DIRECTOR'S STATEMENT
Business Ethics is a film about the importance of honesty and the dangers of greed and moral compromise. The story highlights the balance between the ways in which we shape our lives through our choices and how our lives are affected by random occurrences outside of our control. As a storyteller I am deeply interested in these universal themes and felt inspired by the idea of making a modern morality play about them. A film that examines these topics using dry and sometimes morbid humour while surrounding its hero with broadly drawn characters who embody a wide range of moral perspectives. In many cases these supporting characters are modeled after classic archetypes from old literary traditions, notably Greek tragedies. My belief is that in doing so we have made a film which is tonally distinct from the many other excellent stories about financial fraud.
FAQ
‘Business Ethics’ is clearly based on a short film you did previously with the same title. What made you interested in adapting it into a feature length film?
My father Richard wrote both scripts and it was such a joy to collaborate with him on the project from start to finish. It's an experience that I will always remember and cherish. We were both pleased with the short, but on some level always regarded it as being a kind of proof of concept for a feature. The story approaches these big themes and sways between this kind of dry humour and a more serious, somber tone and we always felt that it was one that could use more scope to accommodate a better balance of both.
What differences are there between the short film and the feature length versions of ‘Business Ethics’?
The script for the feature version of the film went through many revisions. From a plot point of view the two films have a lot in common, but tonally I think they are quite distinct. The feature expands on the short principally by indulging in more moments of absurdist comedy to go along with its laconic humour and more pointedly invoking those classic archetypal characters who I wanted to play with.
The film’s principal character Zachary Cranston is also quite different in both films. In the short, Gil Bellows did a brilliant job of portraying Cranston as a more uniformly self-centered presence. The character presents as charming, but with a very dark edge. In the feature, Larenz Tate is afforded more running time to develop Cranston as person who comes across as superficially forthright despite his disingenuous, selfish intentions. We also get to know a little bit more about Cranston’s family backstory which I will get into in the answers to a couple of later questions.
Another big addition to the story was the character of Cranston’s compliance officer Wilfred Tempest (played by Julian DeZotti). In the short, Cranston’s main allies are his secretary Veronica Caruso (played by Lauren Lee Smith in the short and Sarah Carter in the feature) and his auditor Martin Abacus (played in both films by Julian Richings). Both are people who mostly have good intentions, but make the fatal mistake of trusting their boss, who does not. Wilfred is, to me, a very sympathetic character. He is a person who has lived his life with integrity and wants to do the right thing but gets wrapped up in Cranston’s web for personal reasons related to his family, despite knowing that his colleague is not really to be trusted. He is guilty of making a moral compromise, but it is for love rather than greed. I thought that Julian did a wonderful job with the character.
Were there any additional sources of inspiration, in addition to the classical archetypes, that you drew from?
Two major inspirations for the film were the classic Ealing comedy Kind Hearts and Coronets (directed by the great Robert Hamer and starring Alec Guinness who plays eight characters in that film!) and the original BBC miniseries of House of Cards (starring Ian Richardson). Business Ethics owes its structure and the way its hero Zachary Cranston breaks the fourth wall to speak with the viewer to these works. If the film's sense of humour feels more like an old British comedy than a conventional North American one then these references and my father's love for the plays of Noel Coward are to blame.
How was it working with Larenz Tate?
As the lead character in the film, Zachary Cranston, Larenz is in almost every scene in the movie. As I recall he had one morning off during the entire course of principal photography. His energy is boundless and he was a terrific leader on set, having to oscillate between playing a kind of straight man against the film's colourful cast of supporting characters and leaning into his own absurdist moments. I was thrilled when he agreed to play the role because, as a big fan of his prior work, I knew he would be great and his performance exceeded my expectations. It was so important for Zachary to be a likeable scoundrel who the audience is kind of rooting for despite his misdeeds and Larenz is so innately likeable on camera throughout the film. We see him confront a diverse set of obstacles and observe how he spirals as a result, changing irreparably because of his own decisions and the way circumstances play out around him.
I should also note that it has been a pleasure to work with Larenz’s brothers Laron and Lahmard who were both producers on the film. They, along with Larenz, are experienced producers who offered a lot of good advice on the project. I have an indelible image in my mind of LaRon, who was on set nearly every minute of every day, sitting in video village joking around with my father and other members of our crew.
