P7

1. Magazine copy
GEORGE WETTON

2. Headline
 Reliving the 80’s through the eyes of someone who doesn’t know why they are there. This is what happened to St Hill’s
student Steve Target as he battles the mysteries behind his identity crisis, along with the uncovering of many murders around
the streets of York. Steve and his friends, Chris Bond and Lauren Pike all work together to uncover the mysteries behind the
disappearances. This comedic horror deals with a lot of dark humour earning it the rating of an 18. The reviews written so far
have been successful and the film has been highly complimented. George Wetton’s direction of making the audience not
know if they want to laugh or cry is a comportment which makes this film very unique. The film has been critiqued for dealing
with issues of dyspraxia and religion rather well; two themes that aren’t normally seen together in this genre. Whilst it may
be set in the 80’s, and to be honest we have seen this in previous ideas such as the cult TV serious ‘Ashes to Ashes’, but this
film isn’t just about the fashion and music and unchallenged misogynistic attitude of the decade, this film delivers the
promise of change, tackling serious issues which were prominent of the time, and the showing of strong character
development, something which this film has managed to do successfully well.
 Here today we have an exclusive interview with Peter Harding, the star of the Target Zone franchise, as we discuss the main
processes and complications behind the filming.
 Blood Moon, the film adaptation of the first book in the franchise, will be released on May 18th with screenings at all major
cinemas.

3. Questions
Here are the questions that I will be asking for the interview. I think that they are most suitable. They don’t give too much away but cover general bases of what the actors
opinions are on the film. I don’t want them to be robot. Whilst of course the actor who is getting interviewed is the most important person regarding this subject. I want to
be giving them as much personality as possible whilst still focusing on the task of asking the questions. This shows there will be sort connection.
1. So, first of all Peter, what was your thoughts when you were handed the copy of that script?
2. When you said, you had originally auditioned for Brick was there any particular reason? Did you feel a connection with him that made you want to act in that role?
3. What was your favourite scene to shoot?
4. What was the hardest scene to film?
5. Your hometown was originally York, wasn’t it, but I understand you haven’t been down there for a while? What was it like going back to see it all?
6. I’ve heard your direction has shifted a little from acting to filmmaking. You’ve stated in a previous interview, that this encouraged you be more interactive with how it looks
on camera. Could you talk more about this?
7. Even though it was quite an anxious role to have taken on and the character is very different to most characters that are in the film, do you see similarities between the
character and yourself?
8. When you are thinking of the 1980’s, what are the first things that you think of?
9. What are your opinions on character development in the film? Do you feel like they got through a lot of it?
10. What are you most proud of now that the film is finished?
11. Now I’m guessing that you have already read the second book, just in the expectations of a sequel? The main antagonist deals with an identity crisis in a similar sense as
Steve does. If you could pick someone for the role of this, who would you pick and why?

4. Question One
 “Well thought it was an interesting one. At least I hope I did or else I wouldn’t be having this interview, (laughs) it
was certainly a bit by bit process. The writer and director, George Wetton, had pitched me the idea at a very
early development stage and, whilst I had read the book, I will admit I was a little unsure and self-conscious
about the casting. My original casting choice was the role of ‘Brick’ but after seeing my audition they just knew
that I was better suited for the role of Steve, which naturally I felt flattered about. But having said that, it also
came with a lot of pressure. I felt like it would be such a big gamble because it’s a franchise and hopefully there’ll
be more films than just first adaptation. I didn’t want a huge part, and I certainly wasn’t expecting it! Plus, there
is the fear of being type cast, but I am so glad I accepted it and I can’t wait to hopefully do more. The other thing
I noticed was how non-linear the script was. There were certain flashbacks and scenes that were in different
areas of the film. They were a lot more difficult to read and understand on a paper script but when you’re acting,
in character, and then see the editing process, even just those short frames when you review the ‘take’ on set,
you understand what the director is trying to portray and that helps you in evolving the character you are
playing, even just into the next scene. It really is a process of evolution.”

5. Question Two
 “No, he’s not my favourite character but I felt like his part would have been the most fun to play. To be honest I
didn’t think I had the skill and the ability to audition for such a complex character like Steve. In fact, I actually never
read the books until I heard about the audition from my agent. Halfway through the book, I had already realised
that Lauren is my favourite character. I love her no nonsense attitude. However just because she doesn’t suffer
fools gladly, doesn’t mean she can’t be a fool herself sometimes. We see a lot of smart egotistical female fictional
characters in film and TV increasingly nowadays, but I think Blood Moon pushes this view, and especially in the
context of the eighties decade with, for example, the first female Prime Minister, George has tried to expand and
focus on this. Whilst Lauren is not the key character, her resilience and her strong personality makes her natural
confidence more believable and relatable. She’s strong… tough and ironically out of all the characters, she’s the
one that can defend herself the most. However, that doesn’t make her a genius. George has done a good job of
swapping the stereotypes and making them work even more in my opinion. I think Beth (who plays Lauren) is an
admirably strong actress who did an excellent job and that tough side was shown well on the screen.”


