Q: ‘Shame,’ much like ‘Hunger,’ warrants participation from the audience, you ask questions and are involved…

A: I want to earn the audiences trust, you really want people to trust you as a filmmaker. When people sit down to watch a movie, they’re kind of sceptical anyway, but then once you gain their trust they are open to what you will offer them. I always hope they come away with an experience where they feel involved, they feel a part of it. One of the aspects of that was the back-story of Brandon and Sissy, not having it spelled out exactly what happened to them. The reason why I did that, I think, was that I wanted to make it…not mysterious, but actually familiar, to everyone in the audience. That they would know, or have an idea of what possibly was the problem in the past. By not actually spelling it out, in some ways the audience are involved in what possibly it could be.

Q: This film is very political, different to ‘Hunger,’ but political in a different way – the sexual politics.

A: You’re quite correct, the sexual politics. I think how a sex addict as such, or a person who has an affliction to this disease as such – pornography, the internet, the access of pornographic images, the access to sexual content is quite prevalent, it’s everywhere. I think that was the sort of starting point to explore someone who has this affliction. In my day pornography was on the top-shelf of a newsagent, it was a far away thing. Now the access to it is much more prevalent, and therefore it has an influence to the amount of activity to a sex addicts state….if that many makes any sense.

Q: It’s societal and political…

A: Yes, politics as well because of the sexualisation of images to sell anything, it’s prevalent all around us. But it’s done in a way, a very commercial way, as pornography is, you pay to go online, it’s active in our everyday. If you are aware of it or not, its prevalent, it’s very very active. And of course to navigate your way through this world is difficult. I think everyone’s involved.

Q: What is the collaborative experience like with Michael Fassbender?

A: It’s a little bit like Jazz in a way, you write the music, the melody, the harmony, and then within that piece of music you can improvise. There’s a roof, there’s a ceiling, certain notes can play within that space. You know, I don’t hire robots, I hire actors, just like great players – and of course Michael Fassbender is a great great player. So you write the song and then there’s chance for him to improvise, and in that frame he improvises. There’s many great examples, my favourite example is a very simple example you see in the film, when Michael is standing outside the elevator – it’s a shot being used for the press image, he presses the button for the elevator, he was meant to get into the elevator, but he presses the button of the elevator, and he looks at the elevator, the elevator door closes, then he went back and sat down. That was beautiful because as a brother, in the scene, not wanting to confront the situation of what could be going on upstairs with his boss, it was beautiful. A perfect example of you writing the music, then the person improvises and does his thing. It was much more beautiful than him going into the elevator, it was wonderful. A genius moment, simple, but that’s what it’s about.

The original source is here