The Big Picture - 10 Predictions About the Future of Movies. Plus: Ron Howard!

Episode Date: July 28, 2020

'Tenet' is delayed until Labor Day. 'Top Gun: Maverick' has been bumped to 2021. And yet 'The New Mutants' is scheduled to open in theaters on August 28. Everything in the world of movies is up for grabs. So we’re opening up the mailbag and answering all your questions about what the hell movies will even be in the future (6:13). Then, Sean is joined by legendary filmmaker Ron Howard to discuss his career and his new documentary 'Rebuilding Paradise' (1:03:20). Hosts: Sean Fennessey and Amanda Dobbins Guest: Ron Howard Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today's episode of The Big Picture is brought to you by An American Pickle. An American Pickle stars Seth Rogen as Herschel Greenbaum, a 1920s American immigrant who is accidentally brined in a vat of pickles for 100 years, emerging in present-day New York City. Seth Rogen also plays Herschel's only surviving relative, his great-grandson Ben, a mild-mannered computer coder living in Brooklyn. It's rated PG-13. Stream the new Max original and American Pickle

August 6th only on HBO Max. I'm Sean Fennessey. I'm Amanda Dobbins. And this is The Big Picture, a conversation show about the future of movies. Tenet is delayed at least until Labor Day weekend. Mulan is delayed. A Quiet Place 2 is delayed to next year. Top Gun Maverick has been bumped to 2021. By the time Avatar 2 is released, we may be living in communities that resemble Pandora. And yet, The New Mutants

is reportedly being released in one month into movie theaters. We'll believe it when we see it. We have a motto here at The Big Picture, death taxes and The New Mutants is never coming out. But everything at the movies is up for grabs, so we're opening up the mailbag to all your questions about what the hell movies will even be in the future. Do we know the answers, Amanda? We don't. We don't know the answers. We don't know the answers. We do have some thoughts, so we'll share our thoughts. Later in the show, I have an interview with Ron Howard, Hollywood icon, a lovely man, and the director of a new documentary coming out later this week, co-produced by National Geographic called

Rebuilding Paradise. It's an inspiring bit of activist documentary from Howard following residents of the California town paradise, which was ravaged by a devastating fire in November of 2018, as they try to reconstruct their homes and their lives in the face of tragedy. Really wonderful. Just talking to Ron about his new movie and his career. I hope you'll stick around for that. But first a little sad news to open the show. Amanda, Olivia de Havilland died over the weekend. She died at 104 years old. I was going to say, she was 104 years old. I was going to say. She was 104 years old and she died in her home in Paris. So, you know, good for Olivia de Havilland, 104 and living in Paris.

Congratulations to her. I just wanted to talk a little bit about her life and career before we get into the mailbag because she really is one of the most important people in the history of Hollywood. And not just because she was one of the stars of Gone with the Wind and was really the last major surviving star from the golden age of Hollywood cinema, not because she made her name alongside Errol Flynn and appeared in movies like Captain Blood

and The Adventures of Robin Hood. She was one of just 13 actresses to have won a Best Actress Oscar twice. She and her sister Joan are the only siblings to have won a Best Actress Oscar twice. She and her sister Joan are the only siblings to have won Best Actress statuettes. And I wanted to recommend a movie that I think a lot of people were recommending over the weekend, cinephile-wise, which is a film called The Heiress from 1949, which is a William Wyler riff on Washington Square, the Henry James story. And it's really an elegant, beautiful, gut-wrenching movie.

Anybody who has ever yearned after someone that maybe wasn't as interested in them as they were in they, then I would definitely recommend you check out The Heiress. Criterion released an edition of this movie a year ago. It's beautiful. And her performance in it is just heartbreaking. She's an amazing performer. There's a more specific reason though for Olivia de Havilland to be celebrated, which is that she is in the labor force of Hollywood actors in the Screen Actors Guild. She is an icon and she's an icon because she did something that no one else did in the 1940s. And I'm just going to read a kind of summary of what she is remembered for by a lot of her colleagues and cohort over the years. So after fulfilling her seven-year contract to Warner Brothers in 1943,

