Speaker 1: Welcome to Playback, a Variety podcast. On today's show, we
Speaker 1: discussed this year's stacked Best Actress Oscar race and the
Speaker 1: uncharacteristically thin Leading Actor Race. A little bit later, I'll
Speaker 1: be talking to director Jeff Nichols about his new film
Speaker 1: Loving and a whole lot more. So stick around. All right, everyone,
Speaker 1: I'm back here again with Variety's Deputy. Oh, it's the
Speaker 1: longest smiling over here with Smile and Janelle Janelle Riley. Oh.
Speaker 1: I always said it once last week. Let's see how
Speaker 1: I do this week. And we're going to talk about
Speaker 1: something specific this week. Actually, we're gonna talk about the
Speaker 1: lead oscar races. Uh. First up, let's talk about the ladies,
Speaker 1: because lead actresses insane. Yeah, it's insane. It's not just
Speaker 1: amazing performances, it's huge, huge stars, previous nominees, previous winners.
Speaker 1: It's crazy. Yeah. Well at the top, I think it's
Speaker 1: fair to Well, first of all, I won last week
Speaker 1: law law Land, you did, yes, the Victor at Toronto
Speaker 1: Moon I didn't even place. And it's not three that's shocked.
Speaker 1: Although I am not surprised. I mean, obviously I've heard
Speaker 1: amazing things about Lyon and I saw Queen of Cotway
Speaker 1: on Saturday night with a sag crowd and the enthusiasm
Speaker 1: for it, I mean they were rhapsodic, So I actually
Speaker 1: was not surprised that that's one of those delightful kind
Speaker 1: of movies. It really is. It's really well done. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's And having said that Lupie in the Ago will
Speaker 1: not be in the actress race because the race is insane, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: And and regarding lail and Emma Stone won the Venice
Speaker 1: Prize for Best Actress, so she is everything for I
Speaker 1: think most of us at the top of the list
Speaker 1: right there, whether there is Natalie Portman, which we talked
Speaker 1: about Jackie last week, I think those are two locks. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean everyone else. It's just there's so many great performances.
Speaker 1: Amy Adams turns in two fantastic performances and movies this year. Um,
Speaker 1: Ruthnega is fantastic, Isabelle who pair And then there's the
Speaker 1: what people we haven't seen in Nett Benning to Roggi
Speaker 1: p Henson, Viola Davis, Marian Cotillard, and you haven't mentioned
Speaker 1: perennial favorite Meryl Street, which is completely I mean, she's
Speaker 1: probably good to go yeah, unless you know this category
Speaker 1: is just squeezes someone like her out, which it could.
Speaker 1: I worry that it could squeeze someone like Ruth out
Speaker 1: because it's a quiet performance. It's not a big performance
Speaker 1: like some of these, just like her co star Joel Edgerton,
Speaker 1: they're quiet performances and sometimes that can be hard to
Speaker 1: break through. But she's such a discovery this year, truly,
Speaker 1: she truly is. She's you know, and preacher as well
Speaker 1: on TV doing something completely different. I mean, there is
Speaker 1: always the possibility they haven't been seen yet that Mariankatillard, Viola,
Speaker 1: Davis Roggi, b Henson and Net Benning aren't good. I
Speaker 1: would find that hard to believe. But those are four
Speaker 1: people that you know that they're already practically guaranteed a slots,
Speaker 1: and the Net in particular is one of those that
Speaker 1: consistently brought up is overdue, Yeah, I mean the only
Speaker 1: person who is more overdue than a Net Benning is
Speaker 1: Amy Adams. Now we've talked about this before. You say
Speaker 1: that because of the number of nominations, Amy has five
Speaker 1: and I believe has four. She's been around for for
Speaker 1: far longer. I think there's an argument there, but they're
Speaker 1: both they're both going to get their oscar one day,
Speaker 1: I think, is um. And you know, we'll see how
Speaker 1: good twentieth Century Women is. That's going to play at
Speaker 1: the New York Film Festival, so we will know soon.
Speaker 1: But until then, I am only saying that only two
Speaker 1: sure things are amastone and Natalie apartment. There you go.
Speaker 1: But did we talk about Viola? Did you bring her
Speaker 1: up there? I did bring her up. Here's the thing
Speaker 1: about Viola Davis, I am hearing. I don't know if
Speaker 1: this is true or not. She supporting that. I feel
Speaker 1: confident now that it's going to stay lead. I'll just
Speaker 1: say that, you know the are you familiar with the
Speaker 1: play itself? I am, And I know they've also expanded
Speaker 1: the role a little bit for her. She won the lead. Tony,
Speaker 1: the actress that played it previously won it in the
Speaker 1: future category. So you know, you can see that the
Speaker 1: argument could go either way. And the argument for supporting
Speaker 1: is very clear based on our conversation here. It's a
Speaker 1: tight category in lead. But I think at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, Um, I'm expecting that to stay in lead.
Speaker 1: And why is that? Or do you not want to
Speaker 1: say I don't want to say I just we'll see,
Speaker 1: we'll see. But I just feel pretty good right now
Speaker 1: that the logic on top of just you know, chatter,
Speaker 1: that lead makes the most sense to me. She's a
Speaker 1: friend runner in the lead category without anyone having seen
Speaker 1: the performance, So maybe she shouldn't move, you know, I'm
Speaker 1: just as far as optics are concerned, I think it
Speaker 1: would be a shame too quote unquote demote the the
Speaker 1: woman of color out of this race to into the
Speaker 1: supporting category. Um, you know, if it made room for
Speaker 1: Ruth then that's one thing. If it made room for
Speaker 1: Geogi p Henson, that's one thing. But if you know,
Speaker 1: if it's the one woman of color that had a
Speaker 1: shot at a lead nomination and she was pushed to supporting,
Speaker 1: I think it would kind of be a shame. But
Speaker 1: I mean people do it all the time. I mean,
Speaker 1: let's be honest, Alicia Vickender one last year performance that
Speaker 1: they don't have the optics of, you know, diversity, you know,
Speaker 1: flocking around it. So if the performance is as good
Speaker 1: as I'm hearing, and it probably is because she's Viola Davis,
Speaker 1: I think she'll be fine in either category. And I've
Speaker 1: heard that Denzel is fantastic as well. Opposite her, he
Speaker 1: is softer. Yes, the story of my life. We need men.
