Lionheart

A conversation with Sheldon Lettich, for The Postil Magazine

by Grégoire Canlorbe · Mar 1, 2022

Sheldon Lettich is an American screenwriter, film director, and producer. He is notably known for his work in the action film genre—and his collaborations with Jean-Claude Van Damme, Sylvester Stallone, Mark Dacascos, Dolph Lundgren, and Daniel Bernhardt. Besides co-writing Bloodsport and Rambo III, Sheldon Lettich directed and co-wrote Lionheart, Double Impact, and Only the Strong.

Grégoire Canlorbe: What is the situation with regard to your long-established movie-project about Vietnam?

Sheldon Lettich: Well, I’ve written a lot of scripts about Vietnam, but none of them has been made. I wrote a script called Firebase. And it was kind of like that movie called Zulu. It was kind of like that. Basically, a small group of Americans on a hilltop firebase, and they got attacked by a huge number of North Vietnamese and Viet Cong. That was the screenplay I wrote a number of years ago. And Sylvester Stallone read the screenplay, and he liked it. And that’s how I ended up working with him on Rambo III, because he had read that screenplay. I’ve written a few other Vietnam screenplays, but none of them has gotten made, yet.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You collaborated with Sylvester Stallone on Rambo III. How did your team come up with the idea of the tank-versus-helicopter scene? Or the idea of colonel Trautman’s “In your ass!” line?

Sheldon Lettich: The tank-versus-helicopter scene wasn’t my idea, that was Stallone’s idea. And I thought it was not a plausible idea, but it seemed to work. You liked it, right? A helicopter versus a tank just makes no kind of sense at all because a tank is not designed to shoot at something moving fast like an airplane. A tank versus an airplane or a helicopter makes no kind of sense at all. You’d have to be very lucky. It takes some time to aim that cannon on a tank. So for a tank versus a helicopter, I didn’t believe it, but it seemed to work. There we are, it was Sly’s idea. As for colonel Trautman’s line in the interrogation scene, that was Stallone’s idea as well. That wasn’t mine.

Grégoire Canlorbe: What kind of movie could be done about the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan? Perhaps a new Rambo installment, in which Stallone would rescue a group of hostages once again abandoned in Afghanistan and, in the process, decapitate his former Taliban allies turned into despots of the region?

Sheldon Lettich: I don’t see a good action movie coming out of that because everything about that was very disappointing. That really shouldn’t have happened the way that it happened. I don’t think anybody would want to see a movie about that. And Stallone is in his 70s, now. He’s a little old to go back into Afghanistan. And I think he’s had his—I think Rambo has had—his Afghanistan adventure and doesn’t really need another one. So I don’t see that happening at all. I’m 70 years old. Stallone’s even older than me. I don’t know, he’s like 72. I don’t think he’ll want to do some crazy action movie where he’s running around firing a gun and killing all kinds of Afghans. It’s just not going to happen again.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Jean-Claude Van Damme served as an editor on Bloodsport, which you co-wrote. How much did he change the story with respect to the original screenplay?

Sheldon Lettich: The first cut was very bad, so Jean-Claude got involved. And he basically recut the fight scenes because he was involved with those fight scenes. He knew how the fight scenes should work. And there was another editor that Cannon brought in to recut the movie and to restructure it. And so they fixed it up. But Jean-Claude basically worked on the fight scenes, and he made those work really good. In the meanwhile, they got some other writers involved who made some changes. Most of the changes, I thought, were very good, actually. What I mostly did with Bloodsport is I came up with the idea. I structured it. I came up with the three-act structure where the beginning is that everybody’s getting ready to go to the fight. The middle is the tournament, and the movie ends after Gong Li is defeated and Jean-Claude goes home. So, that’s the structure that I came up with.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Before Bloodsport, had you been involved with Karate Tiger?

Sheldon Lettich: No, I had nothing to do with that. That’s the first movie that I saw Jean-Claude in, here in the US. It was called No Retreat, No Surrender. And that was the movie—when we were looking for an actor for Bloodsport, that movie came out in theaters. It was playing in theaters here, in Los Angeles so the producer, Mark DiSalle, told us, “We found this new actor, Jean-Claude Van Damme. Go see his movies in the theaters, right now.” And that was No Retreat, No Surrender. And we were very impressed with him. And that’s pretty much—that helped him solidify the role in Bloodsport.

Grégoire Canlorbe: After Bloodsport, did you get involved in Kickboxer?

Sheldon Lettich: Well, I was involved just in that Kickboxer was the project that Mark DiSalle approached me with. When I first met Mark, he was looking for a writer, and he had an idea for a martial arts movie called Kickboxer. And so, he pitched me the idea, and I thought I had a better idea, which was Bloodsport. Bloodsport had not been written, but I’d been talking with Frank Dux about his experiences. Turned out that they weren’t real experiences: he had made all that stuff up.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Please tell us about your partnership with Jean-Claude Van Damme in writing Full Contact, which is known as Lionheart in the US if I’m not mistaken.