de Havilland was informed that six months had been added to her contract for the times that she had been suspended by Jack Warner, who ruled Warner Brothers with an iron fist. At the time, the studios had adopted the position that California law allowed them to suspend contract players for rejecting a role, and the period of suspension could be added to the contract period. Most contract players accepted this, but a few tried to challenge this assumption, including Betty Davis, who mounted an unsuccessful lawsuit against Warner Brothers in the 30s. But in 43, de Havilland filed a similar suit against Warner Brothers, seeking declaratory judgment that she was no longer bound by her contract on the grounds that an existing section of the California Labor Code forbade an employer from enforcing a contract against an

employer for longer than seven years from the date of first performance. In 1943 of November, the Superior Court found in de Havilland's favor. The decision is one of the most significant and far-reaching legal rulings in Hollywood, reducing the power of the studios and extending greater creative freedom to performers. California's resulting seven-year rule is still known today as the de Havilland Law. Warner Brothers reacted to de Havilland's lawsuit by circulating a letter to other studios that had the effect of a virtual blacklisting. As a consequence, de Havilland did not work at a film studio for nearly two years, but when she came back, she won Oscars in 1946 and 1949 for subsequent work, and then went on to live a life of more than 100 years. So Olivia de Havilland won. Congratulations to her. All of that happened

before 1950. It's amazing. Extraordinary. Just an incredible performer and an important person in Hollywood history. So I thought we would be remiss here on The Big Picture if we did not recognize her achievements. I also very quickly wanted to shout out John Saxon, another great actor who died over the weekend, who for a genre movie nerd like me is a bit of an archetypal figure. He's one of the great that guys of all time. I think few people who watched his movies necessarily knew his name, but he was a sort of lantern jawed, granite chinned guy who showed up in Enter the Dragon and Dario Argento's Tenebrae and Black Christmas

and Clint Eastwood's Joe Kidd and A Nightmare on Elm Street. And he's a person who, even if you never knew his name, if you saw his face, you'd say, oh yeah, I know that guy. He's probably playing a sheriff or a bad guy in the old west or trying to punch Freddy Krueger. So shout out to the late great John Saxon. Shall we go to the mailbag, Amanda? I think we must. Bobby, come on in and read us some questions to talk about what the hell is going on in the world of movies.

Sure, it's my pleasure. The first question comes from Kelly. Do you think studios would get desperate for money enough for them to release films in non-US markets? It wouldn't gross as much since US market is number one, but I'm talking true desperation here. And here's a follow-up question from Andy. We've opened cinemas here in the U.K., but we've only got old movies to watch. Is there any chance we start to get new stuff or we go and have to wait for the U.S. to open? Well, we got some

answers on this. Great timing. Amanda, you want to speak on what's going to happen to movies around the world and in this country? Oh, gosh. I would love to. First, I just want to say, Andy, who is in the UK where cinemas are open, I hope you're having a great time. I hope you're being safe. I hope you are following all local precautions. But, you know, sir, if you get to go to a movie theater and see an old movie, then you're doing better than some of us here.

Also, if you get to go to a pub and have a drink, you know, again, be safe, but God bless. Cause it's not what we're doing here in the United States. Um, do I think studios would get desperate enough for money enough for them to release films and not in us markets? Uh, yes, I do. I mean, I think they'll always be desperate enough for money, but we did get news today that tenant, which was pulled off of the calendar, I believe last week, though that feels like months ago at this point, has a new date. It actually has several dates because it will be being released internationally before it is released in the US. So August 26th, which is a Wednesday, it goes international, which is apparently in over 70 countries, but it will be

available, I believe, in the UK for you, Andy, answering your question. And then it will supposedly be released where it is able to be released in the United States for the Labor Day weekend, which is a week after August 26th. So we'll see. That supposedly is doing a lot of work there. That is really, and that's the issue. I think this is the fourth date change, I think, in the United States for Tenet. And Amanda, as you cited, we're California residents. Things are not going well in California with regard to COVID-19. They're going even more poorly in other states that have key markets.

And so what select cities looks like is complicated. I think if you live in Montana, I think it's probably fine to go to the movies. There are fewer than 100 cases of COVID-19 in the state of Montana. The Dakotas are doing okay. There are some places where the numbers are quite low, even proportionally speaking to population. But most states and most states with key markets are not in good shape. And so it still seems like, I mean, we're talking a matter of five and a half weeks, essentially, to when this film is theoretically opening in the United States. Let's talk quickly about what this kind of means, though, for the reception of the movie at large. As soon as this was announced, I got an email from our friend and contributor, Adam Naiman.

