The writer and director of If It Ain't Broke, Break It, Ravi Godse, answer questions about his latest comedy and fimmaking.

Where did you get the idea for If It Ain’t Broke, Break It?

It is said that life imitates art. That may be true but art always imitates life, in my view. I have seen how many problems well intentioned but misguided help can cause. In real life I have been both the recipient and perpetrator of that problem. Then I thought, why not build a comedy of errors on it. I started looking for a title. I believe that the label is as important as the actual material. I keep thinking of different themes and once I like it, I see if I can find a nice title that I can marry it to. All of my movies have funny titles. And have a message too. In this movie, it’s that you can’t really chase happiness. When you’re not chasing it, happiness will find you.

How long did it take you to write the screenplay?

I draw inspiration from my surrounding. Anything funny or different I notice, I make a note. Once I find a central theme on which I can build an entire story, I let it run in my mind for a while and then try and knock out the story in one sitting. Then I polish it for 6 months.

How did you go about casting this comedy?

This is my third movie. And when I tell my friends about the movies, the first thing they ask is, “Who is in it? Anybody we know?” I tried to politely point out that they know me and I am in it, but they did not seem to get that. So I was determined for this movie to have known names. So I hired a producer from Hollywood – Kathy Oliver. She is brilliant and without her it would not have been possible. She read the script, liked it and brought in the Lisa London casting agency. 

I don’t want to compare my movie to a kidney stone but at times before a stone forms you need a small focus, a nidus around which everything else gets built. In this case, once Kathy and Lisa were on board, it was a different ballgame.
We prepared a detailed breakout sheet and had it submitted to all the agents. We did it in Hollywood style but with a little Ravi touch. For example, the main character we were looking for was Mr. Fish, a lawyer. In the description I added, “Not good looking is a plus.”
 
Once we had Steve, Richard, Sabrina, and Rondell, I found 2 Pittsburgh stars to play cameos and before I could blink I had 6 names I could hang my hat on.

Which scene was the most fun to film?

I liked the scenes I had with Richard Kind. Most of the movie was already in the can, so there was less pressure. There were just two actors. We could ad-lib, go off the reservation, explore a different take on things. It was great.

Say I have two scenes at one location. Then I will make them subordinate to a camera move. Once you move the camera, you have to move the lights. So instead of moving the camera, I would shoot both scenes from one angle and then switch. It will involve a costume change for the talent, but this usually takes less time than resetting the scene.

In the scenes with Richard, since we had time, we finished one scene at a time. It involved moving the lights and camera but we could keep the emotional cadence and tempo. It was great to be able to do it artistically instead of logistically. Art is important, all pervading, it has no limits. It is nice to say this in a seminar, but in the real world, where you want to get some things done in a certain time period, business trumps the art, usually.
Richard is a very serious and talented actor. These scenes are simple and complex at the same time.

Which scene was the most difficult?

I would say that the climax scene was the most difficult. We were under the gun to get it done. It not only involved all the Hollywood players but all the local actors too. Being a farce, it needs to come together in the climax. And also it is a talky climax, so a lot of lines – some of them even in French. Everything needed to be right. All 11 actors need to get the lines right. Boom, audio, dolly operator, lighting – everyone had to be sharp. I did not want to break it down into small chunks and lose the natural flow, so we shot it quickly. I did not need a perfect wide shot, once I got the elements that I was going to use in wide, I did not want to kill myself getting the lines right when I knew we would be using close-ups. Luckily, my editor Jim Ledoux was on the set, so he was able to tell me when we had enough to make the scene work.

Why did you decide to become a filmmaker?

Since I was a child, I love to tell stories. Naturally, as a storyteller, I desire to tell my stories to a lot of people and what better medium than a film to reach them. It started as a hobby and as far as hobbies go, it is a really cool one. But if I am expecting people to pay for my movies, then it is not a hobby anymore. It is not only the money; they are exchanging 90 minutes of their busy lives for my story, so they better get something in return.

How would you describe your directing philosophy?

Philosophy is a big word. It is a complicated word. And my directing philosophy is against that. I like to keep it simple. Every shoot day I would ask myself, as to what is the most pressing need of that day is, then I would make everything else subordinate to it. I can’t use any textbook jargon, because I don’t remember it. Don’t get me wrong, I did go to the film school and did take classes for technical directing. But I don’t like to mess with success, so if something works we roll with it. The plan is simple. The script is pretty much written in stone – some ad-lib happens but not much. If the actors give a great performance, I might take one more for audio safety and move on. I come from Steelers’ country, so to use Football language: I love the hurry-up offense.

My philosophy in a nutshell: stick to the script, trust the professionals, don’t waste the actor’s energy, don’t lose patience, let the crew feel the love, roll with the punches if needed, and get the job done. I also believe that being calm, well mannered, polite and deeply courteous also helps.

Tell us about the other members of your team.

My main crew, Lou Yellin and James Ledoux, have been with me for three movies; they are part owners of this venture, my brothers.

Many years ago, some nurses were telling the doctor who hired me as to how smart I was. After a while that senior doctor said, “Of course I know he is smart. I did not hire him for his looks.”

So I get together people who know what they are doing and then I don’t waste time or energy second-guessing them. I am not looking at depth of field, shutter speed, or white balance. I trust them.

Does filmmaking affect your work as a physician?

Being a physician is a very serious business. It is literally life or death. Patient care comes first. I think the way this question can be properly framed is: does being a physician affect filmmaking? Despite me being so busy, it does not detract but it enhances me as a filmmaker. I love history and traveling, so I will give you a historic reference. I was recently in Hungary and Hungarians have a historic phrase. There was a battle called Mohács. They lost disastrously. Whatever misfortune befalls a Hungarian they say, “We lost more at Mohács so it is not that bad.” For me, medicine is so important that it gives me a curious air of nonchalance, an élan if you will, about filmmaking. So even if things are not going my way, I can deal with it; it is just a movie after all. President Reagan used to say that once you convince the other party that you will leave the negotiating table if pushed too far, then you become a terrific negotiator. Since I know I can walk away, that gives me the strength to keep making films.

What filmmakers have influenced you the most?

I don’t watch too many movies, so I can’t really answer that. But, when I watch a movie, I always find something to like in it and enjoy it. Someone said that a scene in my movie reminded him of a movie by a Japanese director in 1956. I could truthfully look him in the eye and say that I had no clue what he was talking about. And even if it is done inadvertently or unknowingly, is not imitation the most sincere form of flattery?

Which of your three films is your favorite and why?

How can you ask a parent which child you like the best? But I will answer it. Currently I like my fourth movie the best: the one I have just finished writing.

My first movie, Dr. Ravi & Mr. Hyde might be a trifle short on production value but for sheer writing pleasure, I love that movie. My second movie, I am a schizophrenic and so am I is a tense courtroom drama and that is releasing soon on DVD. I like them all and I endeavor to please so I hope to satisfy a wide variety of discerning audiences. However, I plan to stick to comedy.

Can you tell us more about your next movie?

I’ve just finished polishing a script for Thursday the 12th.  It is a religious drama and a political satire all mixed together. Three friends are obsessed with finding out what happens to you once you die. It turns out that there is an after-world where you go, but it’s definitely not what anyone expects. It’s a comedy, of course, but it is very philosophical also. It’s going to be a really fun and unique project.

What is the one thing you want people to know about you and your work?

If you think of a Gaussian curve, a bell curve, there is a median and anything that is 2 standard deviations away, either to the left or to the right is significant. Whichever way people interpret my work: I would like to think that it is significant. It is humorous, but it goes deeper. It is honest, fun, feisty, thoughtful and hopefully significant.