The cult movie director Todd Solondz had just released his latest film. Palindromes is a dark and twisty morality fable that's sure to divide viewers. Jeremiah Kipp of Filmcritic.com has already described it as: "another hour and 40 minutes of hatred for the world and everyone in it" but Solondz himself has a more sanguine view of his work. Using multiple actresses to play a single character, it's a disturbing, funny and edgy piece of work that tackles themes such as motherhood, abortion, religion, and, as always in his work, the worldview of children.

What's your favourite Aviva sequence?
My favourite. I don't know! I don't know! The problem with favourites is, I wouldn't like to say favourites because I wouldn't want any actor to feel that they were less of a favourite than another.

Were there any parts of the film that you particularly enjoyed working on?
I can't say. It's always an unpleasant experience. But I can tell you this: truly the most moving moment was when all the Sunshine Singers were performing their songs. These kids came from all walks of life and they really formed a bond with each other. To see what pride and joy they took in their performance was such a profound delight, it was very moving. That said, at the same time, you set back and you think: "Oh my God, what are they singing?!" But that's the rub, that's the friction, it's part of the dynamic through which my films operate.

How do you manage to make subversive, unsettling films like Palindromes? What keeps you going?
I think you need selective amnesia. You have to forget how horrible it was last time or you'd never put yourself through it again.

Like a pregnancy?
Yes, you could look at it that way I suppose.

At the press screening most of the audience were silent, but some laughed nervously, especially at Sharon Wilkins and the Mama Sunshine scenes. What do you make of that? Does it bother you that people might misinterpret your vision for the film?
There's all kinds of laughter, and certainly there's a satirical thrust to the movie, there's a light satirical thrust to the Sunshine sequence and a harsher one in the Ellen Barkin one. So I don't have a problem in principle, I think laughter is fun. If I feel that the laughter comes at the expense of the characters then that becomes another story, that's problematic.

What are the challenges in using actors who are minors to discuss themes that are very adult. Do parents withdraw their permission when they find out what the film is about?
It's been like this with all my movies and I approach everything in the same way. With the children I call the parents and discuss at length what I have in mind, I let them see the script, because I certainly would never want to persuade any child to be in a movie, they're in it because they want to be and because the parents are supportive of the endeavour. I don't have any kids but if I did have a kid and they wanted to act, I'd prefer them to act in one of my movies than, I don't know, a commercial for The Gap or Banana Republic or something where they're essentially a sales device for some consumer goods corporation. To me, that would be the obscenity.

Did you self-censor whilst making this film?
No - I think I've upset enough people as it is! I make the movie I want to make, I find the right tone in the course of cutting the film. I suppose censoring would not be the right way to describe that editing, as far as I'm concerned, it's all about achieving the right tone.

Do you think queer audiences are more likely to understand Palindromes than straight?
I'm happy that you're asking this. I don't know if they're more likely to understand it, I don't know, but I will say this: certainly from the gay people I've spoken with who have seen the movie, they respond to it in a very different way. They appreciate or get things that straight audiences don't seem to. I think that even though there is no homosexuality in the film, there is one gay character. It's never really mentioned that he's gay although I think many people pick up on it, it's the one Sunshine singer whose disability is that he is gay, which I think enough gay viewers recognise. I think some of the themes in the film, even though they don't relate to homosexuality, they are concerned with the homosexual experience. The issue of childbirth, of being a parent and not being biologically capable of that, the idea of change and the question of what we change and do we change, certainly I think are true. I don't know of any terribly well-documented cases of people changing their sexuality from gay to straight any more than I know of those who change from straight to gay. It is something that I don't see that one has much choice in. It is determined, for better or for worse, you have no choice but you accept who you are, which some see as a bleak proposition but I see as a freeing thing.

What's next for you?
I'm afraid I don't really talk about the future. I have something in mind but I don't want to jinx myself.

Is there anything else you'd like to add?
I'm glad that you asked that question about gay audiences because I do think that there's a gay audience for this movie - in ways that are oblique and yet palpable.