Adam, of course, is a Canadian citizen. So Adam will get a chance to see Tenet, assuming the movie opens on August 26th there. Which I'm sure is thrilling to Adam, personally. I think he's pleased to have a film to review that will show up in a movie theater. And he and I were kind of speculating about what kind of redacted review should run on theringer.com covering this film because Tenet, of course, is the number one spoiler box movie of the year

and people are very concerned about getting information about it. But as you and I have talked about in the past, if this movie opens in England and in France and in Canada and all people want to know about is what it's about and why it's about that, why it's the way that it is. I'm very curious to see what the culture becomes around Tenet in the United States, especially if it opens on August 26th internationally and then does not open the United States on September 2nd or 4th, which it's reasonable

to assume there's a chance that it moves off of that date. And for a movie like this to have to be out in the wider world in foreign countries and not in the United States, I think actually might drive a segment of the population even more crazy than the COVID-19 crisis, which says a lot perhaps about the American psyche. But it strikes me that people just really want what they want in America. That's a defining characteristic of our people. And I don't know what to, I don't know. I'm not sure how that will be received.

The hardcore movie going audience, I feel like will be driven a bit nuts by this particular instance. I think that's true though. I did find myself wondering a little bit where, I think we've already driven ourselves a little bit insane with Tenet. And I think, you know, Tenet did become this political football and the future of movie going is resting

on it and everyone's yelling at each other and Warner Brothers is sending emails being like, you know, please be nice to the future of movies. And that, which I guess be nice to the future of movies, everybody, but we've worked ourselves up. And I'm kind of like, at this point, as Warner Brothers just want to get Tenet out of the way, not from a financial perspective, but from a just how do we solve this problem so that then we can move on and figure out what the future of movies looks like long-term.

I think there's such a psychosis around it now that no one's going to be happy. Because even if it does release everywhere, then'll have all the the arguments or discussions about should it be releasing everywhere and should we go I mean how you and I are going to see this movie is a really fascinating question not to make it about ourselves but this is a podcast about us so and movies um and you know my husband walked in and joked being like you and Sean should road trip to Vancouver to go see Tenet before it opens in the U.S. and I was like number one no and I will not wait wait go back for a second this is important so what is the suggestion that you and I ride in a car

together for like the 12 hours it takes to get to Vancouver? I don't think that, first of all, I think 12 is generous. Number two, yeah. Number two, I don't really think, you know, Zach's not one for specifics as you know, but I immediately was, as soon as I heard road trip with Sean, I was like, I'm out because I know what that looks like. You're a maniac. You drive really crazily. You insist driving like 45 hours at a time. You really like to drive. You like blast your soulful music. No, thank you.

So it's 19. Okay. It's 19 hours and 53 minutes. So I nailed that. Okay. Great job, Bobby. Sean, here's the thing. It doesn't matter because we can't get in.

Oh, of course. We'd be blocked at the border. Oh, okay. So I should stop mapping this trip on I-5. matter because we can't get in oh of course we'd be blocked at the border oh yes okay so i should stop mapping this trip on i5 just you and i alone in one continuous trip for 19 hours and 53 minutes although based on my driving i would guess closer to like 18 and a half yeah yeah my question is which one of you is the podcast engineer and which one of you is driving that's what i care about you gotta are you saying you want to sit in the trunk? Do you want to sit in the trunk, Bobby?

Is that what you're asking for? The trunk? Come on. Well, you know, I've got my golf bag in the back seat. So that's the only open space. Tough beat for me. Done this podcast for almost two years now. Yeah, that is true.

So we can't even get into Vancouver. This is all, it's all, it's needless is what you're saying. Right. Though the secondary question becomes if Los Angeles is not a market where this movie can open, which is really up for debate

because as you noted, things have been very tough in California and in Los Angeles specifically. And, you know, we're at a place where schools might not open in Los Angeles. Right now, schools will not be opening in Los Angeles County. Again, all of these things are subject to change. But and so it's it's hard to imagine a world in which people are allowed to go to movie theaters, but children can't go to schools, though, like that may end up being the

capitalist world that we live in, which is another conversation. But putting all of that aside, because it's just kind of too grim to get into, if theaters are not open in Los Angeles, then do you and I drive somewhere else to see it? Are we allowed to? Would that be safe? Then even if we did see it, how do we speak about it? Because presumably not everyone will have seen it simultaneously because one of the things that Warner Brothers is advertising is that they're banking on a quote long tail because you still can't have packed theaters. You can't have that opening weekend. You got to go see talk about it once you have seen it? Over under five hours, you would drive with me to another American city. Five hours over.

