This time it's psychological

NEW YORK -- William Friedkin's new film, "Bug," revolves around a volatile and disturbed man who thinks his motel room is teeming with blood-sucking aphids. So it's more than a little unsettling when the filmmaker who directed one of the scariest movies ever made, "The Exorcist," starts scratching at bug bites on his own leg during a recent interview in a Manhattan hotel suite.

"I'm getting bitten up by all these [expletive] bugs!" Friedkin blurts out, mid-interview. "Look, they're all over me! I never had bug bites before. Not even in the jungle!"

If he hadn't lifted up his pant leg to itch the little red marks on his ankle, the outburst might have been interpreted as a crazy publicity stunt.

While Friedkin's bites are apparently authentic, it's left up to the viewer to decide whether the creepy-crawlies in his latest psychological horror show, which opens Friday, are real or imagined.

Adapted by playwright and actor Tracy Letts from his hit off-Broadway play, "Bug" is set in a drab motel room where everyday objects seem fraught with menace and tension fills the air.

When the lonely and superstitious Agnes (Ashley Judd) isn't waiting tables at the local watering hole, she hangs out with her friend R.C., while hoping that her abusive ex-husband (Harry Connick Jr.) doesn't come knocking. Haunted by memories of her young son, who vanished years ago, Agnes quickly falls for the unstable yet seemingly sweet Peter (Michael Shannon), a paranoid drifter with a disturbing penchant for conspiracy theories. Slowly but inexorably, Peter draws Agnes into a harrowing vortex of manic hysteria from which there seems to be no escape.

Although Friedkin hasn't scored a critical or box office hit in many years, the filmmaker best known for 1970s touchstones like " The Exorcist" and "The French Connection" has recently been making waves in an unlikely venue: the opera world. After helming a production of Alban Berg's "Wozzeck" in Florence a decade ago (at the urging of his friend, conductor Zubin Mehta), Friedkin has gone on to direct a string of successful productions. He credits his opera work with rebooting his creative side.

Clad in a navy blue blazer, khakis, and his signature tinted glasses, the 71-year-old former bad boy of '70s cinema proves he's still as feisty as ever.

Q When you first saw "Bug" off-Broadway in 2004, what made you think it would adapt well to the big screen? Did it feel cinematic?

A Absolutely. "Cinematic" means characters in conflict. And cinematic is suspense and edginess and a feeling that something dreadful can happen or something funny can happen. I found the characters both unique and recognizable at the same time -- and recognizable within myself. If I didn't recognize these people, I couldn't have done the film because, really, the film is about the thin line between good and evil that's in all of us -- that constant struggle for our better angels to triumph over our demons. And that's what this film -- and most of the films that I've made -- have in common.

Q Besides the thin line between good and evil, what other ideas were you looking to explore in "Bug"?

A The other thing in this film that I haven't dealt with much in the past is how vulnerable people, when they find a comfort zone with someone else, can tap into the other person's reality -- and accept it as truth. Which is what happens when Agnes feels that she can trust Peter. She completely absorbs his worldview and gets in the same frame of mind with him. Others could look at his behavior and think the man is whacked and should be committed. And that's what he's fighting. No one understands him, but then she seems to get him. And that's his attraction to her and her [attraction] to him.

Q So would you characterize the film as a love story?

A It is a love story -- a very dark love story. But so is "Romeo and Juliet." This could be "Romeo and Juliet on Acid."

Q The film taps into the contagious, collective paranoia that has been stoked to unprecedented levels in the post-9/11 world. Today, conspiracy theories are ubiquitous -- whether it's about the government blowing up the levees in New Orleans or the stealing of presidential elections.

A There was a [Rasmussen] poll taken last week. Among registered Democratic voters, 35 percent think that [President] Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened, and 22 percent of all voters [believe the same thing]. That's enormous! That people believe that the president knew about this and let it happen! I find that astounding. But people accept these things as truth. We can't make sense out of what's happening in the world, but we do know that the government is not able to protect us or doesn't care to. And then you see what's happened at Guantanamo and other places. . . . So is it possible that Peter's story is true? Yes. We're living in a time when our paranoia can turn out to be real.

Q Has directing opera given you new inspiration as a film director?

A Yes, because the singers want the same thing good actors want, which is a psychological underpinning for their characters and a staging that works. And you have to arrive at that much more simply with opera because you can't move the camera all over the place. But you can emphasize certain things with staging and lighting. It requires the same sort of visual interpretation, but you have to find different solutions. . . . It's been a real adventure and an education. And to see your work performed with a 100-piece orchestra, it's just thrilling.

Q Your controversial 1980 film "Cruising," starring Al Pacino, is getting a restored print that will premiere at the Cannes Film Festival this month. Upon its initial release, critics blasted the film and gay-rights protesters condemned it. Why do you think the film sparked so much scorn?

A When the film first came out, it was near the beginning of the gay rights movement. A lot of people who cared about gay rights felt that "Cruising" was not the best foot forward for the movement. And I understood that. The talk then, and much more so now, was about people in committed relationships -- not people going around to bars to [have sex with] anybody. But to me, "Cruising" was simply an exciting, exotic background for a murder mystery.

Q There aren't many 27-year-old films that get to play at Cannes. Why do you think the film is being looked at in a new light?

A I think people are a lot more understanding and sophisticated now than when that film hit them almost 30 years ago. . . . It's now being evaluated as a film, not as a political statement. It was never meant as a political statement. But I understand that if you portray a particular minority group negatively -- African-Americans, gay people, Muslims, whoever -- there's an enormous sensitivity on their part. Look at all the Jewish groups that [were angered by] "The Passion of the Christ." But that's inevitable, that's all I can say.

Q Where do you think "Bug" fits into the William Friedkin canon?

A I have no idea. It's the latest film that I've done. That's really for others to judge.