6. Question Three
 “Whilst I can’t give too much away because the ending is very important, the ultimate scenes were definitely my
favourite. I love the physicality and doing my own stunts as that is very important to me personally. You see a lot of
action characters being replaced by stunt doubles. Sometimes it can be very obvious. So, I wanted to stay in the
character and do my own stunts a much as possible. I also, personally had a lot of fun filming the cricket scenes. I am
a huge cricket fan and, as you can imagine, working on set with the same people over a length of time, they become
like family and friends, so rehearsals felt like just a bunch of good friends relaxing and knocking a ball about in the
local park. It was just great to bond and have a laugh, however I needed to not get caught up in my competitiveness
and needed to focus on my character and his coordination problem of dyspraxia and then having the challenge of
finding that enjoyment in cricket; I think it’s an interesting concept. The character can skateboard which is one of the
only things that he can control but his enjoyment for cricket is challenged because of the condition that he suffers
from.”

7. Question Four
 “The hardest scene for me personally was the soliloquy that is played halfway through the film. The scene was very demanding
and pretty much sums up the whole film, apart from the ending because that’s not happened yet. It’s almost like gathering
your thoughts on a journey to that particular stage. I felt it very pressuring and because George likes to film in one continuous
take, which I think does work really well, when it comes to script learning and constantly being on top of the character it was
quite emotionally exhausting. The monologue came after the scene, which was filmed with the other two characters, which
resulted in the scene being a lot longer than I was initially expecting. The script itself could be a little demanding too; you’re
playing this character who is knowledgeable on some stuff apart from just the basics. How do I describe it? It’s concept is like
someone who has a head injury and they don’t know anyone in their family but they know the simplicity of how to make a cup
of tea. This is how my character feels. He knows how to do everything in his life but what he doesn’t have knowledge on is the
things that should matter the most and be the most personal to him. Anger was one element that I had to play throughout of
the film. He feels robbed. He doesn’t know these supposed people, that are telling him he’s their friend or son. This anger is an
emotion that I think pushes him to work harder against the case. Halfway through you realise. It’s not even about going back to
his own life but realising the anger he holds for the person responsible for putting him in this world. Whilst the killer is of
course the most dangerous character, he himself becomes dangerous as the story evolves. That anger I found hard to do in
some scenes because it’s an inspiring anger. This character doesn’t want to live that out-of-date life and that’s something
which he will do anything to escape from. Its compelling but difficult emotion to portray.”


8. Question Five
 “Oh yeah it was brilliant. I thought it was a huge coincidence that the main location setting was York. The film
does a good job of exploring the important and instantly recognisable sights that tourists often see. It was very
interesting to see the locations on screen. Seeing places like the bar walls, Minister and Clifford’s Tower, you
really get that sense of the geography on the screen, but the experience was very surreal. I missed it. Having
grown up in York it was just such an amazing place to film, and I’m proud to say that this beautiful city is my
home. What I thought was rather noticeably different is that normally the backdrop of York is used for portraying
much older periods.. Georgian.. Victorian, most recently ‘Gentleman Jack’ for example with Suranne Jones, but
to have York as a setting for something more modern was quite unique. Any 80’s British film just seems to be
normally London based”

9. Question Six
 “Yeah absolutely. I think it was mostly through George’s direction that I felt engaged with his continuous shots.
Having seen the film ‘1917’, I found that the concept of the camera following the characters and having no cuts
made you really feel like you were in that world and it felt a lot more engaging. Something which I think George has
captured very well in this film. It’s not just the camera work that I admire though. It’s also the cinematography. The
practical camera work I found very inspiring, but I also like looking at the editing. The monochrome style of
including hues of red and blue from selective colour is something that I have never seen before. Time is also a
heavy concept in the film, whilst time travel would be a bit of a stretch when talking about the story’s plot, time is
always there throughout the story and is the main aspect of the story. So, the visuals of all the different clocks and
how the camerawork focus on them… I feel like they have taken a really unique direction on that.”

