The victory of American actor John Malkovich was not surprising. Not only does his history attest to the merit of his talent and uniqueness in mixing his acting style with the characters of his roles, which makes his entire work a suitable case for studying his history and style in performance, but there is also this special (and specialized) role that he played in “Wild Horse Nine.” The role of an American intelligence agent does not hide his background. He spent many decades working as a spy and responsible for assassinations and overthrowing governments. He is now trying to achieve an ideal ending: he wants to write a book about the secrets of the CIA and suicide.
This interview took place about a week before he won the Best Actor award, after watching his film; It was clear that there would be no one more deserving of this important award among the actors of the competition’s films.
• During the preparation period, the role almost went to Christopher Walken, who was not able to accept the role due to its connection to other works. There is, of course, a big difference between the way you perform the character and the way any other actor performs it.
- First, Christopher is an excellent actor in his role, but every actor has his own way of performing any role. This method goes back to the language he uses to represent the character he plays. Of course, it would have been different. I don't think two actors can play one character the same way, so the result will be different.
• How did the understanding between you and director Martin McDonagh get the role?
- Go through the scenario first. I was very impressed with the character as written by McDonagh. It is full of elements that push the actor to express it in his own way.
• What do you look for in the scenarios you are presented with?
- I search for the character that the director presents to me. I cannot represent a proposed character, or, to be more emphatic, if I do not find room in it to be myself in it. There are many important characters in many films in which I find nothing that excites me. But this, let me be clear, is not a situation specific to me, but rather the situation of any good actor who wants to enrich his experience as a “dramatist” and searches for meaning that he can add to the film.
• There is a movie named after you called “Being John Malkovich,” produced in 1999. How was this movie made, and why do you think you are the model used in the title?
- Perhaps the word “model” is not correct. What happened was that Charles Kaufman wrote the script and sent it to Francis Ford Coppola, who turned it over to director Spike Jonze, who liked it and made it happen. Have you seen the movie?
• Yes.
- Good. So, in the story, employee Charlie Sheen finds a corridor in the company he works for that leads to the mind of John Malkovich.
• But why you and not other actors? I think this is because, during that period, you demonstrated a unique talent in performance.
- I don't know how to answer this question. If you say so then so be it (laughs). Glad to hear that.
• Let me take you to a role that demonstrates your uniqueness that I am talking about. It's not a big role in the movie, but it's important. You are the one who hatches a plan to assassinate the President of the Republic in a film that preceded “Being John Malkovich” by 5 years, which is “In the Line of Fire.” I remember well the scene in which she finishes making a wooden gun, and on the first occasion she fires a bullet from it and kills a man. She does this without the slightest emotion...coldly and spontaneously.
- That's because I'm only good at what I do. Perhaps I was expected to get a little emotional or express anger at the discovery of my situation, for example, but this would have led me to perform a ready-made act that I could not carry out. I have always tried to enter the characters as an explorer, not a judge. This prevents me from representing what others expected of me at that time or before.
• It is also an indicator of the quality of your performance, and as I mentioned, do not judge your characters, but perform them as if they were free. Do what you want without positive or negative attitude towards it.
- I think you read my roles well.
• This is repeated in “Wild Horse Nine.” You are an agent of American intelligence. You are neither against it nor with it, but you have carried out its operations perfectly for half a century. I think that's difficult to perform in itself. Do you agree?
- If I adopted a concept like this, what I mentioned would be the only way to perform it. Yes, Chris doesn't care about situations. Not for and not against. A good executor at his job. Only when he begins to review what he has done do we see him break away from those neutral considerations. Inside he knows right from wrong. He has full knowledge of what he has done, but he had agreed to be a good implementer, and once he agreed to that, his personal outlook no longer had any place.
• His situation is strange. He is an outgoing, natural, cautious and intelligent person at the same time, but you do not highlight these qualities, but rather let them declare themselves.
- Thank you... but don't forget the dialogue. He plays a role in announcing it. Also, delivery is part of acting.
• The last scene of the film is very touching... How do you feel about it?
- Perfectly serves what the movie was about. It's a perfect ending, and yes... I think it's very touching.
• You have a theatrical background that preceded acting for film and television. Did it have an influence on your acting style?
-In fact, as soon as an actor begins his work, whether on stage or in front of the camera, he establishes what he will practice in most of his work. Naturally, my role in “Death of a Salesman” (which he presented on stage in 1982) was different from the roles of many others who played this character. Acting is a concept and a decision performed by the actor in the manner he chooses to crystallize his work.
The results of a clinical study revealed that the drug “Tarlatamab” showed anti-tumor activity and was well tolerated when given by subcutaneous injection to patients with small cell lung cancer.
Researchers from Val d'Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona explained that the results support the continued study of this method, which may provide an easier alternative to administering the drug intravenously. The results were presented on Saturday during the 2026 World Lung Cancer Congress, organized by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer in the South Korean capital, Seoul.
Lung cancer is the uncontrolled growth of abnormal cells in the lung, which may spread to other parts of the body. It is basically divided into non-small cell lung cancer, which is the most common, and small cell lung cancer, which is less common but grows and spreads faster. Smoking is the main risk factor, along with passive smoking, air pollution, exposure to certain substances and gases in the work environment, and genetic factors. Clear symptoms may not appear early, while later symptoms include persistent coughing, shortness of breath, chest pain, coughing blood, and weight loss. Treatment depends on the type of cancer, its stage, and the patient's condition, and may include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy.
Tarlatamab is an immunotherapy that helps the immune system recognize and attack cancer cells. The drug has shown clinical activity in patients with small-cell lung cancer in previous studies, but it was mainly studied when given intravenously. According to the researchers, this is the first study to examine the administration of tarlatamab under the skin. This method may be more suitable for patients compared to intravenous infusion, and may also lead to the drug reaching the blood more gradually and reaching lower maximum levels, which may affect the occurrence or severity of some side effects, including cytokine release syndrome.
The study included patients whose small-cell lung cancer had progressed or returned after receiving at least one treatment. In the first part of the study, researchers tested doses of 10 and 15 milligrams of tarlatamab subcutaneously once every two weeks. The 15 milligram dose showed almost identical exposure to the drug in the body as the intravenous dose of 10 milligrams every two weeks, and was therefore chosen as the target dose in the second part of the study.
Forty patients had received a dose of 15 milligrams, and 85 percent of them had treatment-related side effects, most notably injection site reactions (50 percent), altered sense of taste (45 percent), cytokine release syndrome (38 percent), and decreased appetite (20 percent). Most cases of cytokine release syndrome were low grade, and no severe cases or treatment-related side effects resulting in death were reported. The initial objective response rate was 30 percent, meaning that about 3 out of 10 patients' tumors showed a response to treatment.
The researchers said that the results indicate that a subcutaneous dose of 15 milligrams of tarlatambab can achieve drug exposure levels in the blood similar to those achieved by an intravenous dose of 10 milligrams every two weeks, while maintaining a favorable safety profile. According to the researchers, the safety results and initial anti-tumor activity, along with the potential ease of administration of the treatment, support the continued study of subcutaneous tarlatamab. However, the results remain preliminary, and this study alone is not enough to definitively prove the drug's effectiveness or compare it directly with other treatments.