Sheldon Lettich: Yes, Lionheart. Actually, I got together with Jean-Claude and he came up with the basic idea. That was his idea. It was called the Wrong Bet, at first. We sat down in a coffee shop, one night on Sunset Boulevard to talk about it. We were in that coffee shop for about three hours, and the manager wanted us to leave because we were taking up—it was kind of empty, but he still wanted us out of there. He thought we were there for too long. And we told him to leave us alone. “We’re working on something, right now.” And then, he called the cops. So actually, we had some sheriff’s deputies come in there and tell us to leave. But in those three hours, we came up with the basic story line for Lionheart. But it was Jean-Claude’s original idea, that whole thing about—I think I came up with the Foreign Legion idea, but he came up with that idea about his sister-in-law, and she’s got a little daughter, and he has to fight in order to make money to take care of them. That was Jean-Claude’s.

Grégoire Canlorbe: The fight between JCVD and Bolo Yeung at the end of Double Impact is quite an epic moment. How was it shot?

Sheldon Lettich: Actually, it was shot in two different locations because we shot part of it in Hong Kong. I’m just trying to think about. We were on a ship in Hong Kong. No, the exterior of the ship was in Hong Kong, the interior of the ship was in Los Angeles. That was in San Pedro. And so, we actually shot on this ship, and then we looked at the footage later. We were kind of rushed that day. We didn’t have enough time to really do it right. And so we had a set built in Santa Clarita, also in Los Angeles, to shoot some additional shots. So it was basically like—it looks like it’s all done at the same time, but it was actually done in two different locations at two different times. We cut it all together, and it looked really great.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Why did JCVD never act with Bolo Yeung again after Bloodsport and Double Impact? After all, three is a magic number as they say.

Sheldon Lettich: Well, he made two movies with Bolo. Bloodsport has Bolo, and Double Impact has Bolo. It’s hard to just keep using the same villain over and over again.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Are you concerned for the future of the cinema of Hong Kong as the Chinese Communist Party will be extending its grip on the city?

Sheldon Lettich: I’m not an expert on that, but obviously, we’re not going to see Hong Kong movies like the old ones. It’s all going to change now because the Chinese have taken over. So there are certain things you can say, certain things you can’t say. The Chinese government controls whatever is going on in Hong Kong. So you’ll never see those Hong Kong movies like we saw before, the Jackie Chan’s. Oh, Jackie Chan, of course, is doing movies in China, also. But they’re not going to be quite the same as those John Woo movies. I don’t think he’ll be able to make movies anymore in Hong Kong with corrupt police officers. Basically, the way that the Chinese government sees it, there are no corrupt police officers in China. There are no gangsters in China. So, basically, everything has to change. They’re up to do a lot of historical stuff. So, you’re probably not going to see any contemporary stories like in those Hong Kong movies where you’ve got good cops, bad cops, gangsters, all kinds of stuff like that. I think that’s going away. And all they’re going to see out of Hong Kong and China is stuff that takes place hundreds of years ago in earlier eras in China, but not contemporary. Because contemporary means that you’ve got to have good guys and bad guys. And in China, they want everybody to believe that China is a perfect country. There are no gangsters, there are no corrupt cops. So everything is wonderful in China, which means you can’t have much drama for a contemporary movie. So, that era—the era of the John Woo movies and Ringo Lam and all of that—that’s pretty much over, for now.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Please tell us about The Hard Corps, starring Jean-Claude Van Damme and Vivica A. Fox. How did such great movie with such great cast end up as a DTV?

Sheldon Lettich: Well, we were hoping it was going to go to theaters. And the problem was that the producers just didn’t want to spend the money to get other actors that we needed to make it a theatrical movie. Because originally, it was supposed to be Jean-Claude and Wesley Snipes. So the boxer was supposed to be played either by Wesley Snipes or Cuba Gooding, which would have made it a much bigger movie. Basically, they said, “We’ve got Jean-Claude Van Damme. We’re paying him a lot. If we get Wesley Snipes, we’ll have to pay Wesley Snipes the same amount of money we’re paying Jean-Claude, and that’s going to make the budget too big.” Now, in my opinion, it would have helped the movie. We would have had a bigger name in there. We would have had three big names. We would have had Jean-Claude, Wesley Snipes and Vivica A. Fox. And I think for sure, it would have been a theatrical movie. And that’s why it didn’t go theatrical because we just didn’t have the money we needed to get the right cast.

Grégoire Canlorbe: I’d like to hear you about The Order, which easily ranks among your best collaborations with JCVD. The scene in which Van Damme is dressed as a Hassidic Jew is just exceptional.