Speaker 1: It's it's uncharacteristically thin over there. I just there is
Speaker 1: no one who is a sure thing at this point.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of you know, good, case Affleck feels strong,
Speaker 1: but it's it's in a in a darker also a
Speaker 1: very subtle performance. It's very subtle performance. Yes. Also, I
Speaker 1: don't know if Casey Affleck is going to play the
Speaker 1: Oscars game well, so to speak. I don't think he would.
Speaker 1: I mean, he'll probably do the usual regular stuff, but
Speaker 1: like that above and beyond territory that you need sometimes
Speaker 1: if you're on the fringe. I don't see him wanting
Speaker 1: to do that. I mean, I think Casey Affleck and
Speaker 1: probably Ryan Goslin are and maybe even Tom Hanks, which
Speaker 1: is crazy to me because I liked Solly. Tom Hanks
Speaker 1: as excellent as always. The man could not get nominated
Speaker 1: for Captain Phillips, which was one of the best performances
Speaker 1: I've seen in the last ten years, But he might
Speaker 1: get in this year for solely because it is a
Speaker 1: really weak categor I was going to make that specific
Speaker 1: point and he's excellent. I mean he's Tom Hanks. He's
Speaker 1: very good. I mean he's it's It's also a quiet performance,
Speaker 1: by the way, because the performance is all about this
Speaker 1: guy who's very controlled, very kind of just like you know,
Speaker 1: when he landed the plane. He was very controlled, very
Speaker 1: on top of it, very just I need to know
Speaker 1: he lands the plane. I do think though, that Tom
Speaker 1: Hanks's performance is pretty fantastic. He's one of those actors
Speaker 1: who does so much with his eyes without speaking, and
Speaker 1: he does get a couple great scenes in Sully that
Speaker 1: you know, could could be that clip moment. So I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that he would not deserve an Oscar nomination.
Speaker 1: I think he's fantastic. It's just sort of indicative of
Speaker 1: of we don't have anything in this category yet, and
Speaker 1: by the way, that movie is making its best case
Speaker 1: for itself and people love it. I cannot tell you
Speaker 1: how many people who live across the country that like
Speaker 1: are regularly sending me texts asking if I've seen Sully
Speaker 1: and I think it's like the best movie of the year.
Speaker 1: The movie is landing if you will. Oh god, he
Speaker 1: edited that out. I threw Matthew McConaughey in there. This
Speaker 1: is obviously a movie that we haven't seen yet, but
Speaker 1: he looks like he's having a lot of fun and gold.
Speaker 1: I loves movie, and you know, I think people wouldn't
Speaker 1: mind seeing him back on the circuit. Frankly. I mean,
Speaker 1: he was very much on the circuit for Dallas Buyers
Speaker 1: Club and and hard to to Miss and regarding that
Speaker 1: above and beyond stuff, you know, was doing everything and
Speaker 1: it paid off. This movie comes in December, and we'll
Speaker 1: see if it's a contender otherwise, But just for his performance,
Speaker 1: he looks like he's having a blast. Yeah. I was
Speaker 1: really charmed by the trailer. Much like Michael Keaton. You know,
Speaker 1: he starting the two Best Picture winners of the last
Speaker 1: two years. Um, he's back in a lead role as
Speaker 1: Ray Croc, the founder of McDonald's, who was not a
Speaker 1: very nice person as it turns out. I was sort
Speaker 1: of shocked to learn just how much he screwed the
Speaker 1: McDonald's brothers. I really did. I am very busy with
Speaker 1: The Bachelor. Okay, I have a lot of about things
Speaker 1: that really happened. Well, uh, we'll see about that movie.
Speaker 1: I don't know that that's going to be much of
Speaker 1: a player. But I don't know if the movie is,
Speaker 1: but I wouldn't under estimate Keaton. We'll see, we'll see.
Speaker 1: I love the man. I think he deserved a win
Speaker 1: for Birdman, and you know there's it's going to be
Speaker 1: that residual good will when he's back in the race.
Speaker 1: Well that's what I thought. If he didn't win for Birdman,
Speaker 1: he'll win for Spotlight because of all that good will.
Speaker 1: And then they didn't even nominate him. Well that was
Speaker 1: tough though. It's like the two performances that have been seen.
Speaker 1: I am a big fan of Miles Teller and bleed
Speaker 1: for this. I think he's great. Actually think Aaron Eckhart
Speaker 1: is pretty close to a lock for supporting actor in
Speaker 1: that movie. Um, Miles, who knows? Uh? You know, Miles
Speaker 1: is you talked about playing the game? Like would he
Speaker 1: play the game? You know? Per se? Would he? I
Speaker 1: did a lot with him for Whiplash when it was out,
Speaker 1: and he can be very try I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: Miles tight, Miles Teller. Um, he just he doesn't really
Speaker 1: have a filter in a way. I kind of admire that,
Speaker 1: and he can be very charming in front of audiences.
Speaker 1: And the performance is really great. Uh, well, people see
Speaker 1: the movie. I don't know, so it's a real crowd pleaser,
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, I agree. I how did it do
Speaker 1: in Toronto? Did you see it there? No? I saw
Speaker 1: before Toronto, and so I don't really the crowd there
Speaker 1: because I was very curious how it was going to
Speaker 1: play a thought and tell you right, it's sort of
Speaker 1: got a little lost just because of the that first
Speaker 1: night it was Moonlight, Sully Casey Afflecks Tribute along with
Speaker 1: Manchester Bleed for This. It was like there was four
Speaker 1: or five things on top of each other that people
Speaker 1: and I think Bleed for This was the one that suffered.