There were a few of the same faces in your cast for the short as there are in this longer adaptation. What inspired you to recast these actors? How was it to work with them in the new format, and in some cases, new roles?
There were three actors in the short who also appear in the feature. The only actor who plays the same role in both films is Julian Richings, who returns as Martin Abacus, Cranston’s auditor with substance abuse issues. I love working with Julian. He is such a great collaborator and has been in nearly everything that I have directed. I can’t imagine anyone else embodying Martin.
As previously mentioned, my friend Gil Bellows played Zachary Cranston in the short. In the feature he plays Edwin Murk, a hedge fund manager and Cranston’s surrogate father. It’s a not a coincidence that in some ways Murk is like the short’s version of Cranston. He is an unapologetically greedy person and clearly a bad influence on Zachary, but also a caring man who loves his unconventional family. He does get a kind of redemption which Cranston never receives, and I thought that he had lovely chemistry with Dorly Jean-Louis, who plays Cranston’s mother Nellie and is one of the few uniformly good characters in the film. Her only bad decision is to love a man who is so flawed. In some sense she is Echo, in love with Narcissus and blind to his flaws.
In the short, Julian DeZotti played the business school-aged Zachary Cranston in an early scene and, as with Julian Richings, I have worked with him several times since. His portrayal of Wilfred represents a very different challenge for an actor which I spoke about earlier.
How about the rest of the people on set?
I owe a great debt to our entire cast and crew who worked so hard on this film. It was a pleasure to get to work with friends who I'd collaborated with in the past and to make so many new friends as well.
Our cinematographer Michael LeBlanc is one of my closest friends and was also the cinematographer on my first feature, No Stranger Than Love. We shot the feature version of the film in many of the same locations as the short and it was a challenge to figure out which parts of the first film’s aesthetic we wanted to retain and which needed to change based on the new, expanded story and different tone. As always, Michael was an amazing collaborator and we spent a lot of time together before pre-production working out how to shoot each scene. He has a gift for visual storytelling common among great people of his profession, but also really understands story and notices things in performance which many would not. More than once he gave me a good note on performance because he saw something that the rest of us did not. We have since shot another film together which is in post-production right now.
It was a treat to finally work with my good friend Sarah Carter who did a brilliant job of playing the enigmatic Veronica. It’s a challenging role because Veronica is so important to the story and yet for much of it she remains an enigma.
Kurtwood Smith is such a kind, thoughtful person and gave a terrific performance as Magnus Hardcastle, the first investor in Cranston’s fund. He has several wonderful, scene-stealing moments sprinkled throughout the film.
Angus Macfadyen’s portrayal of Menlo Sartori is cribbed straight from many characters in those old, Ealing comedies which I mentioned earlier. In a way he represents an earlier version of Edwin Murk’s character, pre-redemption. I loved working with Angus. He’s a very considered artist and his character is probably the most dissimilar from what I had originally envisioned it being, but it’s so much better.
Lastly, one actor in particular whose acquaintance I was privileged to make is the late Lance Reddick, who played Professor Wrightway. I had been a fan of his work for many years prior to making the film and he is so great in it. More than that he was an absolute gem of a human. A wonderfully kind gentleman with a wicked sense of humour.
Do you have a favorite moment in the movie?
There are a lot of moments in the film which I love, but a particular favourite takes place in the office of auditor Carmine Tucci (played by Paolo Mancini). I love the chemistry between Tucci and Swiss banker Fraulein Stumpf (played by Shauna McDonald) and the intimidating presence of Mr. Karamozov (played by Vitali Makarov) adds some real tension that is undercut beautifully by comedy. It was one of my favourite scenes in the script and our cast somehow made it even better in the film.
Are there any lessons you learned on set that you can carry on to future projects?
Every experience working on set presents its own unique challenges. In the case of this film we had a head start because some of the heavy-lifting had been done in making the short. I also had the benefit of having made one feature previously which was important in learning to adapt to the extended shooting schedule (the saying “it’s a marathon, not a sprint” applies). I think while making this film I learned to defer to other peoples’ expertise better. Filmmaking is a lot of fun, but it is hard work and very much a team effort. In learning to defer to our very talented crew more often I became a lot more comfortable in my own role.