Sheldon Lettich: I made another movie in Israel—I did a movie there with Dolph Lundgren, The Last Patrol. So I got to know Israel pretty well. The cops trying to catch Van Damme, it was basically my idea. But I didn’t write the original script for The Order. It was written by this guy, Les Weldon. I wanted to make it more like an old Hitchcock movie. Hitchcock made a movie called North By Northwest and another one called The Man Who Knew Too Much. And that’s what I wanted to do with The Order.You’ve got the bad guys and the cops all after Jean-Claude. So, basically, he’s in trouble with everybody. And that’s how all those Hitchcock movies worked. I rewatched North By Northwest just recently. It was on TV. And I realized there were a lot of ideas that I took from North By Northwest. And I even forgot that I took the ideas, like this one scene in North By Northwest with Cary Grant. He’s trying to disguise himself, so he puts on some dark sunglasses. I did the exact same thing in The Order. We got the cops looking for Jean-Claude, and he’s putting dark sunglasses on to disguise himself. So that’s the kind of movie it was supposed to be. And Hitchcock put a lot of humor into those movies, too, and I put a lot of humor into The Order.

There was a Jean-Paul Belmondo movie called The Man from Rio. It was in the 1960s. I saw it in the theater. And so I wanted to make it a little bit like that. The same thing where everybody is chasing our hero. The cops and the bad guys were all after him. And then, there was another movie I saw. It was a French movie. So those two French movies, right there. It was called The Mad Adventures of Rabbi Jacob, where some guy was anti-Semitic. He’s got the mafia after him, and he disguises himself as a Hasidic Jew. And then, the bad guys and the cops are all chasing him. So that’s another part of that idea that I had. And then, just being in Jerusalem and just seeing these guys walking around, I just thought that would be a good disguise for Jean-Claude to have if he was trying to get away from the cops. So that was what pretty much led to that. And I really wasn’t sure if Jean-Claude would go for it, if he would actually do that. And he did. He totally went for it. He put the beard on and everything, and that’s my favorite sequence in the entire movie. I really love the way that whole sequence turned out. So that’s my favorite part of The Order.

Our producer was Avi Lerner. And one thing Avi told me before we did the movie, he said, “l want an action scene every 10 minutes. Lots of action.” And he paid for it, too. They had the budget. We did a lot of crazy stuff in The Order. We were at the airport. Can you imagine shooting—nobody else has done that in Israel, but Avi had some connections. He had a cousin who was a pilot for El Al. That was how he got that jet where Jean-Claude was trying to get around the jet and just coming through. That was Avi’s cousin in the cockpit. And then, Avi was a good friend of the Mayor of Israel at the time, Ehud Olmert. And that’s how we got permission to shoot in Jerusalem. I mean, can you imagine? We’re doing this crazy chase scene, and we’re really on the streets of Jerusalem for most of it.

It was very hard to shoot there. It’s very crowded. And the people who live there, it’s divided between Jews and Muslims. And they disagree on just about everything, but they all love Jean-Claude Van Damme. All of them are Van Damme fans. So we had a hard time getting away from them because they’d be surrounding us and chasing after us. They were like, “Van Damme! Van Damme!” They wanted him to sign autographs. It became very difficult to shoot in Jerusalem, so we ended up building sets in Bulgaria to look like Jerusalem. Half of that chase scene was shot in Jerusalem and on the real streets, and then the other half we shot on a recreated version of Jerusalem in Bulgaria. And what I find interesting about this is that even people who are from Israel or who’ve been in Jerusalem many times don’t realize that we shot in two different places. They think that we shot the entire thing on the streets of Jerusalem. So we did a pretty good job recreating that Jerusalem look.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Before Mark Dacascos acted for Christophe Gans in Crying Freeman and Brotherhood of the Wolf, he was revealed in Only the Strong. Please tell us about your collaboration with Dacascos.

Sheldon Lettich: Well, he had a manager named Katherine James, and she was the one that was pushing Mark. She got in touch with me, said, “You need to work with my client, Mark Dacascos. He’s going to be the next big action star.” And so I met Mark and I liked him very much. And one thing I found out about him was that he was very good with gymnastics. He was a good acrobat, and I think he’d already been studying some capoeira at the time. And that was an important part of the movie. It was all about capoeira. So Mark was willing to go to classes with this real capoeira master from Brazil. So he learned all that stuff and was very willing to do anything I asked him to do. And it ended up working out great for the movie because he was able to do so much stuff that Van Damme can’t do, for example. Like Mark was good with the gymnastics. He could do flips. He could jump in the air. Jean-Claude can’t really do that kind of stuff. He’s good with the kicks and the punching, but if he has to do something gymnastic, we generally have to get a stunt double to do it for him. And also, Jean-Claude was not good with weapons, like martial arts weapons. He can use a gun. Of course, anybody can fire a gun, but he couldn’t do like the sticks and poles and all that kind of stuff, and Mark could do all of that stuff. We realized that in the movie, we’ve got him having fights with people using sticks and everything. And with Jean-Claude we couldn’t do that.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Scott Adkins is sometimes thought to be Jean-Claude Van Damme’s spiritual heir. How do you assess his performances?