Speaker 1: Now I have not seen Haxa Ridge, but I'm hearing
Speaker 1: good things about Andrew Garfield is also appearing in Silence
Speaker 1: maybe this year. I think Silence is definitely coming out
Speaker 1: this year, but we'll see. I don't I don't know
Speaker 1: what's going on with the hold up on presenting materials
Speaker 1: and whatnot. But uh, you know, regarding Haxell, I do
Speaker 1: think he's He's very good in Haxel. I think that
Speaker 1: if Silence does come out, that his performance in hacks
Speaker 1: All could kind of just add to that it's like
Speaker 1: the Michael Douglas Wall Street Fatal Attraction year. There you go.
Speaker 1: But it's like how at the same time, like maybe
Speaker 1: the category placement shakes out differently in Silence, Like if
Speaker 1: Liam Neeson is the lead of Silence, I think that's
Speaker 1: a game over. I am going to campaign Liam Neeson
Speaker 1: for his work in A monster Calls as the Tree. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's all you so? Um. Ryan Gosling's performance has been seen,
Speaker 1: has been liked, and yet I think those kinds of
Speaker 1: roles suffer. Yeah, it's it's a tough thing. Also not
Speaker 1: able to campaign. He's shooting Blade Runner until at least November. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's tough. But people love the movie, yeah, if they
Speaker 1: If they love it, it's kind of one of those
Speaker 1: things that depends on how how deep they fall in
Speaker 1: love with it. And if he kind of comes along
Speaker 1: for the ride. And I don't think he's It's not
Speaker 1: that I don't think he's great on his own, it's
Speaker 1: just those kind of performances in these kinds of movies
Speaker 1: can be a little thankless. Yeah, and Emma Stone just
Speaker 1: owns the movie so much. It well, it kind of
Speaker 1: is her story. Yeah, I mean it's it's presented in
Speaker 1: advertisements as sort of both their stories, but I do
Speaker 1: sort of feel it it tips in her favor. I
Speaker 1: think Nate Parker deserves to be in this race. I
Speaker 1: think he's amazing in Birth of a Nation. I think
Speaker 1: his I would rather see him nominated as actor than director,
Speaker 1: to be honest, and I think his direction is very good.
Speaker 1: But I was really really taken by his performance. I've
Speaker 1: been a fan of his for a long time. As
Speaker 1: far as Beyond the Lights, he was great in that.
Speaker 1: He was great an arbitrage and way back in great
Speaker 1: debaters when everyone first discovered him. But I do think
Speaker 1: that them getting not that it was some master stroke.
Speaker 1: But I do think that this uh controversy happening when
Speaker 1: it did gives it time to recover. It either will
Speaker 1: or it won't. I mean, look, if the movie comes
Speaker 1: out and it just bombs at the box office and
Speaker 1: the audience is rejected or Boycott's become the story, how
Speaker 1: do you think he's going to do with the box office.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I really have no idea. I'm never
Speaker 1: good with guessing box office. But I don't think that
Speaker 1: it's going to be a movie that a lot of
Speaker 1: people are interested in seeing. I'm terrible at guessing box office.
Speaker 1: Um witnessed Blair Witch this weekend. I didn't do I
Speaker 1: don't ten million. I think, at the most supposed to
Speaker 1: do better than that. It supposed to like double that,
Speaker 1: And let's be frank. I mean, there have been some
Speaker 1: pretty lousy horror films that come out and do triple that.
Speaker 1: This was actually supposed to be a good movie with
Speaker 1: a built in audience. And you know, I mean, I
Speaker 1: guess ten million isn't bad. It was a small budget,
Speaker 1: but I know it's not what they're expecting, right. We
Speaker 1: also don't know about Brad pitt An allied. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think it could be a smaller performance and people expect
Speaker 1: I think Marion might be the story that I'm hearing
Speaker 1: Brad might actually be supporting. But after the events of
Speaker 1: this week, gosh, the tabloid press are going to have
Speaker 1: a field day with all of that. Yeah, exactly. And
Speaker 1: I don't know how much campaigning he'll want to do
Speaker 1: when his divorce is being played out in the public.
Speaker 1: We talked about a few weeks ago. Love it, love it.
Speaker 1: I think he's worth considering. I absolutely well, you know,
Speaker 1: he and Joel Edgerton have Well, actually, I take that back,
Speaker 1: Vigo Mortonson's performance is a little flash here. Joel Edgerton,
Speaker 1: you know, is constantly doing such wonderful, subtle work, like
Speaker 1: could he finally be recognized this year for Loving? For
Speaker 1: such a quiet performance? That's the thing is, it's that
Speaker 1: quiet performance situation. Again. I think he's great in it,
Speaker 1: and I think he's been putting out work, great work
Speaker 1: for a number of years and he's been right there.
Speaker 1: You know. Last year with Black Masse he was fantastic,
Speaker 1: I thought, and the movie the movie just ran out
Speaker 1: of steam. So you know, I don't know. Um, we're
Speaker 1: the interview portion later here, I'm talking to Jeff Nichols
Speaker 1: about all of that, the director of Loving. Um. It's
Speaker 1: strange too, because the supporting mail category seems so much stronger. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, just off the top of my head, you
Speaker 1: have me herschel a Lean Moonlight. I mentioned Aaron Eckhart
Speaker 1: in Bleed for This, and um, who is the person
Speaker 1: I'm just blinking, Liam Neeson if he's supporting, by the way,
Speaker 1: not just making your owing up. Michael Shannon, Michael Turnal Animals. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and uh, we'll just have to see how some of
Speaker 1: these turn out. I've got just recorded Levin Gordon Levitt
Speaker 1: on here too, but I don't know. I wouldn't rule
Speaker 1: him out. Yeah, it's it's We talked about it briefly
Speaker 1: last week, but you know, the accident didn't bother me
Speaker 1: after a while, which was surprising. Do you have Jake
Speaker 1: Jillenov for nocturnal animals that list? No, I do not.
Speaker 1: I do not, but I love Jake. I have Ethan
Speaker 1: Hawk from Born to Be Blue on this list. Sure
Speaker 1: he was great, so it was done. Chee in miles ahead.
Speaker 1: They're both great. I mean there are like great performance.
