Paul Currie talks about upcoming thriller 2:22

A scene from 2:22, a Magnet release. Photo courtesy of Magnet Releasing.

Paul Currie, an Australian filmmaker who directed the upcoming romantic thriller 2:22, spoke with Solzy at the Movies on Monday afternoon.

Thanks for joining Solzy at the Movies today.  How are things going?

Paul Currie:  It’s very good.  How are you?

I’m doing well.  Having just watched 2:22 the other day, I am amazed at the recreation of Grand Central in New York.  Given how much of the film is set at Grand Central, were there ever any thoughts on filming on location in New York?

Paul Currie:  Basically, the logistics of it just couldn’t work with it.  It was the cost shooting in there for the amount of time that we would have needed it and also, just getting control of the terminal for the time that we would need—that had many issues with it from a crowd perspective and from a lodging perspective as well so as (inaudible) as it was, we decided we were going to recreate Grand Central in Fox Studios in Australia.

I watched the movie and until I read the production notes, I would have never guessed that it was a recreation.

Paul Currie:  What we did—we basically started with three-dimensional very accurate down to centimeter accuracy of Grand Central.  We created a full 3D model and then we went there to Grand Central and really got to know her.  We basically photographed it from every angle and had our art department authentically build about a quarter of the station—obviously not to the full height.  We were always lining up making sure that our tech would line up to the real angles and the real photography.  A lot of the tech (inaudible) is the real deal.  It’s very hard to depict that you’re not in the real Grand Central due to the wonders of technology.

This film is a high-concept romantic thriller.  What drew your interest to the screenplay?

Paul Currie:  I just thought an idea of one of those stories that takes a different take on (inaudible) through time was really interesting.  Just the notion of 2:22 and the fact that it kind of held high-intense (inaudible) guy with a very groovy job had this really interesting event happen to him.  Obviously, one day in the tower, something goes horribly wrong for someone that’s so skilled.  I just thought that it was a really interesting caricature of a guy that kind of quickly loses his way and the world he inhabits—working world.  He has to try to unravel the mystery of what happened and the things that keep repeating and accelerate towards the finale.  Leaving a girl that happened to be on the plane that was kind of (inaudible) to be out there.  I just found it really interesting kind of a contemporary take on a love story that has a real kind of timeless (inaudible) to it.  I just thought it was a nice way to look at a thriller that has a lot of ideas contained within a thriller and it’s a really good journey for a love story.

Dylan is the main focus of the film.  In many ways, his experiences remind me of what happened in Groundhog Day.  Is that a fair assessment 2:22 a version of Groundhog Day if it had been a thriller?

Paul Currie:  I guess that’s a simplistic way of looking at it in some ways.  The difference is that it’s fractals of the past and it’s not the same day.  It’s the same pattern but different elements to the pattern.  There’s always a businessman but it’s not always the same businessman in the train station.  I guess reliving through fractals from the past and trying to navigate him toward the realization of what the character needs to go through.

From what I can tell, only three theaters are playing the film this weekend even though it’s also available through Amazon Video and iTunes.  From a filmmaker’s standpoint, is it tough seeing indie films having to fight for time on the big screen?

Paul Currie: It’s always challenging when you don’t have the big cast and the big US film.  Initially, 2:22 will probably have some fairly wide releases throughout the world theatrically.  It’s very competitive in the US.  With the emergence of the different models, I guess you have to look at different ways of doing things.  But hopefully the movie, we know from some of our test screenings and those that have seen it, the movie really appeals to a wide audience.  It’s a great romantic thriller.  Teresa, Michael, and Sam are all fantastic in it.  It’s a really good, intriguing romantic, and ultimately, a satisfying ride.  That’s basically the reactions we’ve been getting to it.

What is the next project that you’re working on?

Paul Currie: I’ve got a couple things I’m working on.  I’ve got a few projects that I’m developing to direct and also a couple of large movies to produce as well.  I enjoy all those parts of the filmmaking process.  It’s always a challenge to work out how to make a film and I like projects that are quite technically challenging and has a (inaudible) and involves collaborating with a good team of people.

Thanks again for your time.

Paul Currie:  No worries.  Thank you so much.

Danielle Solzman

Danielle Solzman is native of Louisville, KY, and holds a BA in Public Relations from Northern Kentucky University and a MA in Media Communications from Webster University. She roots for her beloved Kentucky Wildcats, St. Louis Cardinals, Indianapolis Colts, and Boston Celtics. Living less than a mile away from Wrigley Field in Chicago, she is an active reader (sports/entertainment/history/biographies/select fiction) and involved with the Chicago improv scene. She also sees many movies and reviews them. She has previously written for Redbird Rants, Wildcat Blue Nation, and Hidden Remote/Flicksided. From April 2016 through May 2017, her film reviews can be found on Creators.

Leave a Reply