Sheldon Lettich: I think he’s great. I met him a few years ago, and I knew he was going to do great as an action actor. And he’s been doing terrific. He’s been doing a lot of great action movies. Unfortunately, we’re in a different era, now. Had I met Scott in the 1980s, he probably would have become a much bigger star because those kinds of movies were popular back then, in the 80s and 90s. By the time Scott came on the scene, those kinds of movies were not happening, anymore. And now, it’s become superhero movies. So superhero movies have kind of taken over as far as action movies. And Scott has certainly done a number of action films, and he’s been great in them, but that’s just not the kind of movie that’s getting the big theatrical releases, nowadays, which is unfortunate.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Do you share Martin Scorsese’s, Ridley Scott’s, and Denis Villeneuve’s recently expressed reservations about Marvel movies?

Sheldon Lettich: Well, personally, I’m a Marvel Comics fan. From a long time ago, I was reading all those comic books in the 60s when they came out. I would go down to the to the store. The day that they put the comic books on the stands, I would go down to the store and get them. So I had all the originals. I had the first Fantastic Four and the first X-Men, the first Spider-Man. I had all those. I was a big fan of Marvel comic books back then. And then, when they started making the Marvel movies, I thought the first few were really great. I loved the first Iron Man movie, for example. And the first Captain America movie, I thought that was terrific. But then, they just started getting just too big for my taste. They’re too big, too many characters. And I started losing interest in those Marvel movies. They’re well-made, but there’s a sameness to them. They have the same kind of structure. They all end up with these huge action scenes with lots of special effects, lots of CGI. And personally, CGI is great, but I prefer action films that have some real stuff going on screen where people are actually fighting. They’re not relying on CGI.

I was a big fan of the earlier James Bond movies, the pre-CGI James Bond movie. I was a big James Bond fan for many years. But with some of these more recent ones, once they started getting into too much CGI, and I wasn’t seeing real stunts anymore, I started losing interest in those. Although the Daniel Craig ones, I think are really good. They basically made some real changes with those Daniel Craig versions. But even so, I’m just not the Bond’s fan that I used to be many years ago. And the Marvel movies, Scorsese says they’re not real movies. Well, they really are more like just an assembly line product. There’s a sameness to all of them, now. It just feels like you’re watching the same movie: lots of CGI, lots of explosions and crazy weapons, crazy flying machines. But they just don’t have the same kind of heart that they had in the earlier ones, the first few that they made.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Do you share the commonly heard criticism that Christopher Nolan’s action scenes are as much bad and poorly shot as his screenplays and concepts are astute?

Sheldon Lettich: Christopher, I think he’s great. See, his action scenes feel fresh and original to me because he’s basically running the show. He’s coming up with these movies. He’s not recycling some comic book characters. He’s doing original movies, coming up with original action scenes. Whereas with the Marvel movies, the producers are pretty much telling—they’re hiring directors who are basically traffic cops and telling them, “This is what the movie is going to be. This is what the action scenes are going to be. And you get out there, and you just tell the actors what to do.” They just move the characters around. And with Christopher Nolan, it’s not like that. He’s basically making Christopher Nolan movies. He’s doing action scenes that are fresh and original and doing them the way he wants to do them. And I really admire him for that. And James Cameron, too. James Cameron is another example. I love the Avatar movie. I’ve watched it a number of times. The action scenes are great. Everything about Avatar is fantastic. But James Cameron, basically, he’s calling his own shots. He’s basically saying, “I want to do this movie called Avatar. These are the actors I want.” And he goes and makes the movie. And he’s got no studio executives telling him how to structure his movie, what characters are going to be in it. It’s basically his show. And that makes a big difference.

Grégoire Canlorbe: How do you explain that Hollywood, which used to be somewhat conservative and patriotic in the Reaganian era, has become so woke in the last few years?

Sheldon Lettich: No, it wasn’t really conservative in the eighties. It was not Hollywood. That was Stallone. That was Stallone’s own point of view. Stallone was somewhat patriotic. He was a big supporter of Reagan, America. Reagan was, I don’t know—I wouldn’t call him a close personal friend, but he knew Reagan. He voted for him. I’m not sure if he campaigned for him, but they were very closely aligned in their politics. The rest of Hollywood was not. Stallone was kind of an outlier when it came to Hollywood. Oliver Stone, for example, has a completely different point of view. So that was Stallone and Schwarzenegger. Both of them were Republicans. Schwarzenegger even ended up being the Republican governor of California. So that was really their point of view, but that was not Hollywood. Hollywood was actually much more liberal during that period.

