"I'm interested in crime, particularly murder without motive … I thought it would be interesting to make a film about someone who whilst still very young had engaged in extremely violent behaviour without knowing what he was doing…"

Writer and director Andrew Dominik initially found it impossible to adapt the books of Mark 'Chopper' Read and turn real life into reel history.

What eventually resulted in the excellent independent Australian film Chopper, began when a paragraph from Read's first book -  "From The Inside" - renewed Dominik's interest.

"I found Chopper's books hysterically funny," says Dominik, who was intrigued by a paragraph where Chopper was talking, without any apparent regret, about having committed nineteen murders. "He was very gung-ho about these acts and yet within just two paragraphs he was describing dreams where the faces of his victims appeared before him. One thing he was saying was diametrically opposed to the other and it occurred to me that he did indeed have bad feelings about certain actions. On closer reading the first book, there were all these apologies to people peppered throughout, where he'd say, 'I did this, but I regret that,' and 'If you're out there, I', sorry about your leg,' and this sort of thing which I found completely fascinating."

Dominik showed the book to producer Michele Bennett, who admitted that it was "not the sort of subject that I would normally have been attracted to. I was. It was absorbing for all the wrong reasons. I was laughing at something I felt I shouldn't have been laughing at and was fascinated by a person whom I felt I  shouldn't have been fascinated by and then I realised that there is another side of life that becomes interesting because you don't understand it and it's an anathema to your way of life - to most people's lives."

Dominik and Bennett felt that the subject matter, although sensitive, had the potential to be a commercially viable film. They also suffered no illusions that as first-time filmmakers they would need even more than the usual level of determination required to mount an independent film.

Neither were prepared for the degree of negativity that the mere mention of Chopper's name aroused in certain quarters, nor the hurdles that would have to be surmounted due to preconceptions about how they intended to present the film's protagonist.

"I was surprised to find it difficult," says Dominik. "I was just trying to make a film about human behaviour that I thought people would find interesting, but encountered a lot of resistance. His name created a picture in people's heads, but that picture had very little to do with the film. On the one hand we've had to deal with moral indignation and on the other Chopper, who's bound to be disappointed by how he's been portrayed. He's certainly not going to consider himself glamorised, but then again, you have people who think that he has been just because he's the subject of a film, so you can't win."

"There were distributors and investors who wanted a more sensational story," says Bennett. "Others wanted a more moralistic one, given the subject matter. The first draft of the script was a bit of a romp through the crime world and certain distributors were very interested in pursuing that line, but at that stage we really needed to research the character, and his life, and go far beyond the information afforded by his books."

What intrigued both Andrew and Bennett was the subtext in his writing. "There was the sense that he was presenting an image of himself that wasn't the entire truth and we wanted to learn what his life was really like and what he was really like. By the end we had a script that was responsible in terms of understanding the character and in the way it approached violence."

As soon as the rights to "From The Inside" had been secured, Dominik wrote to Chopper forewarning him that he should be prepared to dislike the film, as not only would it condense a substantial portion of his life to ninety minutes, but would also be largely inaccurate in a strictly historical sense.

Chopper replied saying that "he wasn't interested in his opinion of himself but would prefer to see what others thought and therefore felt no need to meet or collaborate."

Three years later, during which time Dominik and Bennett had been immersed in researching their subject, Chopper changed his mind and they traveled to Tasmania where he was serving time at Risdon Prison. The filmmakers spent seven hours in Chopper's company.

"I was apprehensive of our first meeting," admitted Bennett, "but within fifteen minutes I'd forgotten all of my fears and became enthralled by his stories and his attitude towards us. He did offer input and was very clever in the way he presented things, but after we'd passed some time with him, we could see  that he was waiting to gauge our reaction before he proceeded. He wanted to tell us about himself, but we've never been able to determine what was true and what he wanted us to know that wasn't necessarily true. We did offer to show him the script, but he declined, remarking, 'Anything I say would be fiddling. I want to know what you think of me,' so we didn't pursue it. He pretends that he doesn't care how he's perceived by others, but I suspect he really does."

"I don't think that he formulated any opinion of us whatsoever," says Dominik. He was more interested in what we thought of him. He was very entertaining, but meeting with him confirmed for me that I was on the right path with the script. He was eager to please and continually trying to determine what I wanted him to be. He is an incredibly flexible human being."

By this stage, the screenplay had evolved greatly from its first draft. It was never intended to be a straight biography, but rather a portrait of a complex and violent person. In terms of strict accuracy, liberties were taken and incidents restructured to fit within the confines of a dramatic piece. Truth was further complicated by Chopper himself, a raconteur of singular talent of whom it could be said, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

"There's not much that happens in the film that's not based on some real incident, but it's not absolutely factual," says Dominik. "It has to feel true, but that doesn't necessarily mean accurate."

"I read the script and found it remarkable," says producer Al Clark, who also produced "Priscilla; Queen of the Desert". "As a piece of film writing it was one of the most original variations on the criminal psychology that I'd encountered. I also felt that whilst America has produced many outstanding crime movies and England has produced at least several, it's one area in which Australian filmmaking, with very few exceptions, has never really flourished.

casting chopper
After a six year battle the film was ready to shoot, with Eric Bana, one of Australia's most celebrated stand-up comics, to play the title role.

"I thought it a unique opportunity to approach a delicate and potentially controversial subject, in an intelligent and humane way," says Bana.

"It's beyond an impersonation. I'm playing a real person. And with that comes responsibility. It's a plus and a minus to have heaps of information about him. I have had two years to do the research, from casting to shooting, and spent several days with Chopper himself."