Speaker 1: People want to dig back the stuff. There's stuff to
Speaker 1: look at. That's the question what they want to do.
Speaker 1: But we know how much they hate to dig back.
Speaker 1: They have short memories. All right, we'll leave it at that.
Speaker 1: Please stick around. I'll be talking to Jeff Nichols right
Speaker 1: after this. Walm up. I'm as wife. That's no good here.
Speaker 1: Richard Perry Lovey in a white person, and Mildred Jeter,
Speaker 1: being a colored person, did unlawfully cohabitate as man and wife.
Speaker 1: I believe this is about all that could go all
Speaker 1: the way to the Supreme Court the State of Virginia
Speaker 1: will argue that it is unfair to bring the children
Speaker 1: of mixed race into the world. Is there anything you'd
Speaker 1: like me to say to the Supreme Court Justices of
Speaker 1: the United States? Yeah, Jorge, I love my wife. Welcome
Speaker 1: back everyone. I'm here with the writer and director of Loving,
Speaker 1: Jeff Nichols. How you doing, Jeff, I'm great. Thanks for
Speaker 1: having me. Yeah, man, thanks for being on here. It's funny.
Speaker 1: I tend to always, obviously do plenty of research and
Speaker 1: learn where where the talent I'm interviewing is coming from.
Speaker 1: But I know your background pretty well. I went to
Speaker 1: the same film school together, and I wanted to start there.
Speaker 1: You know, your time at North Carolina School of the Arts. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's interesting voices coming out of that school, an interesting
Speaker 1: group of people, with Chad Hartigan and Aaron Katz and
Speaker 1: obviously David Green and stuff. Craig Zobel, what do you
Speaker 1: think about the uh, the kind of voice that is
Speaker 1: emanated from that school. Well, I think it's probably evolving.
Speaker 1: I mean, um, I haven't been there in a while,
Speaker 1: but when we were there, I think, you know, I
Speaker 1: guess I got there and they only graduated one class
Speaker 1: by my first year, so so they still didn't really
Speaker 1: know what they were doing, which was great because they
Speaker 1: just gave us film cameras and um allowed us to
Speaker 1: start making mistakes, which is rare I think in the
Speaker 1: film school setting. UM. I know the school's kind of
Speaker 1: evolved since then, but I think a big part of
Speaker 1: it is that it's in North Carolina, you know. I
Speaker 1: know that was a huge part for me and uh
Speaker 1: and probably for day of it, and probably for Jody
Speaker 1: Hill too, and and maybe even Craig. But we could
Speaker 1: walk out the door and be confronted with an environment
Speaker 1: that was similar to what you know, we grew up around,
Speaker 1: and that's a pretty big deal. I think back now,
Speaker 1: like had I gone to New York or or USC
Speaker 1: or something one of these kind of you know, premier places,
Speaker 1: I don't know what I would have done. Um, I
Speaker 1: don't know what kind of storyteller I would have become.
Speaker 1: And I'm really glad, you know, I had access to
Speaker 1: to the countryside in the South. Something I've noticed about
Speaker 1: a lot of the guys that come out of there too,
Speaker 1: is they've maintained that sort of tight knit group of
Speaker 1: people they work with. Sure well, I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: all ships rise kind of an idea. Um. I think
Speaker 1: David Green was the first one to kind of bust
Speaker 1: down the door for us. And and a big part
Speaker 1: of I think becoming a filmmaker is is believing that
Speaker 1: it's actually possible it us for me, at least because
Speaker 1: I grew up in Arkansas completely you know, removed from
Speaker 1: any real connection to the industry. And when David made
Speaker 1: George Washington, it was like, oh, man, like David's one
Speaker 1: of us. Um as unique as David is, he felt
Speaker 1: like one, it was kind of somebody from our gang
Speaker 1: making it. But also beyond that then, I mean, David's
Speaker 1: the one that sent me to Brian Kavanaugh Jones at
Speaker 1: c A, that got my finishing funds for Shotgun Stories,
Speaker 1: you know. Um, David's the one that wrote Berlin um
Speaker 1: a letter that I think influenced them watching Shotgun Stories
Speaker 1: so that it got into that festival and had a
Speaker 1: launching pad. Those are two very probably minor things for
Speaker 1: David to do in in his day and in his life,
Speaker 1: but they had a tremendous impact on me. So you
Speaker 1: can't and I know for a fact that you know
Speaker 1: he influenced Jodi and Danny McBride and everybody else. So
Speaker 1: like there is this kind of you know, um, mental
Speaker 1: unity that happens, but there's also a very practical side
Speaker 1: of it of just like hey, man, make a phone
Speaker 1: call for me. Yeah. Absolutely, Well you mentioned Berlin there.
Speaker 1: You have two films this year, one of which started
Speaker 1: at Berlin this year, right right, and Loving sold in
Speaker 1: Berlin off of footage. Yeah, Berlin was good to us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it was really good to us. You know, two completely
Speaker 1: different movies, Midnight and Uh and Loving. You have a
Speaker 1: sci fi film and you've got a historical drama. Uh
Speaker 1: that variety keeping things you know, mixed up? Is that
Speaker 1: important to you? Yeah, it kind of is. You know. Um,
Speaker 1: I think it's really easy to get pigeonholed in this business.
Speaker 1: And I, UM, I really liked the idea of those
Speaker 1: two films coming out in relative time and space of
Speaker 1: one another, you know, um, even though technically Midnight Special
Speaker 1: could have been released and maybe should have been released
Speaker 1: the year before. Um, it's uh, it makes me happy
Speaker 1: because I can find the personal connection stach these films.
Speaker 1: I can find the personal motivations for each of these films.
Speaker 1: But just on the kind of you know, just bald
Speaker 1: face of it. Towards the industry, It's like, wow, well, okay,
Speaker 1: he's at least not repeating himself. Um, even though I
Speaker 1: think there are a lot of similarities in all these
Speaker 1: things that I've made. UM, Yeah, that that feels important
Speaker 1: to me. But also I'm five films in now, and
Speaker 1: for the first time in my career, I don't know
Speaker 1: what's next and I and I feel though a freedom
Speaker 1: in terms of the choices I have access to simply
Speaker 1: because no one film is going to totally define me anymore.