And that’s why the Rambo movies got such bad reviews, too. Like Rambo III, I mean, we got a Golden Razzie Award for Worst Screenplay, Worst Movie because most of the press was very liberal. And so they were not really voting their conscience about the movie. It was all about politics. “Because Stallone is a conservative Republican, we’re going to say that his movie is shit.” But actually, Rambo III, I think, is a pretty damn good movie. I like Rambo II even better. But basically, that was not the Hollywood attitude at the time. That was Stallone, Schwarzenegger—Bruce Willis also ended up being a Republican. So a lot of these action stars had a different point of view from most people in Hollywood. Like even Van Damme, he’s very conservative. He’s not an American. I think he is an American citizen now, actually. And he was a Trump supporter. Even Stallone and Schwarzenegger were not Trump supporters but Van Damme was. We’re not talking about Hollywood in general, we’re talking about action stars who, for the most part, tended to be more conservative and lean towards the Republicans more than the Democrats.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Please tell us about this recent movie of yours whose main character is a soldier dog, Max.

Sheldon Lettich: Well, that brought me back to Afghanistan because the beginning of the movie takes place in Afghanistan? So rather than Rambo in Afghanistan, Max was really Rambo with four legs instead of two. He was basically a Rambo character. Max, he’s a soldier in Afghanistan. He gets sent back to the States. And then, when some bad guys are threatening his family, well, then he uses all his skills to defeat the bad guys. So it was really Rambo with four legs and a tail. That was basically Max. And I got the idea for that because I got some puppies a number of years ago at the pound, and supposedly, they were German Shepherds. They were little, so it was hard to tell. So I got these two puppies, and months later, I discovered that they were not German shepherds, they were Belgian malinois. And so I did some research on Belgian malinois, and I found out that the army and the police are using these dogs because they’re the best dogs for that kind of work. So I was doing my research, and I saw that there were a couple of dog handlers that died in Afghanistan or Iraq. And then, their families asked, “Well, my son is dead, but can I have his dog? Can his dog be part of our family because that’s all we have left of him from his time in the military?” And so these families ended up adopting the dogs, and that was the basis for Max. Basically, this dog handler gets killed, his dog survives. And then, the family back in Texas wants to adopt the dog. And the dog ends up being their protector, coming to the rescue.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Thank you for the opportunity to do this interview.

Sheldon Lettich: You’re welcome. That’s funny, I was just exchanging text messages with Brian Thompson. And Brian is in The Order. And Brian is a real expert with swords. He was in the Conan Show at Universal Studios. So he used to work with swords all the time. He’s really good with them. And then, our stunt double for Jean-Claude in The Order was David Leitch. Well, David is also really good with weapons, so Brian and he worked out a great sword fight sequence. And David, by the way, has now gone on to be a director. He directed Deadpool 2. He did that one, I forgot the title of it, the one with Dwayne Johnson. He did this really huge movie with Dwayne Johnson [Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw]. And he was our double for Jean-Claude.

So, we were supposed to have a sword fight at the end of The Order.But Jean-Claude, like I said, he’s not good with weapons. We tried doing a few things with him. He wasn’t comfortable with it. He’s comfortable with what he’s good at, with the kicks and the punches and all of that. So he said, “Guys, let’s not do this. I can’t do this scene.” And basically, Brian and David were going to do most of the scene with the swords. And we were just going to need some close ups of Jean-Claude just swinging a sword or something. And he just didn’t feel it was going to work. So we went away from that whole sequence. And it’s a bit disappointing because I thought we needed a really good sword fight at the end of The Order, but we ended up not getting it. It’s kind of a disappointing scene.

That interview was originally published in The Postil Magazine‘s March 2022 issue

A conversation with Abdelkrim Qissi, for The Postil Magazine

by Grégoire Canlorbe · Déc 1, 2021

Abdelkrim Qissi is a Belgian-Moroccan actor and boxer. A close collaborator of Jean-Claude Van Damme, Qissi notably played the antagonists Attila and Khan in two cult Van Damme films—namely Lionheart and The Quest. He is the brother of Mohamed Qissi, actor of Tong Po in Kickboxer and Moustafa in Lionheart.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Could you start by telling us about your coming co-directed movie Lopak l’Envoûteur [Lopak the Enchanter], which will be released in next April?

Abdelkrim Qissi: Originally, I was called upon to act in a scene from a movie whose story revolved around a cannibalistic killer. The script was largely non-existent and the shooting improvised. Abel Ernest Tembo, who was in charge of directing, proposed to me that I appear in a few more sequences; what I accepted on the condition that we rework the story thoroughly and give the film a script worthy of the name. Ernest immediately accepted. I went into production and we agreed to make the film together. The work of the image, camera, light and grading would be mainly his doing; developing a story, playing the lead role, directing the cast and writing the script mostly mine. During the Covid period, a story was born, a new film was born, only the title remained. Then, a year ago, we started shooting what was now a feature-length film, a shooting almost finished as I speak to you [November 9, 2021]. I would like to salute the work of Abel Ernest Tembo, a man excellent with the image.

Grégoire Canlorbe: In Lopak trailer, the character you play, Molosse, evokes the bees in a furtive and mysterious mode. Could you satisfy our curiosity by telling us what is going on with those insects in the scenario?

