that the main character Lee who has been stuck in his hometown. This benefit allowed Steven to be more secure knowing that since he can’t shake off his American side, so he can portray a man who has travelled to America and other cosmopolitan cities, picking up those Western characteristics along the way. 

Steven then elevates his answer to the topic of how Burning is not just a Korean film because the characters are “speaking through emotion”. Geoff uses this to pivot the conversation of having North American audiences direct their attentions towards more international content and creatives. Steven sees this as an “opportunity here for people to know him (Director Lee)”. 

For the second half of the interview, Geoff and Rob oscillate between how Steven approaches his roles, like Squeeze for Boots Riley’s Sorry To Bother You, more about Director Lee’s style, and then again on Hollywood’s diversity. All of these questions to which Steven provides interesting and well-composed answers. 

At one point however, you realize as the viewer that the moderators’ questions are not uniquely particular to his playing Ben in Burning because when Steven is discussing how Lee wanted Steven to figure out how to portray Ben’s ending, Steven asks Rob and Geoff, “Have you guys seen it?” They quickly shake their heads “Yeah”. But that he even had to ask means he couldn’t decipher and didn’t get prior confirmation that they had indeed seen the film being discussed. Rob and Geoff could have said yes to avoid awkwardness or they could have truthfully seen it in full even if just an hour prior, but it shows they have been asking Steven a too generalized series of questions. General questions can cut down on preparation time, especially when they have so many appointments to keep for other festival attendee interviews, but it can backfire when the interviewer can't hide being a bit mystified by a guest’s answers for a particular project. 

For the penultimate question, they want to discuss Steven’s thoughts on diversity in Hollywood and being a “pillar” of representation. Steven’s answer articulates a sentiment that it’s not something he wants to focus on for himself as a conscious decision to keep up with in his career but rather that it’s something which can be achieved in a way of “express myself as much as I can” and that it’s too self-reducing to only think of the racial component. Instead, he sees the (then) current wave of Asian and Asian-American representation as an opportunity for the “actors getting more shots” and not acknowledging their ethnicity “but their humanness”. * I discuss this aspect more further below. 

Rob’s closing out of the interview does so with building upon Steven’s answer that film stories are “reflecting the world as actually is” and Steven continues his thought that Burning would have been ignored ten years ago, that Korean cinema was once being explored as a reflection of genre instead of now more so as a reflection of how Koreans can make any type of film and speak to any audience, whether Korean, French, American, etc. They finish on a positive note, happy to have met, and the moderators loved the film. 

In the time since this interview, Korean cinema has indeed been more widely lauded by North American audiences with Bong Joon Ho’s Parasite win for not just Best Foreign Picture but also THE Best Picture award at the 2020 Oscars. For the 2021 Awards season, Steven Yeun is nominated across the board for his role as a Korean father Jacob Yi in Minari who had already been with his family in America for about a decade but wanted to start living the true ‘American dream’ of starting his own farm and being his own boss. 

Minari premiered at the 2021 remotely held Sundance Film Festival, and was distributed by A24 on the company’s own streaming platform to individual online paid ticket holders for $20. After the film’s entire run, there was a full pre-recorded Q&A via Zoom between the main cast and a moderator. Because the allotted time to watch the film and Q&A on A24’s site was only 4 hours, I couldn’t study it the way I can with a YouTube video that has unlimited time to watch, pause, rewind, and fast-forward. From recalling the video, the moderator gave everyone a chance to answer questions, that again were very typical of getting involved with the project, the inspiration for the project, actors’ approaches, and then some cute questions for the child-actors (who I think could have answered more interesting questions). 

In early December, Jay Caspian Kang interviewed Steven for TheNew York Times Magazine (with the article published in early February just after Sundance wrapped) because of his work in Minari. But their conversation was strongly focused on their mutual (as well as different) experiences being Korean-Americans. Jay begins the article by talking about his recollections of Asian-Americans that were well-known in the 90s during his growing up, specifically mentioning author Amy Tan’s success for The Joy Luck Club (first the novel and then the feature film). Jay also profoundly describes his own difficulties trying to “elevate” his graduate school workshop writing about the immigrant experience and perceptions of it within a larger context of his characters. The goal of this extended introduction is to give the reader a deeper understanding from where the interviewer is coming from and for why that in the interview these are two men talking about their way of looking at the world from their perspective, how others perceive them, and the responsibilities they feel as representative of their Asian backgrounds. 