Do you remember once upon a time when we could take public transportation and we were on the bus together at Sundance trying to get our passes passes. And we didn't really know how the bus system worked. I know I talked a lot about this at the time. Remember how quaint and exciting that experience was. But like the two of us on a bus together got so weird within like 20 minutes. Do you remember this? It went insane. And then for that to be fine, I mean, we could do it. It would definitely, I suppose we should record it for podcasting, but then that would just become very weird. I think probably I could handle six hours, but no more. Non-stop?

Fighting over the bathroom is going to be a big issue. Would you use a public bathroom during a COVID-19 crisis on a road trip to a movie theater? Which, by the way, what the hell are we talking about? I mean, no, I know. What is going on? I mean, I would wear masks and follow safety. I don't know. I can't do the whole diaper thing that a lot of people are doing for the road trips.

I'm sorry. We can't turn this into that astronaut movie. No, let me assure you that I will not be sitting in a car with you while you wear a diaper, Amanda. I just want you to know that right now. Good, because it won't be happening. So then you have to agree to stop for the bathroom. I can't go six hours. I'm not going to be like you and just like dehydrate myself for two days.

So I don't have to use the restroom. I think that's insane. Well, to each their own. Hopefully we'll get a chance to see Tenet. I don't think we haven't discussed drive-ins. Will this film be opening at drive-ins? Because if so, we need to get tickets at Mission Tiki. And we need to drive there, which is only 40 minutes away from where we live.

And just go see the movie that way. That would be fantastic. Right? I mean, I hope it's doing drive-ins. We were talking about drive-ins last week and they have all been sold out. I haven't yet been able to get to one, which is good. That is good. I mean, it's primarily been older movies.

There have not been a huge number of new releases, but they were. I know that Inception was scheduled at some point to do the drive-in circuit. So theoretically, if Inception is, then hopefully Tenet would be as well. I would do that. That would be exciting. I mean, I noticed just that The Rental, the new Dave Franco horror thriller that came out over the weekend, I think opened on 420 screens and most of the drive-in screens around the country. And it did a pretty good bit of business. And it did, you know, it did well.

It did even better than some of those other horror movies like The Wretched that we talked about earlier this spring on the show. So if Tenet comes to drive-ins, we don't have to worry about you wearing a diaper, which is very exciting. I never should have said that. But it's like, I can't.

I won't be doing that way. Anyway, in conclusion, congratulations to Andy, who's just going to have a new movie in theaters in the UK a week before we do. You did it. Bobby, what's next? I love to do mailbags. The next question, actually, we have one question about drive-ins,

so let's get that out of the way. It comes from Michael. Do new movies playing on drive-ins count as theatrical release? And if no, why not? And if yes, why can't new big studio releases try for that and then go on VOD three months later? I mean, they do count. They count as movie releases for sure.

And they're tabulated by the box office tracking systems. It's just that there aren't enough of them. You know, I mean, the story of drive-ins over the last 75 years in this country is that they've been closing over time. You know, it's been nice to see this kind of boom in them. And I grew up, I grew up going to a drive-in and I love drive-ins as a,

as an experience. Personally, Amanda and I have been talking about trying to go to a drive-in movie. And it's just not something we've done either for the show or just as friends, but I suspect we will at some point over the summer. And it would be fun to do it with a new movie that we haven't seen before.

But I just think it's not like it's easy to build a drive-in. I think a lot of conversation around film festivals has been oriented around, can they sort of retro or sort of refurbish their circumstances to create outdoor screenings and particularly drive-in screenings to, you know, allow people to socially distance at festivals. And I'm sure that that's something that could get developed around the country over a period of time. But I think there's only north of 300 drive-ins

around the country, which is just not that many. So I'm for them and it's good for box office, even in small batches, like I said, for that movie, The Rental. But it's minimal relative to the movie theater experience. Yeah, it just seems to be a logistical block. I do know that here in Los Angeles, like a local mall turned its parking deck into a drive-in experience. And I mean, I haven't done that yet and I don't know what the screen quality or whatever is, but I think that as Sean sean said it's just there aren't that many drive-ins and the

the space and getting the mechanisms in place is hard on the other hand like let's do more of it from from michael's lips to god years you know like let's let's do it give me someplace to watch movies besides this one tv in my home thank you amanda we got a listener asking about your home setup and why you don't like it as much and whether we can somehow as a big picture community get you like a big screen that you love with some surround sound. That's so nice. I feel so supported by the big picture community. Thank you. No, this is me being a big fat baby. I appreciate it. Yes, a diaper wearing baby.