Speaker 1: I didn't feel that way with Shotgun Stories and Take
Speaker 1: Shelter and what even Midnight Special. To degree, it was like,
Speaker 1: this is how people are going to judge me. Now,
Speaker 1: that's a little bit naive because in this business you're
Speaker 1: kind of always judged by the last thing that you did.
Speaker 1: Regarding Midnight Special, your experience with a big studio in
Speaker 1: the movie. We talked about this earlier in the year,
Speaker 1: but just want to hear some more about it now.
Speaker 1: You know, diff vibe obviously than the other projects you've
Speaker 1: been on, and and i'd I'd love to hear just
Speaker 1: with a studio like that that is kind of in
Speaker 1: the muck of franchise movies and these kind of big
Speaker 1: temp poles and trying to build these cinematic universes. To
Speaker 1: to take time for a project like that, I thought
Speaker 1: was extraordinary. How did you find it? Well, you know,
Speaker 1: Warner Brothers was really really good to me. Um, But
Speaker 1: that was also a very specific situation, and I was
Speaker 1: there kind of during a bit of a sea change
Speaker 1: for that studio. UM. You know, Jeff Robinov was the
Speaker 1: one that that green let that film, um, and then
Speaker 1: he left the studio and uh and Greg Selverman you know,
Speaker 1: took over. So I was there in a transitional period. UM.
Speaker 1: But even despite that, UM, you know, they they didn't
Speaker 1: they didn't mess with me too much. UM. I think
Speaker 1: I really, you know, from my perspective, I just really
Speaker 1: wanted them to like the film, because you want the
Speaker 1: people that are paying the money for your film and
Speaker 1: the and the money to release it and picking the
Speaker 1: distribution plan. You just want them to not just be
Speaker 1: financially invested, but you really wanted to like the thing
Speaker 1: you're doing. UM. You know, I definitely think, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: Robinov had a different point of view on it, um
Speaker 1: than maybe Silverman. But um, but I can't say I
Speaker 1: was never you know, I was never forced to to
Speaker 1: alter what I wanted to do in any substantial way. Um,
Speaker 1: can I back up? I'm just curious, what do you
Speaker 1: mean by the difference of the point of view? Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean I think I think Robinov, from
Speaker 1: just the conversations I had had with him, I think
Speaker 1: he saw it as a little bit potentially a bigger film,
Speaker 1: not in terms of cost, but in terms of accessibility
Speaker 1: to the audience. I think by the time I was
Speaker 1: done with it, you know, um, they and you know,
Speaker 1: it's a big group over there, so I won't even
Speaker 1: say who, but they kind of saw it as a
Speaker 1: smaller film. You know. I heard a lot of times
Speaker 1: when they were talking about their release strategy, they were like,
Speaker 1: you know, don't this is a film you don't want
Speaker 1: to get caught speeding with, which, you know. The the
Speaker 1: result of that was, you know, it just kind of
Speaker 1: sat in five on five screens for a long time.
Speaker 1: But and you can judge whether that was a good
Speaker 1: decision or a bad one, But I don't think it
Speaker 1: was any you know, scheme to h to make the
Speaker 1: film not succeed quite the opposite. Actually, I think they
Speaker 1: thought that was the way the best way to handle it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and they don't do stuff like that, you know frequently there.
Speaker 1: I think I think sometimes studios get these movies, uh
Speaker 1: and and they're not really outfitted maybe the platform a
Speaker 1: movie or or what have you. So there was a
Speaker 1: lot of talk, you know, um at the time about
Speaker 1: we're really excited we get to work on something like this,
Speaker 1: you know, because we don't work on movies of this
Speaker 1: scale a lot of times. And so you know, I
Speaker 1: think there was I think there was some excitement there
Speaker 1: from from from the people there, and like said, I,
Speaker 1: I really enjoyed them all. I really like them. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: Loving came to you through Martin Scorsese, right kind of
Speaker 1: kind of kind of he was kind of a friend
Speaker 1: of the project. Um. That was the initial phone call
Speaker 1: that I received, UM, which you know, to the producer's credit,
Speaker 1: that was a good first phone call, you know, to
Speaker 1: throw my way, because who doesn't want to talk to
Speaker 1: Martin Scorsese. Um. But really it was Colin Firth and
Speaker 1: Jed Doherty and Nancy Berski who had made the documentary. UM,
Speaker 1: that were the the the first producers on it. You know,
Speaker 1: when when I came on board, I brought Sarah Green
Speaker 1: with me. It's my producing partner UM and Brian capital
Speaker 1: Jones as an executive producer. But it was really Jed
Speaker 1: and Colin and Nancy that spearheaded UM the approach to me,
Speaker 1: and I have to give them a lot of credit
Speaker 1: to to be to be willing to to work within,
Speaker 1: you know, the structure that I dictate, UM. And it's
Speaker 1: not for everybody, you know, but it's like Sarah is gonna,
Speaker 1: you know, have a very heavy hand and producing it
Speaker 1: because she understands on a very you know, specific basis
Speaker 1: how I work day to day. Adam Stone is gonna
Speaker 1: shoot it. Jack Keith is going to be the production designer.
Speaker 1: Julie Monroe is gonna edit back to what I was
Speaker 1: talking about about this tighten it. Oh yeah, you know
Speaker 1: it's it just makes sense to me though, you know, UM.
Speaker 1: I mean maybe there will be some point in my
Speaker 1: career where I look up and say, hey, I just
Speaker 1: want to, you know, um, blow this all up and
Speaker 1: have a different experience. But but movies are so hard
Speaker 1: to make. They're so complex and there's so many variables
Speaker 1: at play. That I find as much confidence as you
Speaker 1: can get, you know, around the process, the better. Yeah,
Speaker 1: going right into it exactly. Um. But talk to me
Speaker 1: about that phone call with Scorsese. I mean that had
Speaker 1: to have been. Oh it was awesome, you know. Um.
