We asked Giamatti what itâs like to live an objectively charmed life for being the poster boy of our discontent, as well as the strange characters he sometimes gets mistaken for.
GQ: I hope I don’t sound terribly pretentious for quoting myself, but after I saw The Holdovers I wrote about your character, “He doesn’t get the girl and he doesn’t win. He merely affirms his own humanity at great personal cost.” I felt like that was also true of this character.
Paul Giamatti: [laughing] I think thatâs true of a lot of things I’ve done!
I was going to say: is that something that people see in you, or is that something that’s true of the projects that you seek out?
That’s not necessarily anything I seek out, it’s kind of just what comes to me. And it’s just a processâover time, people see you do things, and that’s kind of what they want to see you do. I get all kinds of great variations on âsort of complicated person, kind of unhappy person.â They’re all interesting parts, but yeah, I would say that that can kind of describe a lot of things. I mean, John Adams gets to be president and he’s still not happy. He’s still pissed off, and it doesn’t satisfy him. Then he just affirms his own humanity by being someone satisfied with being president.
Do you relate to that at all? You’re synonymous with being successful and known for being good at your craft, do you still feel like, âI should be happier than I am?â
[Pause] No, I don’t, no. I feel pretty good about what I’ve managed to do in my life. No, I don’t feel likeâoh, jeez, no. I feel pretty good!
I mean that’s what it looks like from the outside in, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth.
No, no. I’m sitting here going, âDo I?â But I donât think so. I think I’m feeling pretty good about things.
You talked about playing unhappy, complicated people. Do you ever think to yourself, âDang it, when does Paul Giamatti get to play the guy who has everything?â
Yeah. Thatâs interesting. But then I’m like, well that’s boring, isn’t it? I mean, a couple of times in my life I’ve gotten to play very kind of content, happy people, and that’s been interesting. And it’s hard, actually, but it’s fun the couple of times Iâve done it. But the guy who has everything, that’s just not interesting. It’s not very dramatic, you know what I mean? There’s just nothing to it if you’re just playing a guy who’s fine and everything is just awesome. Something’s got to happen to him, he’s got to have that taken away or it’s not interesting to watch. Inevitably just watching somebody deal with adversity is more interesting, whether it’s actually external adversity or internal adversity.
Sure. But then there’s also the stereotype of actors wanting to play something that makes them look glamorous and to be painted in the most positive light possible, whereas it seems like you go out of your way to try to find the complications and the hurt.