Abdelkrim Qissi: I cannot say too much about the plot of the film at the moment; but Molosse in the scenario feels invested with a mission, that of “healing” humanity, whom he considers corrupted by greed and whom he aspires to turn into bees devoted to the common good. To that end, he uses hypnosis and a serum that, annihilating consciousness, leaves only the subconscious and unconscious. He hopes to put thus an end to borders and to all that divides humanity; and change the Earth into a perfectly balanced hive where everyone in its alveolus perfectly knows its place, its mission, and selflessly works for the hive’s well-being, where no one encroaches on anyone and where everyone support everyone. In his quest, Molosse will be led to do things that will trigger a whole tumult around him—whether on his family’s side, or on the side of his old friends.

As it stands, so, I prefer to avoid revealing too much about the film itself and its message; but to those young and not so young who have the desire to shoot their own feature films and who, nevertheless, are reluctant to run to fill out files, submit requests to commissions, receive financial aid, the work embodied in the film sends the following message. “Do not wait to be supported, taken seriously, introduced to big names; take your camera and shoot. Let the big names come to you as you build your own success.” To those young and not so young who have the desire to shoot their own film, who have the talent and the passion but are not particularly well known to the general public nor really involved in the right networks, I venture to hope that Lopak the Enchanter will prove that, whatever the means they originally have, the people they surround themselves with at the very beginning, it is possible for them to achieve their goal and make the film of their dreams happen.

Abdelkrim Qissi (on the right) and Grégoire Canlorbe (on the left)

Grégoire Canlorbe: Alongside Mohamed Qissi and Kamel Krifa, you played in Lionheart (also known as Full Contact). How did the three of you end up on the set?

Abdelkrim Qissi: Jean-Claude is a boy I have known since his childhood. I met him in a sports center where both (as well as my brother, Mohamed) came to train, where Jean-Claude practiced karate (with Claude Goetz); and for my part, boxing. I also met there, among others, Jean-Pierre Valère, who was kind enough to agree to appear briefly in Lopak. When they met, Jean-Claude and Mohamed became more than friends: inseparable, fusional, they were truly brothers. It was not uncommon for Jean-Claude to come to sleep at home.

One fine day, sharing the same dream of breaking into the cinema, both left for America. After long years of sufferings and adventures, they made this dream come true by playing in Bloodsport, then Kickboxer. I cannot accurately relate the circumstances that led to my participation at the age of 29 in the filming of Full Contact. But briefly, they boil down to the fact that I was Mohamed’s brother (who had just played Tong Po in Kickboxer); and that he and Jean-Claude offered me and the producers that I take on the role of Attila. I was very happy with that offer and jumped at the chance. As for Kamel it is a friend that we encountered in Brussels, that is how he too found himself by our side on the set of Full Contact.

From the left to the right: Abdelkrim Qissi, Kamel Krifa, and Mohamed Qissi in their roles in Full Contact

Grégoire Canlorbe: Lionheart’s final fight pits Leon Gaultier, character played by JCVD, against a brutal fighter who is nonetheless affectionate towards his cat. Leon, suffering from a broken rib, progressively lets himself dominated at first; then takes over in extremis over the character you play, Attila. How did the idea for such choreography come to the film crew? How was the filming, the application, of that idea?

Abdelkrim Qissi: Contrary to the idea of the white cat, which is an improvisation during the shooting, the idea that Leon takes the upper hand over Attila when everyone (including his trainer) thinks him to be losing is an idea of the scenario. It was not elaborated when the choreography was being designed. Jean-Claude nevertheless participated in the writing of the screenplay; just as the choreographies of Lionheart are all his doing. Both ideas sound good to me—and constitutive of what makes the film’s aura more than thirty years after its release.

The touching affection that Attila has for his pet, which he shows by taking advantage of Leon being momentarily on the ground to stroke his cat, contrasts with what is, besides, the brutality of the character. A contrast that the film emphasizes in its visual symbolism by making Attila all dressed in black whereas his cat, for his part, is entirely white. The cat in question, which, again, was not intended in the scenario (if I correctly remember), was the one of a member of the film crew. The inner strength that manifests itself in the character of Jean-Claude just after his trainer in person, Joshua, confesses to him that he does not trust him and that he himself has bet on Attila, that rage to defeat himself in order to triumph over his opponent and prove to Joshua that he made a “wrong bet” (a reply which is, besides, at the origin of one of the film’s titles), that desire coming from the depths of his heart which allows Leon to overcome the pain and to defeat Attila even though the latter, in plain view, was largely dominating him until then, offers the film one of its most beautiful scenes.

Attila (played by Abdelkrim Qissi) stroking his cat, in Lionheart

Grégoire Canlorbe: You play Khan, Mongolian champion with whom the character of JCVD fights at the end of The Quest. JCVD directed that film; but years before he had already served, unofficially, as an editor to Bloodsport. What makes the two films so different despite their partly similar plot? How did you work with JCVD to come up with a final fight that be even more impressive than the one between JCVD and Bolo Yeung [at the end of Bloodsport]?