Speaker 1: I was just pasting around in my back yard talking
Speaker 1: to him. And that means the fact that he had
Speaker 1: seen my films. You know, he'd seen Take Shelter and
Speaker 1: he'd seen Mud Um and he was, you know, mentioning
Speaker 1: scenes from them. And and I mean this is a
Speaker 1: man who you know, shaped our our film knowledge. I
Speaker 1: had two DVDs my junior year. We had a DVD
Speaker 1: player in no cable connection. One was Fletched and one
Speaker 1: was good Fellas. And I watched those movies so much.
Speaker 1: And uh and you know, I just remember eating Ramen
Speaker 1: noodles and watching good Fellows and um and I just
Speaker 1: became a student of that film. And here this man
Speaker 1: is speaking about my films. It was a surreal moment,
Speaker 1: Like I was. I was on cloud nine for a
Speaker 1: few days. Was that the version of Good Fellows where
Speaker 1: you had to flip the disc in the middle of it?
Speaker 1: Because that, yes, it was, remember it absolutely was. Yes,
Speaker 1: I forgot that she's she's freaking out at the girlfriend
Speaker 1: ringing the doorbell. You remember having to flip uh. You know,
Speaker 1: the story of the Lovings obviously took place around Richmond
Speaker 1: or up in that are in that area, and you
Speaker 1: you filmed on locations up there, and I just want
Speaker 1: to hear I'm always curious about how an environment helps
Speaker 1: shape and dictate the film, usually for performers, but I'm
Speaker 1: curious as a director, what what did being up there
Speaker 1: in those environments do for you in the process. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, in this industry especially, it's kind of like
Speaker 1: where the taxi centives, you know, and like, you know, well,
Speaker 1: we can shoot that anywhere, you know. I remember when
Speaker 1: we were discussing Mud and I was really kind of
Speaker 1: demanding that it be shot in Arkansas. They're like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, the Mississippi River runs through Louisiana, and You're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: it does, but it looks a hell of a lot different.
Speaker 1: And um, you know, there was just no question that
Speaker 1: we would need to go to Virginia for this. But
Speaker 1: you know, I mean we went to college in North Carolina,
Speaker 1: and even the difference between North Carolina and Virginia's there's
Speaker 1: subtle differences, um, not just in landscape, but also accent
Speaker 1: and everything else. Um. This is just really important. But
Speaker 1: but especially for Loving because I mean that courthouse we
Speaker 1: shot in was the courthouse they were tried in and
Speaker 1: convicted in. You know that that jail was the jail
Speaker 1: you know, um that they were in, not the interior
Speaker 1: but the exterior. Um. The field where he proposes to
Speaker 1: her is about three minutes from the house they lived in,
Speaker 1: the real house they lived in and hiding the whole time.
Speaker 1: And I think because Mildred Loving's character was so innately
Speaker 1: tied to nature into place to really to home and
Speaker 1: a big part of that family, but I think there
Speaker 1: was also a part of her that just she needed
Speaker 1: the country, She needed the grass and the nature. UM.
Speaker 1: I very much identified with that. That that's a thread
Speaker 1: that kind of runs through all of my films. So
Speaker 1: I became very much attached to her point of view,
Speaker 1: um in that regard. And so we need to go
Speaker 1: to the place that that captivated her. And the funny
Speaker 1: thing is when we landed and we were in Virginia,
Speaker 1: I mean I was there before I started writing, doing research,
Speaker 1: and then when we were there in pre production, it's
Speaker 1: kind of undeniable. I mean, it's just got to feel
Speaker 1: to it, Um that it makes sense that she would
Speaker 1: be willing to, you know, endure constant the constant threat
Speaker 1: of danger. It just in order to get her family
Speaker 1: back into the country. What did that do for you?
Speaker 1: Like you and Adam on visual ideas for you know,
Speaker 1: we just wanted to make it beautiful. I have to
Speaker 1: be honest, Um, which what does what does that mean?
Speaker 1: But um, it was really important for us from a
Speaker 1: production standpoint to have enough time to execute these things,
Speaker 1: this being our fifth film, Like we know how it works.
Speaker 1: The question is was somebody going to give us enough
Speaker 1: time and resources to pull it off? You know, I'm
Speaker 1: very very specific on the page about how I want
Speaker 1: these things to unfold, um, and Adams very specific about
Speaker 1: you know, how he designs with Michael roy R gaffer
Speaker 1: the lighting and everything else. And so we just need
Speaker 1: to be given the time to execute our ideas fully
Speaker 1: and Big Beach. Thank goodness, our financiers they had that
Speaker 1: confidence in us and that confidence in the project, and
Speaker 1: they gave us that time and they gave us those resources,
Speaker 1: and so you know, we really were able to say,
Speaker 1: you know, what for instance, this scene where he proposes
Speaker 1: to her in this field, that was going to be
Speaker 1: the last shot of the movie as well. We knew that, Um,
Speaker 1: the days that we were scheduled to shoot those it
Speaker 1: was overcast. I mean we still could have shot in
Speaker 1: those days, and and in past films on past budget levels,
Speaker 1: we would have. But it was so important to us
Speaker 1: to reorganize that week, probably at a pretty good expense, um,
Speaker 1: to be able to put those two days on days
Speaker 1: that were just really beautiful. Um. That that's I would have.
Speaker 1: That's how it affected us. It was the style of
Speaker 1: production and being allowed the the the room and the
Speaker 1: um and the ability to just just to get it right. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Joe Edgerton is uh unknown commodity now, but ruth Is
Speaker 1: is a little more of an unknown. Uh she was,
Speaker 1: she was three months ago. Blow up a bit now.
Speaker 1: But but tell me what you were looking for for
Speaker 1: these two roles. And I imagine chemistry was a big
Speaker 1: part of that dynamic. Oddly enough, I didn't. I didn't
Speaker 1: sweat the chemistry too much, which I know sounds absurd, um,
Speaker 1: but you know, I write parts for people, all right,
Speaker 1: parts for Mike Shannon, I write, I wrote mud for
Speaker 1: Matthew McConaughey. You know, I'm real specific on the page
Speaker 1: about that. And in this instance, I was writing these
Speaker 1: parts for Richard and Mildred. I'd been studying this archival
Speaker 1: footage over and over and over and over in these photographs,
Speaker 1: so much so that I had them in my mind.
