Bob Odenkirk extends his unexpected pivot into the action hero archetype in Normal, a role that builds on the tough‑but‑ordinary persona he’s been refining since Nobody. Directed by Ben Wheatley, Normal takes viewers on the journey of an interim sheriff, Ulysses, who deals with his town’s little shenanigans before a compelling secret is revealed.
Featuring lead actor Odenkirk and screenwriter Derek Kolstad, the two discussed the production in a roundtable interview with The Heights and other college newspapers. Normal hit U.S. theaters this weekend on April 17.
Set in a town called Normal, the film quickly makes it clear that every place has its quirks—and this one is anything but ordinary. Although the title’s mislead is intentional, the irony becomes part of the appeal. Any moviegoer knows the town won’t actually be “normal,” and the film uses that expectation to play with the audience and have fun subverting it.
This modern western film with touches of comedy and violence required the successful collaboration of Odenkirk and Kolstad, a duo that’s been working together since Nobody.
“I saw that it had this opening chapter that was suspense, mystery, and comedy,” Odenkirk said, describing the moment in Kolstad’s outline that enticed him into the role.
Much like their previous collaborations, Kolstad handled the screenplay, but the story itself was shaped by both of them. They worked with a “best-idea-wins” mentality, pulling in other voices like producing partners and script supervisors––even if the idea came fifteen minutes before shooting.
“The reason we have this partnership that’s working so well is I come from action-horror genre, sci-fi-thriller, and [Bob] comes from comedy and drama,” Kolstad said. “[Bob] makes the scene more grounded in the humanity and funny.”
Drawing on both of their industry strengths, the two manage to blend comedy with the film’s more serious, violent themes in a surprisingly effective way. Some scenes were born out of improv, and even when it strayed from the script, Kolstad pushed the actors to go with what felt right.
“Comedy is taking, oftentimes with the kind of material we’re doing would be, you build that tension to poke fun and to pop it,” Odenkirk said.
With humor functioning as the counterweight to the film’s drama, Odenkirk’s comedic background brings a light‑heartedness to moments that would otherwise feel purely tense. That balance matters, and preserving that tension is crucial––the final fights only land if the audience has stayed invested through the buildup.
Despite being an action film, it starts with getting to know the town and the characters, before any of the fighting starts. It reminded him of sketch comedy, which he spent most of his life doing.
“An action fight is about three to five minutes, and it’s the length of the sketch, and it hopefully has clever moments within it,” said Odenkirk, noting a few of the film’s memorable fight scenes that were improvised like his past comedic work. “There’s a lot of inventiveness that happens in these, in the actual execution of a fight, where you get on set and you invent moments because of the look.”
No matter how well choreographed a fight is, the set always has something different from the rehearsal location. A new setting, a new prop, something an actor can take and reinvent to give the fight a little extra spark.
One of the project’s main challenges was how much they put their arm around the audience and go, “hey, that’s not exactly normal in a small town like this,” Odenkirk said.
It was a tough call, debating whether to make the hints clearer or leaving it to the audience’s interpretation, Odenkirk explained.
“In a movie, you want to hopefully engage them on a level that they feel they did part of the work,” Odenkirk said. “They caught them, they smelled that that was wrong. We hope audiences will get a smile out of ‘oh boy, when this thing blows up, it’s gonna blow up.’”
There’s a real intentionality to the film’s language, showing just how much forethought went into the story’s construction. The film grapples with what “normal” even means. Beyond the town itself, it treats normalcy as a constructed, enforced concept—one that can turn violent when a community chooses complicity over truth.
“The reality is, there is no such thing as normal,” Kolstad said. “You know, that’s kind of what we’re looking at. And that’s not necessarily bad.”
It’s not a simple message or a straightforward analogy. The film shows the metaphorical complexity of characters performing “normal” for outsiders, putting on a facade as they construct a new version of normal for themselves.
“I think a really good movie or good piece, it doesn’t tell you what to think or it doesn’t land in the most solid parable-like ethical lesson,” Odenkirk said. “If the effort to maintain normalcy is breaking you, then you should look at that conflict.”
