I recently had the chance to sit down and talk to filmmaker Scott Hicks, whose credits include "Shine," "Hearts in Atlantis" and more recently, "No Reservations" and "Glass: A Portrait of Philip in Twelve Parts." Hicks' new film "The Boys Are Back" is currently playing in theaters, and here's what it's about:

It follows Clive Owen as a witty, wisecracking, action-oriented sportswriter who, in the wake of his wife's tragic death, finds himself in a sudden, stultifying state of single parenthood. Here is what Hicks had to say about how the film came together and what it was like working with Owen and two young actors...

The Screening Log: First of all, congratulations on the film, I absolutely adored it.

Scott Hicks: Thanks. Thank you very much.

The Screening Log: So, how did you end up choosing this project? Did you read the book before jumping on board?

Scott Hicks: I was sent a screenplay, and I wasn’t aware that it was a memoir. You know, I was so taken with the point of view in the script. I felt that the relationships between the father and sons were really truthful and truthfully expressed, and in a way that I haven’t seen in a movie before. So, all those reasons got me hooked on the script and then let me to the memoir. I then read that and looked for more details and elements that I wanted in the film.

The Screening Log: How much were you involved in the development of the script?

Scott Hicks: I worked with the screenwriter Allan Cubitt all the way through. He stayed involved and was always a resource, and he even came out for our first week of shooting in Australia. He’s English and lives in London, but he came out and spent some time on the set. But I had to send him home because he weeps too loudly and he kept weeping [laughs].

The Screening Log: Was it like for you to work with Clive Owen on this film, and how much did he bring to his character, the father who takes care of his two boys after his wife passes away?

Scott Hicks: He brought an enormous amount to the table. He’s a wonderfully equipped actor, and he has a great power to him in the sense that he can have moments of great stillness. Now, in the time it took to get the film made, he and I had lots of opportunities to go through the script, line and verse together. Between us, we interrogated every line in the screenplay, and we went through questioning the logic and testing for any sort of moments we felt would not ring true. We both agreed on one thing, which was trying to avoid sentimentality. Yes, we were going for emotion, but not easy emotion, if you like. By the time we got to shoot the film, we were really well prepared together.

The Screening Log: When you worked on the script together, did you end up making major changes to it?

Scott Hicks: We definitely changed emphasis on things. We would go back to the writer with a lot of notes about what had come out of those discussions, and we even involved the writer in some of those discussions and had him in the room while we talked about it. It was a process of refinement; it was no major surgery.

The Screening Log: What was it like for you working with George MacKay and Nicholas McAnulty? I mean, both of these guys evoke a lot of emotions. Was it challenging to work with them?

Scott Hicks: They’re very different entities, George and Nicholas. George is a really fledgling young actor who’s very serious about his craft. So, my conversations with him were not like any other with an adult actor. With Nicholas, it was very different, because he’s not an actor at all. He’s a kid. He’s a kid who has an uncanny ability to believe the fantasy of what he’s doing. So he steps in front of the camera and sort of tells the truth, and really, that’s acting in its purest form. But that requires a whole different approach, like being able to coax him towards certain things, restrain him from others. It really sort of molded as I was going, but I was always looking for truthfulness in his delivery, in what he was doing. He has powerful instincts. I didn’t want some ready-made child actor stepping in front of the lens and acting like you do see kids in movies. I wanted it to be real, and we got that; that was what he delivered.

The Screening Log: So what was it like for you to go back and shoot in Australia?

Scott Hicks: I loved it. I didn’t know if I was going to. I thought that question to myself: What will it be like 10 years or more after shooting a movie there, and, in the event, it was wonderful because I got a really good young crew, you know, people much younger than me, but very eager, very creative and skilled but wanting to be a part of this film. There was a special feeling about it. In the end, I just had fantastic collaborators.

The Screening Log: So, how long was the shoot?

Scott Hicks: We had 50 days, which sounds a lot but it actually isn’t. With a child, the hours are very limited and restricted, so I had to be mindful of that. Also, there would be certain days he [Nicholas] was too tired or didn’t want to do things, and you just had to be flexible, because he was such a crucial part of the film.

The Screening Log: So, how would you sell the film to someone who hasn’t seen it yet but kind of heard what it’s about?

Scott Hicks: Oh gosh, I’m not very good at that. One way is to say it’s about a man struggling to become a better father. On one level, it’s about finding balance in your life. You know, it’s about the importance of family, and family is not a simple nuclear thing, and it hasn’t been for a long time. I think it reflects a lot of people’s experiences. I think it’s Joe’s struggle to become a good father, and he makes a lot of mistakes. But he is not a bad person or a bad father, but he just needs to find out how to do it better.

The Screening Log: One question I always like to ask: as someone who’s just about to start learning film, I’m interested to know: what major advice or tips would you give young filmmakers who don’t have a solid budget but have an idea for one or more film projects and would like to dive deeper into this field?

Scott Hicks: Never give up. That’s fundamental. You have to be tremendously persistent, because the world doesn’t care whether your idea gets heard or not. You have to care, almost more than anything. And if you do care enough, chances are, you’ll get it made in one way or another. If you don’t get it made it may be because you didn’t care enough. It helps if there is a little bit of talent, but believe me, along with that little bit of talent should go a huge slab or persistence. You know, talent alone will not get something made; you have to have such determination. That’s all I’ve learned in 35 years of filmmaking.

The Screening Log: So, is this a business of seducing people? You know, making them believe that your work is important enough to be made?

Scott Hicks: You do, in a way. Yes, you do. You have to. Look, the great sort of lesson for me was my experience of making “Shine.” It took 10 years to get that film made, and for five years of that time, I had the screenplay, and I had Geoffrey Rush, and nobody wanted to make this film, nobody. And I put up with a lot of the objection that I got, and I experienced people’s attempts to hijack it along the way. Like, ‘Get rid of that Geoffrey Rush. Here is a list of three actors, so choose one of them and you’ve got your money tomorrow.’ Now, at that point, I had a choice. It was either keep making what I wanted to make or start to make the other film this other person wanted to make. I was bloody-minded enough to say no, and another couple of years would go by before the opportunity came up again. I don’t know if this answers the question, but it’s a fundamental part of it. Try to hang on to your vision, because many people will try to wrestle it away from you.

The Screening Log: You obviously faced several challenges getting “Shine” made, so how was your experience getting “The Boys Are Back” to the point where it is today? Was it an easier process?

Scott Hicks: I think making drama is very, very difficult, and it’s getting more difficult. I mean, look at the market and what’s happened. I think at the moment, everything is a big cartoon. The huge difference was, some wonderful material came to me, because of my reputation. And armed with that, I was able to get access to Clive Owen, who’s an absolute triple A-grad talent. Now, that couldn’t happen before “Shine.” The doors are very closed until the walls all fall down. But it was still difficult for all the money to come together this time. To get the ingredients together was much more straightforward.

The Screening Log: Okay. So, do you have any projects lined up that you are going to work on in the near future?

Scott Hicks: I do, but it’s still too early at the moment to say anything about it. There are a couple of things I’m interested in, but the same old things applies: casting, and other people’s interest.

The Screening Log: Any plans to go back to Australia to shoot?

Scott Hicks: If the right material comes up, yes. I’d love to; no question. We’ll see.

The Screening Log: Well, thank you very much, and good luck with the film’s release.

Scott Hicks: Thanks. Thanks for your time.