Abdelkrim Qissi: A major difference between Bloodsport and The Quest is, it seems to me, that Jean-Claude had the opportunity to work with professional fighters in The Quest; while the tournament participants in Bloodsport were played by people who were a bit less pros in the field of martial art. Another major difference is that, in The Quest, Jean-Claude had matured since Bloodsport and was then at the peak of his physical and mental form. The exotic landscapes in The Quest, the richness of the animal cast (including the elephant and the horses), the beauty of the image (including the care given to the colors), all that contributes to what makes Jean-Claude’s film so different from Bloodsport released almost ten years before. However, I would regret that the human relations in The Quest were somewhat put in the background during the filming; I believe, because of a timing problem or a problem arisen in production.

Abdelkrim Qissi as Khan, Mongolian champion, in The Quest

Jean-Claude is an excellent choreographer and, on Full Contact like on The Quest, trusted himself for the design of the fights; also, on Full Contact like on The Quest, he adapted the choreography for the final fight to my martial style, to what I’m best able to do in an arena. Whether it is the confrontation between Attila and Leon Gaultier in Full Contact or the one between Khan and Christopher Dubois in The Quest, of which the fight at the end of Lionheart was ultimately the prelude, no stand-in nor any special effect nor any stunt carried out by someone else were required. Shooting the choreography was for Jean-Claude and me an easy, joyful, and quick exercise. If I remember correctly, on the set of The Quest, Jean-Claude and I worked only nine hours—three times three hours over three days—developing our choreography from Jean-Claude’s general idea. A German steadicamer on the set of The Quest said of Jean-Claude and I that we were “like the fingers of the hand” given how we knew each other, understood each other, and had blind confidence in each other in the choreography’s execution; given how our moves, with meticulous precision, were easy for us and resembled a ballet; given how our blows espoused each other without ever hurting nor touching each other.

Grégoire Canlorbe: You traveled to Israel for the filming of The Order, by Sheldon Lettich (who years before had directed and co-written Lionheart). What do you remember from your stay in the holy land?

Abdelkrim Qissi: I had great times with Sheldon; he’s a very nice guy, just like Peter MacDonald. I believe that Jean-Claude, by offering me a sort of cameo in The Order, intended to make a nice eyewink to my previous performances in the roles of Attila and Khan, two characters united into one in “the Big Arab” whom I briefly interpret in The Order. Regarding Jerusalem, what struck me about that city is the conjunction of holiness and violence that reigns within it, the spectacle of both beauty and injustice that it offers. All the more as our subconscious associates Jerusalem with the battles and bloodshed of which it has been the theatre throughout history.

The little Palestinian people is a brilliant people who has gone through very hard times over the centuries. Does the Israeli government really have a stake in peace—given that Israel would then no longer be in a position to continue its nibbling on territories? Do Fatah, in power in the West Bank, and Hamas, in power in the Gaza Strip, really have a stake in the war’s ending–given that the financial rent they derive from the military conflict would itself cease on that occasion? For the Palestinian Authority, wouldn’t stopping the attacks, reprisals, and rocket fires be the best weapon against Israel—given that it would deprive Israel of any justification for its settlement policy and force nations in the whole world to take the side of the Palestinians against the Israelis? Being not in the know, I do not want to make any assertion; but only to raise a number of questions that, in my opinion, are worth asking. Let me add that a religious government, as is the case of Hamas, is, in my eyes, a foolish and disastrous thing; since such a government could never represent the entire population, some individuals being firmly religious, others not or even not at all. It is much wiser for a government to refrain from imposing any dogma or rite regarding religion; and to recognize in everyone the freedom to practice or not some spirituality and the freedom to practice it in the way that suits him personally. Such would be one of the pillars of my policy if I were to find myself at the head of the Palestinian Authority; but being not a man of power, I no more aspire to occupy such a position than I would be able to hoist myself into it.

Grégoire Canlorbe: With regard to the Koran, do you believe that it should be taken literally—or that it contains an allegorical meaning that should be deciphered with the help of ancillary knowledge?

Abdelkrim Qissi: First of all, please know that I am in no way claiming that what I am telling you is the truth; it is only my conception of the truth. I am submitting it to you in the framework of an exchange, not of a debate. I don’t just deny myself the status of teacher, preacher or preacher; I see it as an incompatibility with well-understood spirituality, which is a personal, intimate affair. What I understand about the Quran is that a huge gulf exists between the word interpreted and taught by men and the WORD drawn directly from the source (the Book itself). Allah, I understand him as the source of all that exists; so that God is both present in His creation and located upstream from it. It is impossible to love God without loving His creation which prolongs it: impossible to love Allah, he who is in the trees, if the wood is cut without moderation; impossible to love him, He who is in the human, if one hurts one’s neighbor. The words of the Koran (which it is customary to recite in singing it) are not only made to rock, cuddle, the ears of the devotee. That is the lowest, most superficial, level of listening there is, the furthest from what is attentive listening to what the Koran seeks to communicate to us and make us understand.