10. Question Seven
 “Wow, that’s a good question. Like you say Steve’s a very different and complex character. I think he does have an
overwhelming socially awkward trait to him which I found the easiest to play because I can be somewhat like that
myself. I didn’t live through the 80’s so seeing all the sets and props, I has the same sense of amazement that Steve
has. There definitely is an overwhelming factor, not just to Steve’s character, but to everything that is going on such as
for example the cars used on set, the clothing. the hair! When making something look like it’s set in the 80’s you don’t
want it to come across as too cheesy, but you need to amplify those qualities that tell you what time period you’re in,
so that both the actors and the audience can understand the era. There is also the trait of not knowing what’s going
on. This is definitely something which I relate to immensely no matter what I am doing. (Laughs) However I hate to
disappoint but I wouldn’t say there are many traits that I resemble when putting in comparison. Steve is a lot angrier
than me or any other individual I know, is but he is also a lot more kinder than the average person too. This is
something which I think they’ll look up to; when the protagonist is able to have more struggles than the viewer
despite great successes in the past. That’s how you are creating a successful character. You’ve just got to make that
character’s arc pay off and either have a bittersweet ending or a feel good factor.”


11. Question Eight
 “Well, the first things that come to mind when I think of the 1980’s is Rubik cubes! And then of course
technology? Computers? Wealth? I know my parents talk of Filofaxes, shoulder pads, Dynasty, the “Yuppie”, but I
wasn’t born in the 1980’s; there’s no personal memory there for me to recall. One thing that this film has done,
that the book did quite well but not on the same level for obvious reasons, is bring the music to life. There is a lot
of music from bands that I currently enjoy such as ‘The Jam’ and ‘A-ha’ playing on the soundtrack. This was music
that despite not growing up in this era, I listened to a lot through my parents playing the music. Researching for
the film I understood more about the decade, the divide in social class, people being on strike, AIDS and
unemployment. It was a stark contrast between rich and poor to us looking back on it now. And then you now
take on board the opinions of the world in the 2020’s and the Social Influencers and see how the world has
changed. Although the core protests are still about race and sexism, so I wonder if we have changed at all?

12. Question Nine
 Yeah absolutely. Hopefully if this film is a success, then you can see the further development of these
characters. I think it’s just essential to stick with one film at a time. I do however think there is a fair bit of
character development in this film. It’s almost an introduction to the world. The best part for me is humour
and how you can play around the development of the character using this. You have one scene where the
character is hugging their friend, saying you’re my best friend; we’ve already been through a lot, type of
scenario, and the next scene where they are talking about going to their deaths, which leads to one of them
cowering out and stepping back from that “we’re all in it together” bond. This character finds braver acts
later on in the film and that level of hypocrisy in comedy is something which I feel like George strives for in
the writing of the novel. Overall, there’s a lot more personal conflict; it’s not just about solving the case. It’s
about getting along and working as a team. As well as the personal vendetta that Steve has, the view of who
or what has made him live his life this way, his first interpretation feels overwhelming, and then progressively
as the film goes along, you find the trials and tribulations of investigating sociopath’s murders are a lot more
of a struggle when putting it into a comparison of just living your regular life. Eventually you grow tired of
everyone’s attitudes in the same way. Steve is sick of everyone’s behaviour because they are old fashioned
and just wrong. Some characters are a lot more forgivable than others though which I think the viewer will
see but still be unsure on whether to label he/her as an antagonist or a protagonist.”


13. Question Ten
 “Well, I believe the thing I feel most proud of is the level of effort not just from the cast,
but the crew too. I feel like visually they have tried the best at making this as much as a
success as possible. I also don’t get too involved with it, but the marketing has been done
very, very well with this film. I feel like despite playing such a challenging role I was able to
play that character with an air of believability. Whilst I can’t fully judge myself as an actor,
and sometimes I don’t have the self-belief in my ability, l have had some nice comments on
how believable the role is and how well I played the insomnia side of the character. A
concept which I had initially thought I wouldn’t be able to play very well. Which is great.”

14. Question Eleven
 “Well, I don’t think that I am the best in making these sorts of decisions. I would usually leave them
to the director. But if I did have a say in the casting I would go for Anthony Hopkins. I don’t know if I
am being a bit too ambitious with that decision but having read the second book, I think he would
establish the tone of it perfectly well. He matches the description and his brilliant sinister
performance in ‘The Silence of the Lambs’ (1991) was outstanding. So, I really feel like he would
excel in the role and would just be overall great at the part. “
 The Interviewer: “Well, that’s everything. Thank you for giving us the chance to interview you.”
 “Thank you for having me. I hope you enjoy the film.”