Speaker 1: I had their voices in my mind. So when Ruth
Speaker 1: came in, she was the first person we ought issue.
Speaker 1: Francine Meisler are casting director's greatest casting director in the world.
Speaker 1: Ruth was the first person she brought in. I didn't
Speaker 1: know her work, I didn't know really much about her.
Speaker 1: She sat down and just started doing the scenes and
Speaker 1: it was Mildred. It was until afterward that I started
Speaker 1: talking to her that she spoke in an Irish accent
Speaker 1: and I which was bizarre, you know, but um, it
Speaker 1: didn't matter because she'd already already proven that she was
Speaker 1: she was Mildred, and it was undeniable. You know. Whenever
Speaker 1: we would go talk to financiers or something and they
Speaker 1: asked who Ruth Mega was, we just showed him a
Speaker 1: quick time video of the audition and it was like, well,
Speaker 1: she's Mildred. Take a look and then you know Joel. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, Joel wasn't a foregone conclusion either in terms
Speaker 1: of financing it. It was you know, there were several
Speaker 1: people that had had questions about that, and I just
Speaker 1: kept saying, look, he's he's he's Richard, He's he's gonna
Speaker 1: he's gonna do an amazing up in this part. You
Speaker 1: just have to trust me. And again thanks to Big
Speaker 1: Beach and Peter Sarraf and Mark turtle Toob they did,
Speaker 1: you know, and they let us make this because you know,
Speaker 1: that's a pretty good sized budget, um for for those
Speaker 1: two people, you know, and for me and so um,
Speaker 1: so I have to give a lot of credit to them.
Speaker 1: But you know, Joel, I'd been watching through midnight special
Speaker 1: handle of Texas Dialect, something I I'm pretty serious about,
Speaker 1: and and he just has that facility, has that gift,
Speaker 1: and I knew we had enough audio of the real
Speaker 1: Richard Loving that he would be able to do that
Speaker 1: same thing, you know, he would be able to just
Speaker 1: um absorb that characters. So that's what I was looking for.
Speaker 1: And then I guess you just know something about the
Speaker 1: nature of people, you know, Ruth, Ruth has this quality
Speaker 1: that's very similar to Mildred. She she's just very soft spoken,
Speaker 1: but she also is a bit of a fire and
Speaker 1: you know, she has this inner strength that's kind of undeniable.
Speaker 1: And Joel, I mean it's partly because he's Australian, but
Speaker 1: everybody wants to be friends with Joel. He's just a
Speaker 1: likable guy. And uh, and sure enough you put those
Speaker 1: two together and you can tell they just liked each other,
Speaker 1: you know. Um, and I knew, I just never I
Speaker 1: never worried about that part. You know. What's interesting right
Speaker 1: now is there's a lot of talk of films like
Speaker 1: this and Birth of a Nation and Hidden Figures coming
Speaker 1: later this year. Uh, diversity making its way to the forefront. Um.
Speaker 1: What's interesting to me about this movie is it's what's
Speaker 1: it strikes me as as more about a marriage equality situation.
Speaker 1: It becomes a movie about that. And was that thematic
Speaker 1: something that was mostly at the forefront for you or
Speaker 1: kind of more in the background. I'm just curious your
Speaker 1: thoughts on that. Well, it was absolutely at the forefront.
Speaker 1: I mean I started writing this thing in two thousand twelve,
Speaker 1: and that's when the marriage equality issue was really starting
Speaker 1: to get fought out state by state. It was before Overfell,
Speaker 1: uh and the Supreme Court decision. UM. And I probably
Speaker 1: think all of us, you know, the producers included, we're
Speaker 1: looking at this as a direct you know, as a
Speaker 1: direct link to that conversation. And and in that Supreme
Speaker 1: Court case meaning Overfell, I mean they sighted the Loving
Speaker 1: via Virginia several times. UM. So it wasn't just a
Speaker 1: you know, it wasn't just this kind of thematic connection.
Speaker 1: It was actually like a legal connection to the two things.
Speaker 1: But what's so fascinating about the Loving story is, Um,
Speaker 1: now that you know marriage equality legally has been you know,
Speaker 1: taken care of, very similar to the way that in
Speaker 1: a racial marriages were legally handled by the Loving decision
Speaker 1: in sixty seven, doesn't mean that the the social framework
Speaker 1: is is taken care of. You know. That's when that's
Speaker 1: when that battle really begins. Is this acceptance now of
Speaker 1: of of what is legal? Um. So we knew that
Speaker 1: that that issue would always resonate. It's not like, oh,
Speaker 1: well the Supreme Court fixed this now, there's no need
Speaker 1: to tell this. UM. What's fascinating though, is now all
Speaker 1: of this um, the idea of of racism in this
Speaker 1: country is so out front as it should be. It's
Speaker 1: such an aggressive conversation as it should be. Um that
Speaker 1: the Loving Story applies to that as well. Um. And
Speaker 1: their story hasn't changed, but the social dynamic has changed.
Speaker 1: I think even you know the country, the state of
Speaker 1: the country and May when we play this thing and
Speaker 1: can the tenor of the conversation was one thing, and
Speaker 1: now here it is September. We play the same movie again,
Speaker 1: but the tenor has changed, you know, the shootings in
Speaker 1: said Dallas and Baton Rouge. Um. The conversation is constantly evolving.