Whether or not this topic of two Korean-American men talking was part of the interview’s pitch isn’t mentioned. Jay and Steven’s interview was over Zoom video, so the article has to balance between transcribing their conversation in addition to Jay’s describing and interpretation of Steven’s looks, gestures, tone, and pauses. Although it’s an edited version of the interview, Jay includes a significant number of lengthy quotes from Steven’s answers. 

I can’t determine the chronological structure of Jay’s questions. Jay says, “We talked about the usual things: his early moves, from Seoul to Saskatchewan to urban Michigan; his parents, who were shopkeepers in Detroit; his American childhood, which was mostly spent in the Korean church; his acting career…But our conversations kept circling back to this prismatic neurosis, in which you worry about every version of how other people see you. Yeun expressed he had been deep in it, especially for this particular role. One of his concerns was the Korean accent he had put on for the film.” From this, Jay may have started off asking something like, ‘How he got involved’ or ‘How did he prepare for this role’ but none of that is something we can see or learn in this article. But you know you can see and read it elsewhere in the plethora of recent interviews available. 

“Weird question, but do you even want to talk about all this Korean stuff?” - Jay

“What do you mean?” - Steven

“There must be some part of you that saw a Korean writer was going to be writing a profile of you and knew where all this was going. That we’d be talking about Korean stuff. Isn’t there some part of you that wants to not just be seen as some Korean guy? Like maybe you’d rather just talk about the craft of acting or something?” - Jay

“Well, as long as we can talk about this stuff on a real level, I don’t mind it, I get what you’re worried about, though. There’s been sometimes when an Asian person comes to talk to me or photographs me and I can just tell that all they’re trying to do is fit into some conception of what they think white audiences want out of an Asian-on-Asian thing. And that’s even more offensive!” - Steven

“Horrible. I don’t even know if I want to ask you about this stuff. Not because it’s too sensitive, but I also feel compelled to ask you to do it because of the implied nature of the assignment: Hey, Korean, tell us about another Korean.” - Jay

“I think it’ll be OK, or at least it’ll be therapeutic in some way.” - Steven

Jay admits in the article “Our talks… were therapeutic, at least for me.” 

In this exchange, Jay initiated his focused conversation with Steven about their Korean-American-ness with great hesitation; like he was about to wrongly choose to acknowledge an elephant-in-the-room which Steven may not have wanted to mutually agree to acknowledge too, and that Steven would rather prefer to focus on everything but. Given how open and articulate Steven is in interviews, his only concern for their discussion about the elephant would be if it didn’t really explore the truth of their experiences and perspectives. He basically told Jay that there is free rein as long as it’s all put out there. 

Steven told Jay what it was like being in Korea and then Canada and then America. He showed an elementary class picture of himself among all of the other white classmates, having to learn English for school and speaking Korean at home, and all of the emotions that came from those experiences. Having to wear a “persona” at such a young age became the building blocks of his natural interest and ability to perform.

Unlike most stories of being discouraged by his family and friends to pursue acting, they instead thought “he consider moving (back) to Korea, following the path of dozens of gyopos – the Korean word for Koreans who grow up abroad…” Instead, Steven did try to dissuade himself from acting but those opportunities didn’t work out so he “moved to Chicago to make the rounds on the comedy/improv circuits” eventually getting to Los Angeles a few years later. And while most young actors struggle for years before getting their ‘big break’, Steven’s audition for “The Walking Dead catapulted” him to seven years of work and recognition playing the major and beloved character, Glenn Rhee. 

As a fan of the show myself, devouring every episode until Glenn was officially (per that close call at Terminus, and then the garbage dump fake-out) brutally killed off by Negan in Season 7, Steven did an incredible job! Even though Rick was the main character which the show revolved around, and that Daryl was a character specifically added to the show for Norman Reedus to play (since he wasn’t in the comic book series), Glenn was the heart of the story who had bursts of bravery, always had kindness, and was just a cool calm considerate guy! Glenn was not the Korean-American guy. He was Glenn who happened to be Korean-American. And that makes a huge difference! One of the few but memorable times that Glenn’s ethnicity was talked about was when Daryl poignantly corrected his (evil?) brother Merle that Glenn was Korean and not Chinese

Steven opened the door for the 21st century’s more dynamic Asian-American representation of better characters, and performers to play them. He is aware of this but as per the above interview with TIFF, it is not something he specifically considers when taking a role. He’s had the fortunate opportunity to take roles during and after working on The Walking Dead that don’t make him the racially stereo-typical Asian-American in the way that happened in decades past when Gedde Watanabe played Long Duk Dong in Sixteen Candles or even Jackie Chan in the Rush Hour franchise. Instead, his roles allow him to incorporate his ethnicity organically. 

