Woody Harrelson takes a stand on war, marijuana and ‘The Messenger’

Woodrow T. Harrelson is in the midst of what could amount to one of his best years ever.

This year alone, he has twice guided America moviegoers through post-apocalyptic universes.  ”Zombieland” was the unexpected hit of the summer and to no one’s surprise “2012″ is raking in millions.  ”Defendor,” an oddball comedy in which Harrelson plays a pseudo superhero, has yet to be released.

Easily the most important role of the bunch is in Oren Moverman’s “The Messenger,” a potent anti-war film that gets its point across without so much as one shell casing hitting the ground.

The 48-year-old Texas-born actor fell in love with stagecraft while performing in plays at Hanover College in Hanover, Indiana. He first appeared on the New York stage as an understudy in Neil Simon’s “Biloxi Blues.” (Harrelson was briefly married to Simon’s daughter, Nancy.) Shortly thereafter Woody Boyd, the affably daffy barkeep on TV’s “Cheers” introduced Woody Harrelson to the American public. The role garnered five Emmy nominations and one win, in 1989.

After the show left the air, Harrelson went on to play a series of decidedly offbeat characters ranging from a one-armed bowling kingpin and a natural born killer to an egocentric TV reporter who is anything but welcome in Sarajevo and a famed American pornographer. His performance in “The People vs. Larry Flynt” caught Oscar’s eye and he remains the only regular cast member from “Cheers” to receive an Academy Award nomination.

“The Messenger,” which opens Friday (November 20) at Landmark’s La Jolla Village Cinemas, features Harrelson’s most challenging role to date. (See SDNN movie critic David Elliott’s review.)

Captain Tony Stone (Harrelson) is assigned to the Army’s Casualty Notification service. He has the unenviable task of informing husbands, wives, lovers and children that a family member has died in the Iraqi conflict. Don’t be surprised if Oscar once again comes a-calling.

Apart from his on-screen duties, Harrelson has amassed quite a reputation as an environmental activist, war protester and staunch pro-hemp supporter.

Scott Marks: What are your latest efforts in the struggle to legalize marijuana?

Woody Harrelson: That’s a little bit of a misunderstanding. I’ve been saddled with that since 1996 when I went on television with a friend of mine who was about to go to jail, which he did, for five years. I went on saying “What’s the point of this?” And from then on I’ve been the poster boy for the marijuana legalization movement and it’s not fair to those people that actually do it. I’ve never been involved in that struggle. All I did was speak my mind. Do I think it should be legalized? Of course! I think when you live in a free country you have to take a look at what constitutes freedom. In my mind I can do anything I want as long as I don’t hurt you or your property. You might say that I’m more of an advocate of freedom. We live in a country where 75% of the people in prison are there for victimless crimes, meaning no one gets hurt except the person perpetrating the so-called crime.

Related stories: Arthur Salm: Legalize marijuana | Steve Francis: Debunking call to legalize marijuana

Do you think that marijuana will be legalized in our lifetime?

In this country it’s just like most wars. War is lucrative, including the war on non-corporate drugs. Do I think so? Probably not.

Do you remember the first time it dawned on you that you could forge a successful career as an actor?

I think it was when I was in college doing plays and there were sometimes great reactions from the audience. I just felt like, geez, I want to go do Broadway. That’s where it started.

I have seen a lot of war films, but to the best of my knowledge this is the first time I’ve seen a war movie that tackled this subject matter. Why do you think it took so long to get around to telling the story of the Army’s Casualty Notification Service?

It really came from a conversation between (director/co-writer) Oren Moverman and (co-writer) Alessandro Camon. They were looking at this war as two people who were outside the war. One is Israeli and the other is Italian and looking at it as outsiders they were interested in some other way to tell a story about the war and they thought about casualty notification. I guess it took as long as it took for those guys to have the idea.

You have taken on many difficult characters in your career, but I’d venture none more challenging than Tony Stone. After each day’s shooting it must have been impossible to shift gears from playing a grief counselor back into civilian life.

It was intense. I felt completely immersed in the character and his thoughts eventually became mine. I guess that’s what you want as an actor. In some ways it was kind of weird when after they say “that’s a wrap” just to go on like nothing happened. It was very emotional. I don’t know…I think the movie has also got a lot of humor and uplifting elements to it. I don’t think it’s a complete downer.

When you consider that under George W. Bush the government would not allow Americans to see so much as one flag-draped coffin, were you surprised that the Army supported the film?

Yeah, I was surprised. But I think they wanted to get behind it because they believe that the story needs to be told. We have to let people know that there is another side to what goes on. In effect, what it does is [humanize] the consequences of war. Usually we just hear about statistics: three people died in Afghanistan, etc. It doesn’t tell us anything. It’s just a number. Each individual who dies over there produces a dramatic ripple effect throughout their community, their friends and their family. I think it’s a great way to humanize what happens.

Is there a distinction to be made between being anti-war and pro-peace or are they one in the same?

