What originally prompted you to adapt a play for the screen?

It was the material. I had a yearning to do something that was experimental for me. I had never directed a play before. Choosing something that was pretty much text-based, where the language was very important, was quite a frightening challenge.

The production design is highly artificial. Was this deliberate?

Yes. I like the artificial realism of the play. I sometimes get pissed off with films when everything is so authentic. Think of something like Beckett, it's great, the artificiality of the way the characters speak. Something that allows you to go into the language in a way that straightforward cinematic naturalism doesn't give you that ability. I like that restriction. I just feel that most adaptations of plays suffer from over-reverential camerawork and music.

What do you see as Miss Julie's motivation for her behaviour?

I came to a conclusion when I first read the play. In order for this to be even remotely successful, I had to have a very clear idea of why she's saying what she's saying. I came to the conclusion that she'd already decided to kill herself way before she ever appeared. Within the confines of that form of madness, a pre-suicidal mind-set, like when you take drugs or you're the condemned man, a completely new set of rules kick in. You can fall in and out of love in ten minutes. Everything happens in an accelerated way. It's the perfect license for that sort of behaviour.

Read our review of "Miss Julie".