In Jay’s question, “Do you think some of your success came from the fact that you kind of stumbled into this life-changing role…and didn’t have to dwell on all the limitations?” he uses the words “fact”, “stumbled”, and “dwell” – which makes for a very powerful question. Jay’s tone is not accusatory, envious, or mean spirited. But to say “fact” instead of something like “experience”, “happenstance”, “situation”, or even “luck” makes “fact” sound like “pre-determined”, “fixed”, “programmed”, “fated”, and “inevitable”, as if Steven’s success is the same fact as 2+2=4. To use “stumbled” means Steven just happened to be there, that he wasn’t even aware of what the outcome of besting the audition would be, when in actuality Steven made the choice to be an actor, to move to Los Angeles where the acting industry (mostly) is, and that he also must have prepared for the audition and did a good one – in addition to having that ‘it’ factor The Walking Dead casting director and producer were looking for. All instead of having to “dwell” as a synonym for “anxious”, “worry”, and “brood”, meant that it would be that thought of being of Asian descent is what every Asian actor thinks about on top of the insecurities and rejection that all actors come to their career with. 

Steven answers Jay that “he had also felt this self-doubt during his career…there were ways in which that hypersensitivity could become its own prison. ‘You can lock yourself into those patterns…”. Steven is not immune from what plagues the sensitivities that come from being an actor and being an Asian-American actor but he’s looking for and knows he is capable of more than that. 

Steven’s IMDB page shows his film roles as well as (non-TWD) television roles (which I am not as familiar with). Playing K in Okja, Ben in Burning, Squeeze in Sorry To Bother You, and Jacob in Minari (and even co-scientist to Michael Pitt’s role Ian in I Origins) are testaments to what he wants from his career but also that the industry has those opportunities for him to do so. *And he must also have a great agent. 

Jay’s next several paragraphs detail Steven’s work in Burning but there’s no question quoted for which Steven’s answers are for. Yet whatever the question was, Steven answered it with a powerful truth: “…Like, I can’t change my DNA. I have the same epigenetic information passed down through the blood we (Koreans) share. Do I know all the same things as Koreans who grew up in Korea? No, because I don’t live there and because I’m not indoctrinated by that society.” 

Further down the article, Jay is able to illustrate what Steven said in his TIFF interview about how “all those (Korean (but any country’s cinema, really)) films can speak to you regardless of the borders of our countries or our cultures or any ideologies that we place before ourselves before we separate each other…You hear the French audience be like ‘that spoke to me in ways that I never considered’…”  When Jay passed along the link of the Minari trailer to another Korean friend, “She said she wasn’t sure she could watch the film because those two minutes seemed almost too accurate…”. And upon reading other viewers’ comments, “I saw similar responses (to his friend’s) not only from Asian-Americans but also from Latino and Black immigrants as well.” Minari’s story of an immigrant Korean family mostly from the situational perspective of young son David is very much the story of a Korean family in America but shows the larger picture of any (mostly non-white) immigrant adult or child in America too who is building that double-consciousness (yes, this term was coined by W.E.B. Du Bois’ for the “internal conflict experienced by subordinated or colonized groups in a oppressive society referring to the Black African-Americans in white society” but has since expanded to include those of other minorities as a formation of identity and social interactions. *I hope I worded this well.). 

Steven discuses his father’s experiences, from his own perspective as part of what he connected to to play Jacob: his difficulty learning English, adjusting from the collectively minded to the individually minded cultures, the gender expectations of masculinity and fatherhood, and also the conflict that can come from when spouses’ ambitions differ. Jay says that Steven “began to tear up as he told this to me” about when he described sitting next to his father during a screening and there was this new understanding between them. “That took 36 years to bridge.” 