It’s hard to say. Everybody says World War II was a good war and certainly it seems like if we hadn’t been a part of that we’d all be speaking German. I feel like American foreign policy since World War II has been badly directed. Most people are unaware that Vietnam cost 2.5 million lives, mostly civilians. Korea cost 4.5 million. The U.S. government’s position was that the Red Scare caused a domino effect when in reality, if you look at the Pentagon Papers, it talks about rubber, tin and oil. I think many times the directives of the U.S. foreign policy board is always towards resources or strategic positioning.

Do you view Tony’s actions as the work of a cold, heartless individual?

No. I think it’s his heart that drew me to the character more than anything. He cares a lot about his country. He considers the Army his family and he cares about the people that he’s notifying. He is a kind of crusty, stoic guy and it takes a while to crack the veneer and see beneath that.

The scene in the diner where Tony first briefs Will (Ben Foster) on his responsibilities is stone cold. Yet you do manage to inject a slight bit of humor by taking a chomp out of a slice of watermelon while telling Will that informing family members at the crack of dawn is not a great way to start their day breakfast-wise. Or the beeper that plays “Pray for the Dead.” In your research did you find a great deal of gallows humor among the real-life “angels of death,” as the  character calls them?

I didn’t notice that so much. But generally in the military, I felt they use humor as a tool because they’re doing some very heavy stuff. A lot of the soldiers that I talked to had a great sense of humor, but the people doing casualty notification weren’t popping jokes about it. They consider it the hardest job in the Army.

It must be one of the hardest jobs anywhere. This film is bound to open a lot of peoples’ eyes because we seldom see a plea for peace come out of a war film in which not one bullet is fired. Everything takes place away from combat, on American soil.

I do think it’s one of the most beautiful scripts I ever read.

This is a film about a very important subject and, as such, I am always afraid that it will only play to an audience of converts. Do you think that people who are for the war, and they are out there, will turn out and support “The Messenger”?

I think that the film makes a fairly apolitical statement. It’s not pro-war, it’s not anti-war. It’s just showing the consequence of war in a very real way. I think it is pro-soldier. The people who have seen it that are in the military without exception have all had an extraordinarily positive reaction to the film and are glad that it was made.

There is a hint of a romantic relationship between Ben Foster’s character and a war widow played by Samantha Morton. I read that Moverman (the director/co-writer) said the military was pleased that the characters aren’t shown in bed together. What do you think this relationship adds to the movie and how might it have played differently without it?

I can’t really imagine the film without it because I feel that it’s a very key part of what goes on in it. Initially there was some debate over where or not they would end up having sex. The higher ups in the military who read the script didn’t want them to bed down. Not only do they not have sex, they don’t even kiss. I think it’s one of the more compelling elements of the movie. That one scene in the kitchen [between Samantha and Ben] is one of the more finely acted scenes I’ve ever seen in any movie. It’s one of those scenes that, hopefully, people will do in acting classes in years to come.

Is it true that the six scenes where you notify the various families were unrehearsed? You basically knocked on the door and didn’t know how the actors that opened it were going to react? Did the writers leave six blank pages in the finished script for you to improvise?

It is true they were unrehearsed and it’s true that we never met the actors ahead of time, but we all had the script. Inside of that there was a lot of improvisation. Things that happened - slaps, pushing, yelling - weren’t in the script. They just happened. There was a lot of spontaneous stuff due to the way in which Moverman shot the film.

Are you pleased with the way President Obama is handling his inherited war?

I think it’s incredible that he allowed the cameras to see the coffins coming home at Dover. But if the escalation continues to happen in Afghanistan, to me that will be a disappointment.

Some of cinema’s greatest artists, starting with Alfred Hitchcock and Cary Grant, never won an Academy Award. You have been nominated for your role as Larry Flynt and there is a good chance that your work in “The Messenger” will earn you another nomination. Would you view an Oscar win as recognition of your talent or do you see the Academy Awards as a popularity contest that has little to do with artistry?

I don’t believe there is one actor who could say they wouldn’t want an Academy Award. They’d be lying. It would be great, but I can’t really invest emotionally in it. Let’s just say that it would be an extra layer of icing on the cake.

Read other movie-related interviews:

‘Paranormal Activity’s’ Oren Peli talks about his boffo bone chiller

Richard Dreyfuss casts his vote for civics and activism, not stardom

Scott Marks is an SDNN contributor.

Tags: 2012, Afghanistan, army, Barack Obama, Ben Foster, cannabis, Casualty Notification Service, Cheers, Defendor, George W. Bush, hemp, interview Woody Harrelson, Landmark La Jolla Village, legalize marijuana, marijuana, Oren Moverman, pot, Scott Marks, SDNN, smoke, Woody Harrelson, Woody Harrelson interview, zombie, zombieland

This entry was posted on Sunday, November 15th, 2009 at 11:46 pm and is filed under Arts & Entertainment, Movies . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.