First the movie, the actual playing of the role and trying to deliver what everybody wanted. Then, when the film came out, there was instant fame. I was just a kid from Sweden, I didn't know what was going on.
You realize as a director that when you are cutting a film, you want to have alternatives. You need color and choices. You don't want four takes that are identical.
The acting style that has emerged from HD, because of the contrast and how sharp the picture is, it's more neutrally played. The main character is very minamalistic. That's what works in this digital age.
You can't give someone five hundred punches in a film anymore. You beat on them, and they continue to stand there staring at you. That doesn't work. People just don't buy that anymore.
I used to be a chemical-engineering student, but I started studying acting, and I went for a cattle call, up against hundreds of people. They tore me down because I was too tall. They said "How tall are you?" "6'5"." "Next."
I think the violence is important. It all depends on the genre. Rambo was ultra-violent, and I think it worked. You have to give Stallone credit. You have to respect him for taking that shot, and taking the violence all the way. He was the first one to do that in a long time. It fricking worked.
I do weights a few times a week. Not a lot of heavy weights. I do it just to keep my muscle toned. With the martial arts, I am doing pretty basic stuff. I do some sparring. If I get a chance, I will go swimming or running in-between. I keep in pretty good shape between films.
When you are acting in a film, you have no idea what scene the editor is going to choose. For instance, after you have directed, you feel more comfortable delivering a performance. Because you know the real performance is put together in the editing room.
Stallone is a pretty tough director. You don't mess with him.