The remainder of the article is Jay turning his attention to Minari itself, that it’s a semi-autobiographical story from Director Lee Isaac Chung with plenty of his quotes, Jay’s interpretation of the film in relation to what’s called (that I’m learning) “dignity porn”, and re-incorporating his own family’s experiences. Thus, there is no closing statement quote or last line from or about Steven. While videos usually show those farewell wishes and “thank you” there is no such description of Steven’s last words from his and Jay’s Zoom video conversation. 

While it’s great for an interview writer to use their own experiences and perspective to connect with their guest on a topic they can fully and thoroughly discuss – especially one that explores identity representation, experience, and perspective – the interview’s final edit of a piece that is supposed to profile the guest shouldn’t be opening and closing with the writer’s own experiences and perspective; especially if there’s no last line from the guest. This opinion of improper book-ending does not bring the article down because it really does an excellent job of spotlighting Steven, but it just goes too far into spotlighting the author too. 

Taking a step back in time, I want to include an interview video from a time when Glenn was still alive and well in The Walking Dead

Chris Hardwick had been hosting Talking Dead (a reaction show with guest comedian fans after the just aired TWD episode) since 2011, so he already had a relationship and familiarity with the show’s cast, crew, and especially the seasons’ trajectory of stories for the characters when he was hosting the Paley Fest 2013 panel. This video is pulled from the full interview that took place, these 5 minutes starts off on a very exciting note that turns into the darker subject of Glenn’s reaction to Maggie’s rape at Woodbury in Season 3. 

When Chris turns his attention to Steven, there are claps and whistles from the audience.

“We talked about this on Talking Dead a little bit that Glenn’s gone from nerd to jock! (More claps and whistles)...As a fan, you look around at who else could plausibly lead that group and you might think that Glenn might be a good leader but because he has Maggie he’s so emotional, do you think he’s too unstable because of that, to be able to lead effectively?” – Chris

“He sees that as a viable option…but Glenn is equally in his rage mode…it’s not predicable characters behaving in a very satisfying story arc…like turning from a pizza delivery boy to a Super-Man, instead he’s a young man who continues to grow and learn lessons as he goes.” – Steven

“I like what you’re saying that he does it in a very prideful, selfish way (taking charge) cause that’s kinda how he deals with the Maggie situation…” – Chris

“Yeah, the riff there is ‘hey do you remember what happened to you….I’m gonna take care of you but remember when that happened to you?’ And you’re just like ‘what the hell dude, chill out!’ (audience laughs)…he thinks that’s how he’s supposed to be a man but he’s still young and that love is still young.” – Steven

“…Do you feel like more than anything he just wants to fix it?” – Chris

“Yeah…in his perfect world what would happen is, The Governor would be dead and he would be happy with Maggie in a field full of …uh, food.” – Steven

(More audience laughs)

Chris latched on to Steven’s last word and continued to joke about what that would look like: “Steak trees, candy plants, fried grass…”.

Steven continues, “…his pride was violated, the person he cares for, covets, wants is tarnished by this other person (the attacker or The Governor)…appropriate for a 20 year old kid would do.” – Steven

“If Glenn could make the Governor spontaneously explode with the power of his mind (then turns to a producer) please make that happen! (then back to Steven) I don’t know if that would make him feel any better, he’d get that but still have the rage.” – Chris

“That’s exactly what it is, this is his growth…it’s constantly evolving.” – Steven 

The video stops there – as this is only a clip. But we can see throughout this spotlight interview segment how well-prepared Chris was, to take advantage of the moment when there’s a funny answer of ‘laughing with, not at’ the guest, entertaining the audience, but also how wonderfully his questions opened up the space to explore  Glenn’s character growth. It should be noted that the video edits Chris’ questions and Steven’s answers to mostly make it look like they are side-by-side when really on the stage there are eight people sitting between them. 

This Part B hopefully showed how though an interviewer may ask general and typical questions or unique questions, their word-choice and tone significantly matter, and that when there is more than one moderator or multiple guests in an interview space, there needs to be a modicum of respect for questions and answers to be said in full. It also matters when the celebrity guest already has a deep sense of self and their characters, and are willing to share their existential thoughts in an interview.

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Golden Compass - Winter 2007

The Golden Compass – Winter 2007 Review originally published in Stony Brook Univerisity's  The Statesman (This review has been updated w...