Speaker 1: And what's so important about that, and what's so important
Speaker 1: about the Loving Story and in reference to it, is
Speaker 1: the Lovings just showed the humanity at the center of
Speaker 1: a very complex, difficult conversation. And we are having and
Speaker 1: we need to be having complex difficult conversations about race
Speaker 1: in this country and about equality in general. And the
Speaker 1: Lovings remain this, this constant example of humanity because they
Speaker 1: they didn't want to be political figures, they weren't looking
Speaker 1: for this, and they just truly loved each other. And
Speaker 1: I think when you get to really divisive topics in
Speaker 1: our society, if we can if we can force people
Speaker 1: to just stop and think about the humans at the
Speaker 1: center of them, we have a chance of actually having
Speaker 1: a rational conversation, which is certainly why you're you were
Speaker 1: drawn to stripping away as much as you have in
Speaker 1: this film and making it very much a quiet story
Speaker 1: of people who fell in love. And there were ramifications
Speaker 1: for that because I believe that's what they were like.
Speaker 1: You know. Um, that wasn't just a calculation on my
Speaker 1: part in terms of, oh, this is the best way
Speaker 1: to represent them. When you look at this archival footage,
Speaker 1: they were such quiet people and they're just specific facts
Speaker 1: and and and things that come out of their mouths
Speaker 1: that that you you know, you know, they just wished
Speaker 1: people had left them alone. Um, so you know that
Speaker 1: the tenor of the film needs to be needs to
Speaker 1: reflect you know, that part of their personalities. Now, you
Speaker 1: said you are at the point now for the first
Speaker 1: time where you don't know what's next. But I feel
Speaker 1: like that allows me to ask you what would you
Speaker 1: like to be next? Do you have any idea that
Speaker 1: is there some area you want to push into that
Speaker 1: you haven't yet is there? Because it seems like if
Speaker 1: you don't know what's next then you have the freedom
Speaker 1: to maybe figure that out. I'll answer two ways first
Speaker 1: and kind of a bigger kind of macrob idea way,
Speaker 1: and then I'll talk a little a bit more specifically.
Speaker 1: What I really want to do is make a film
Speaker 1: that enters the zeitgeist. You know, I want to make
Speaker 1: a film that makes an impression on a lot of people. Uh,
Speaker 1: And there are a lot of ways to do that.
Speaker 1: That doesn't necessarily mean making a hundred million dollar film,
Speaker 1: you know, loving might do it, in fact, um, I
Speaker 1: hope it does. But but as a kind of end
Speaker 1: all goal, that's something that interests me. You know, like
Speaker 1: Richard Linklater does it a lot. Well, he's done it
Speaker 1: twice with Days and like remember when Days and Confused
Speaker 1: came out. I mean that that was and it's not
Speaker 1: just about people quoting it on the street, but kind
Speaker 1: of it is you know, that means that it has
Speaker 1: permeated our society. It absolutely is. And it's not something
Speaker 1: you can calculate. It's not something you can even set
Speaker 1: out to do. But that to me would be would
Speaker 1: be real success, you know, and there are a lot
Speaker 1: of rewards that come along with that, you know. But um,
Speaker 1: but to me that that means you've made a film
Speaker 1: that has really it's really gotten to people. Um So
Speaker 1: that is kind of a big macro goal is one thing.
Speaker 1: But since you can't really plan an assault on the psychist,
Speaker 1: you have to just you have to just think about
Speaker 1: the specifics. And what I've done in the past. The
Speaker 1: way I've tried to make films universal is just actually
Speaker 1: through specificity. Just make them about my life, and make
Speaker 1: them about how I'm feeling, and make the emotions and
Speaker 1: the characters so specific that they're bound to affect other people.
Speaker 1: You know. I think we're more there's more commonality in
Speaker 1: us than we know now, all that floral language aside.
Speaker 1: I'd love to make a big, big budget movie, you know.
Speaker 1: I'd love to make a big studio film. And it
Speaker 1: might destroy me. It might ruin my career and ruin
Speaker 1: my life and my marriage. I have no idea. I
Speaker 1: haven't been through it before, but I want to try.
Speaker 1: Um just you know, just from a purely tech Nickel standpoint,
Speaker 1: I'd love to have access, uh to that level of filmmaking.
Speaker 1: I want to shoot something on seventy millimeter, you know,
Speaker 1: I just want it to be beautiful and big. And
Speaker 1: epic and sweeping, UM, things that I have tried to
Speaker 1: do in all of these other films on an emotional level,
Speaker 1: now I want to do on a production level as well. Um,
Speaker 1: you're just talking scope and scale, not necessarily these big
Speaker 1: I p s and being a part of those worlds
Speaker 1: per se, but just necessarily although you know, I'm reading
Speaker 1: the same tea leaves everybody else that's reading and and
Speaker 1: this is a phase and we'll get out of it,
Speaker 1: you know, as a society and as an industry at
Speaker 1: some point we won't be as um shackle to I
Speaker 1: p UM. But right now, I feel like it's very
Speaker 1: hard in the film business to break through without some
Speaker 1: connection to it. And you know that's why I'm talking
Speaker 1: to Fox about alien Nation. UM. You know, I have
Speaker 1: an original idea there that doesn't have much to do
Speaker 1: with um, the actual alienation you know movie and TV series,
Speaker 1: but the title fits and and that's there's real value
Speaker 1: in that potentially, um, just to get people to listen,
Speaker 1: you know, just to get people to pay attention. UM.
Speaker 1: It's not something that I particularly love. I mean, I'd
Speaker 1: love to just continue making original films from scratch, and
Speaker 1: I feel like I'll do that for the rest of
Speaker 1: my career, but it doesn't mean I won't try my
Speaker 1: hand at something else in the meantime. Yeah, well, good
Speaker 1: luck with that, sir. Thank you for being here today. Yeah,
Speaker 1: thank you, and uh, good luck with alienation. I'm glad
Speaker 1: you brought it up at the end there, because I
Speaker 1: saw that headline and I was like, oh wow, it's
Speaker 1: floating around. It's it's in it's it's in its infancy
Speaker 1: though it's a long rod on that one. Good level
Speaker 1: to thank you again, Thank you, Thanks again for listening everyone.
Speaker 1: Remember to subscribe and check back next week when we'll
Speaker 1: be talking to Hell or high Water Star and the
Speaker 1: dude himself, Jeff Bridges. You've been listening to playback at Variety.