Every actor worth his salt lands a signature role sooner or later. A role that will defy a future career. A role that others would kill for. Venezuelan actor Edgar Ramirez has landed such a career-defying role.
Let’s face it, playing a notorious terrorist will always prove to be a challenge, but playing a notorious terrorist who became a myth in his own lifetime has got to be a tour-de-force that commands 110% commitment to the part.

The role is that of Venezuelan Carlos the Jackal (real name Ilich Ramirez Sanchez), who was a central figure in the history of international terrorism in the 1970’s and 1980’s, from pro-Palestinian activism to the Japanese Red Army. Edgar Ramirez captivatingly portrays Carlos in all his multi-facetted contradictions and gives a magnetic performance as the man many loved to hate but who never ceased to have a mesmerizing effect on women – and the press. Olivier Assaya’s arresting epic spans 20 years in the life of Carlos, and thanks to Ramirez’ performance we see both the cold-blooded killer as well as the human and emotional side of the man nicknamed The Jackal.

Film-News’ Claudia A. had the great pleasure to meet up with Edgar Ramirez during the London Film Festival for an interview. Smart, charming, intelligent (and let’s not forget downright sexy), Ramirez radiates an intenseness that makes it clear as to why he is the perfect choice for the part of Carlos.

Film-News:
Edgar, how much did you know about Carlos before you accepted the role?

Edgar Ramirez:
I didn’t know that much about Carlos beforehand, other than the immediate image that probably most people have of him. He was mysterious and a master of disguise, and was active all over Europe and the Middle East and other places. He was described in many suspense- and thriller books, but I didn’t know much more than all that.

FN:
What intrigued you about the role?

ER:
The reason why I was attracted was the level of complexity that this character offered. I mean it’s a character full of contradictions and he is the most challenging character that I have ever played so far. Not only because of the level of contradictions but also because of the extension of the character’s study, we’re talking probably around 25 years in the life of a character. So we see him when he’s around 22, until he’s 45 years old – in the course of five-and-a-half hours, which is the length of the long film version. Meaning that we had the opportunity to really explore the character. So you know, it was fascinating to explore so extensively the life of the character you play.

FN:
How did you prepare for the role?

ER:
How did I prepare? First I read about the contemporary history, in order to understand the geo-politics of the time. The political and historical context that all these characters lived in, for me that was very important. Then I tried to watch and read as much documentation as possible, about Carlos’ image… the legend, the myth, you know. It was very important to understand the perception the media of the time had of this character and also through the opinion of many authors who have written about him. I also tried to have as many interviews as possible with people who were close to the real guy in order to get more personal input that I could use in the mix. Then I poured all of this into the character that Olivier (director) had already written, which was already very complex and contradictory and then I just let go.

FN:
How did your perception of Carlos change as you progressed along with filming, and also with reading about him?

ER:
Honestly, he was so many things at the same time that I chose not to form any opinion prior to filming. Once I felt that I cracked the character, I just stopped thinking about it, like “<I>The guy should be this or should be that</I>”. No. I think that over-intellectualizing would have worked against the character because he was too complex and too many versions, too many faces, too many different identities. So I did not want to put too much thought into it and have too many opinions upfront because in the end it is not a biography. We’re not trying to get to the truth of Carlos because nobody will ever know the truth. There will always be so many grey areas about his life. So for me it was just important to go through the experiences of the character who to me, was more about tactics than strategy. He makes choices based on impulse without really foreseeing the consequences.

FN:
How did you go about the weight changes of the character?

ER:
With the weight changes, that was clear from the start because many pictures that we had of the real guy show him fat in the later days of his life as a free man. So that was clear that the character was going to go through major physical transformations. So for the character I had to lose weight first and try to become a twenty two year old boy again. Then I had to take more weight back and gain more weight. Then I had to lose almost two sizes again and then get them back. I lost like six kilos at the beginning, then I gained them back in the course of the shoot, then I gained almost seventeen kilos more. I was supervised but I still had some residuals on how it affected my body. I took care and it was ok, but I became a little allergic to dairy and corn, things I wasn’t allergic too before. It was worth it though.

FN:
Some of the film’s structure reminds me a bit of another film with a similar topic, called Der Baader Meinhof Komplex. Have you or director Olivier Assayas watched the film or are familiar with its story?

ER:
Well, the similarity that you can find is that both stories occurred at the same time in history. However, with regards to the structure I would disagree because I think that Olivier’s effort is more focused on the characters and less on the actions and events. Whereas the ‘Baader Meinhof Komplex’, which I think is a great movie and I watched it, is more focused on action and the events. Some of my favourite German actors are in it and I found it very helpful in terms of information and clarifying contrasting facts and all that. But in Olivier’s movie, things are more focused on character study, especially with Carlos. Also because of the length of the movie, it gave us more room to explore who these people were beyond the terrorism. Once again, if some people say that ‘Carlos’ is a movie about terrorism or a political movie I disagree, because I don’t think it is just about terrorism. The characters, they gravitate around world terrorism, yes, but it is really a movie about human conflicts and human choices.

FN:
Do you think the perception of terrorism has changed and also, how would someone like Carlos fit into the current political climate?

ER:
I think the notions of terrorism have changed. They have changed considerably, from the 70’s to our current day. I think people like Carlos would have never considered themselves as terrorists. They would rather be freedom fighters, or radical militants. In this movie we see how an entire generation made the path from revolutionary theory to military action. They would never see themselves inflicting terror. I think for them they were defending the oppressed from the oppressors.

That could be the difference but at the same time: have things really changed? Is the suffering caused by terror different from the 70’s than it is right now? I consider the consequences the same, the suffering, isolation, death, destruction… When I mean terror, I mean terror in general. Terror coming from anywhere. It could be coming from a radical group, or from any army, or any given government. I mean, terror is terror. In my opinion there is no good violence or bad violence. Violence is violence and the consequences are the same. So it brings us back to the point where it’s human nature, for better or for worse, and this movie shows that. The contradictions and the struggle between idealism on one side, and individualism on the other side. The will to change the world and the dreams of revolution on one side, then the narcissistic obsession for recognition, fame and a place in history on the other side. And all of that laced with power, fear, greed, ambition, sex and love, which fortunately or unfortunately are elements that speak to all of us. So for me that reinforces the fact that this movie is not about terrorism. It’s about human nature.

FN:
Many thanks for the interview and best wishes for your future projects.