Abdelkrim Qissi (on the right) as The Big Arab and Jean-Claude Van Damme (on the left) as Rudy Cafmeyer in The Order

I didn’t learn Arabic at school; I learned it late, when I applied myself to reading a comparative edition of the Koran including the original text in Arabic and a French translation. The main words of the Book, what I call the catchwords, resonate differently from anything I have been taught. Often they are not even translated. Here are some examples of those words: Allah, Islam, Muslim, Koran, Jihad. Those words have very precise and deep meanings, characteristics and specificities. I’m not going to teach you what they mean, because that is research unique to each of us. What I can say and repeat is that there is a huge gulf between what you have been taught and what the Quran can teach you. Many counterfeiters have seized the content to use it for their own ends. Such is what created the innumerable religions, themselves divided into different sects, schools and currents of thought. To conclude my answer: from my reading, I do not see any contradiction in the Book, I do not see any violence. I perceive only love for God in it and that goes without saying, for His creation as well.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Tell us about your meetings with Roger Moore (on the set of The Quest) and Charlton Heston (on the set of The Order). What is your favorite James Bond?

Abdelkrim Qissi: The shootings of The Quest and The Order were effectively the occasion of magnificent encounters: Pjetër Malota (who played the Spanish fighter in The Quest), Takis Triggelis (who played the French fighter), Cesar Carneiro (who played the Brazilian fighter), Stefanos Miltsanakis (who played the Greek fighter—and who passed away two years ago, God rest his soul!), Janet Gunn (who played the journalist), Roger Moore (God rest his soul!), and many others. The four and a half months that The Quest team spent in Thailand allowed me to closely interact with Roger Moore to the point where he became a friend; as well as his wife, with whom I have had long discussions around spirituality, being myself sick of spirituality as you must have noticed. Moore was an extraordinary man; of unparalleled kindness, simplicity, and humanism, he warmly encouraged me, as well as the youth in general. Unlike Roger Moore on the set of The Quest, Charlton Heston remained somewhat aloof, withdrawn, on the set of The Order; and had a very small role, so he didn’t stay long on the spot. Being then of a very advanced age already, I think he was a little tired. He nevertheless gave me the impression of a respectful and respectable gentleman, of great kindness.

Mongolian champion (played by Abdelkrim Qissi) having just defeated, killed, Siamese champion (played by Jen Sung), in the Quest

As for my opinion on the evolution of the James Bond, it seems to me futile to want to compare them given how the historical contexts, perceptions of the character, filmic means, are each time different. It would be like pretending to compare Mohamed Ali, Mike Tyson, and Joe Louis! Roger Moore in James Bond evoked Simon Templar, alias “the Saint,” and Lord Brett Sinclair, the sidekick of Tony Curtis’ Daniel Wilde in The Pretenders. Moore played a gallant, charming, light Bond, devoid of the slightest hint of violence, not less than strong and talented. Sean Connery and Roger Moore are the only James Bond that we can almost classify in the same category: by the finesse, the tact, which they have in common and that is ultimately lacking in the others (all the more as the more recent episodes put the action forward). Some say Daniel Craig is the best James Bond, I don’t agree. Pierce Brosnan, for example, was not bad at all, as well as a Timothy Dalton already in a more violent register as would be, nearly twenty years later, Daniel Craig.

Grégoire Canlorbe: Who from Tong Po or Chong Li [antagonist in Bloodsport] would win if they fought with each other? Same question for Attila and Khan

Abdelkrim Qissi: Regarding Tong Po versus Chong Li: if we talk about the actors, I think that my brother, a professional boxer, would win against Bolo Yeung, who, to my knowledge, is an accomplished actor without really being an experienced martial artist or boxer. Now, if we talk about the characters, it seems to me that, by comparing the performances of Tong Po and Chong Li in their respective films, the former is clearly more dangerous, more gifted, more powerful, in Kickboxer than the latter is in Bloodsport; so that, if they were to come face to face, Tong Po would win hands-down over Chong Li. Regarding Khan versus Attila, it seems to me that the former’s power (including mental) in The Quest is without comparison with that of the latter in Full Contact; and that the Mongol would be the big winner in a hypothetical confrontation with Attila.

Abdelkrim Qissi as Attila, Khan, and The Big Arab

Grégoire Canlorbe: Thank you for your time. Would you like to add something?

Abdelkrim Qissi: We talked about thriller and action movie; but I must confess that my personal preference as a spectator goes to contemplative, spiritual films. So I haven’t seen most of Jean-Claude’s films (including Legionnaire, of which one spoke highly to me of the introductory boxing sequence). There are certainly thrillers and action films with a contemplative, spiritual dimension, and that I particularly appreciate for that. Among other examples, Gladiator, by Ridley Scott; or Heat, by Michael Mann.

That conversation was originally published in The Postil Magazine’s December 2021 issue