It is a shortcoming to say that the wait is long, but now the first spectators will be rewarded in a few hours to go to the theater. In the release of his film “Camelot – Part One”, Alexandre Aster offers an adventurous comedy to the audience unlike anything seen in France for a long time.

As we can see even in “La Grande Vatroil” or “McAlomania”, the humor, the best resources – useful and visible on the screen – and all that is known are carried out by high-level actors. The crown prince and co-ordinator of the usual activities (composer, director, actor, screenwriter and others) responded with this outspoken speech to CNEUS ‘questions, actively emphasizing both the benefits of long film design rather than the importance of picking comedy.

After waiting for more than ten years since the end of the series, what mood were you in a few days before the film came out in the cinema?

I’ve been waiting a bit for stress, but it hasn’t come now. Unlike this series, where everyone found her alone in front of the screen, cinema is a collective one. I want to find out what everyone out there wants. Strangely, I have no opinion of this public, and have no intention of dropping this image into space! Rather, I have the idea of ​​handing it over to every viewer. Since there are a lot of things in this film, a lot of people, it’s very bushy. So, without anxiety, we can not wait, we should stop talking about it and people should sit in a room and be open to what is happening on the screen.

If this is not your first film, this is the first time you have made “Camelot” into such a long, two-hour film. People who often talk about the importance of rhythm and dialogue in comedy, have you changed your habit to change it?

No, I would even say that everything is easy in the feature film. Camelot has always been an environment that tries to put small, passive, useless characters against a big dangerous environment. The feature film allowed a lot of shortcuts to this dangerous environment.

Camelot confronts the little characters in a big dangerous environment.

Suddenly, the set is awesome, we go to other countries, take more time to stage big things, impose forces … Suddenly, these characters immediately catch this big thing. A polarity goes fast. In the middle of the desert of Oman, even with a small wooden fire is enough so that the small nature of the characters is clearly visible.

You often talk about your admiration for Luis de Funes, or for the conversational art of a Michael Audiard. On the other hand, your ridiculous comedy connects you with the more Anglo-Saxon of Monty Python. What do you finally file?

However I believe there is a point in common to all of these. I know there is a long history of resistance between the British and us, but we are still relatives. For his part, de Funes, when he sees the “Carniot” scene, he repairs the car, it’s a real ballet. No slight blink of an eye at home, no wink of humor. There is rhythm, intensity, musicality … Monty Python, de Funes … All these people appreciate this absurdity, they put a lot of energy, intensity and work into this absurdity. If you mess around with it, it will fall to the ground because it is so fragile. Making jokes with a lot of seriousness and respect, a lot of humility, is common to all of these.

The gallery of your characters often responds to very strong antiquities, and without trying to be insulted from it, everyone knows the role they play. Stupid he also knows that he is a fool, a traitor … Is it possible to stage these antiquities that you like in the Arthurian myth?

I think comedic characters are not good enough for what they do. You can find it in all the jokes. But in addition, if you have the opportunity to decorate them with Frankish antiquities, traitors, parasites, and bootleggers, the comic spring is all the stronger when you put them in a domestic, casual setting.

Is your character Arthur precisely denying the place he was told, the destiny allotted to him?

The thing that weighs on Arthur is what is put on his back. This is a rule imposed on him: the gods, the grail, the lady of the lake … plus, he has to achieve his results with a team that doesn’t get much. He only needs to understand, it is so scary to be the only clear in a situation! After all, he only allows himself – not to fight against, but to be ashamed of his destiny.

In the film you are introduced to some passages like flashbacks to Arthur’s childhood. What do you mean by these flashbacks that touch so much in the film?

Childhood is often the criterion of popular writers. When you read Marcel Bacchus, you do not have someone writing you a diary of his childhood, you have someone who describes a period of time that illuminated his life, which always works in a particular way, because those loves are more powerful, because the heroes of that time – the birds A guy who shoots well and a guy who shines well at balls – seemed great to him.

Childhood is the junk food of what we create.

This multiplication of childhood memories is what I wanted to show in these paragraphs. Steven Spielberg says we have a lot of money to remember the baby we had. Childhood is the junk food of what we create.

The cast of the film, like the series, is interesting, with a large gallery of characters. In your creative process, is the actor suggesting that you create a character for him or, conversely, are you looking for the most suitable actor or actress for the role you previously imagined?

At home, all the actors are encouraged to have one character, which is no different! I am a writer who considers my imagination to be rather limited. We always see a lot of imagination, but I don’t believe it, I think it’s the other way around. If you start from this campus, you should use every opportunity to tell your movie or your story for yourself. It’s going to act as an eye opener, a way to sort out what you have to say. For example, when I had a coffee with Guillo Galliano, before he got the role of the bounty hunter, I first spoke to him and heard him speak. When I offered to take him on board with me, I asked if there were any things he didn’t like. He replied that the Navy, he did not like boats. I imagined for him to load him on this ship. Gock was born out of this, but if he had not told me about this before, this scene would never have happened. I wanted to talk to him on screen and the sea around him and all the comic springs that come with it.

King Arthur was a man who knew countless editions in which every writer wanted to present something in it. What was your own picture of this hero from the first season of the series to the first film?

My Arthur to me, he escapes the hero’s rivalry policy, the energetic, the hero’s heroism. He is a hero, tired and puts his bag down, in which the ass is full, not wanting to go anymore. This is what I want to say to children today, I want to tell them about a boy who failed, who no longer believes in it, who regains courage from time to time, and then gets tired again. A sad, depressing type.

Arthur is a hero. (…) A kind of grief, depression.

We are still in a world where we are telling young people ideas like success, success …

Basically, if you weren’t in your 50s Rolex, you wouldn’t be a human being. I enjoy telling them my role: “Losing is beautiful”. Under a varnish of Arthurian mythology, humor and absurdity, I use it to send it back to people. But deep down, I’m proud of being a guy even weaker.

The first part is ready to be released in a few days, but we can not help you, but you can ask the question: are the next two already started, launched, in progress?

No, I do not want to! So, I know something like this will happen in the second and something like this in the third! But I urge you not to go for its sequel anymore. But I want to go to the end of the Arthurian myth.