Yeah, okay. And that's fine. Let's just lean into it. It's okay. Maybe they'll make a movie about me like they did about the astronaut that no one saw. We have a great screen and we have a lovely couch. And my husband has gotten much more

respectful of not coming in and ruining the climactic scene of the movie that I'm watching at any given time. I think we reached like a real breaking point when I was watching dirty dancing and I kind of heard his footsteps behind me, like right before the lift came. And I was just like, you do not interrupt the lift, sir. Like, don't you dare. But otherwise, it's fine. I just need to learn how to focus. I need to accept the reality of my situation and be grateful for it. And possibly also invest in some surround sound, which is a great idea.

So if anyone has any recommendations, please let me know. And I'll seek that out and try to complain less in the future. I hope this doesn't sound like spawn, but my movie going experience, my home movie watching experience has radically changed since I got a Bose soundbar that actually did amplify literally movies in a meaningful way. Okay, next question from Edward. It seems like studios are reluctant to put more movies straight to POV, even the lesser blockbusters like New Mutants and Foreign Dispatch.

Isn't that a good sign for the future of theaters? That there's still a necessity for studios to make money? Was trolls an exception and not the rule? I'm going to try my best to tackle this. So every movie is its own individual circumstance. And it is not necessarily representative of the global strategy. And New Mutants and Foreign Dispatch are a very interesting example because both of those movies were in development and production at Fox when Fox was

being acquired by Disney. And so because of that, there is a lot to consider about the home and the operation and what may be contractually obligated by those companies for these films. So for example, a lot of people have said, why don't you just put the New Mutants on Disney Plus? The New Mutants can't go on Disney Plus because contractually, based on Fox's pre-existing deal with HBO, it's a film that would have to go to HBO services before it goes to Disney services and reverts in terms of rights, which means the idea of putting it on PVOD, there may be additional language in that contract that says that a movie like this can't skip theaters, in which case it would be impossible to release in that fashion. So to just cite those two films, Wes Anderson,

we don't know. He's a filmmaker with a lot of power. And so he may have contractually asked that the French Dispatch play in at least one theater in America before going to a PVOD service. Trolls, I suspect there is not that level of contractual obligation. It's a different sort of property. And so, and Universal, we also know, which is a different studio, has been, has taken a very different tact on this. They may be seen as predictors of movie consumption going forward, or they may just be seen as smartly and effectively cutting their losses and trying to best position their films. You know, we also saw them release movies

like The King of Staten Island directly to PVOD. And thus far, Disney, while they did move up the release of Hamilton to Disney+, otherwise has basically been punting. We saw them punt Mulan. And even though The New Mutants is still on the board for August 28th, I don't think that's going to hold. I don't think that movie's going to come out at that time. been punting. We saw them punt Mulan. And even though the new mutants is still on the board for August 28th, I don't think that's going to hold. I don't think that movie is going to come out at

that time personally. And, and the French dispatch is a hardcore Oscar movie and it's not pushed officially to 2021. It's just undated at the moment. And so I wouldn't be surprised to see it get back on those calendar in November or December. But I don't know. I mean, can you speak to maybe the bigger issue here, Amanda? That like, you know, is it a necessity for studios to make money is an interesting question. Like, I think that they do have to make money. Yeah. And I think, as you pointed out, for movies that already exist and already have existing

contracts, and they also have existing budgets and plans. And at some point you can only take so much of a loss, I think, as a studio. And so I think going forward, the plan for both how things are distributed and what those contracts look like could be very different. I mean, I think it kind of has to be just looking at the future of movies and the world at large and how we watch things. I thought the interview with John Stanky, who is the head of AT&T, was very interesting last week because he was obviously asked about Tenet

and many other things. And I'll read you exactly what he said. He was asked about putting movies on PVOD. Is it going to happen with a movie like Tenet or something like Wonder Woman? I'd be very surprised if that would be the case. In fact, I can assure you with Tenet, that's not going to be the case.

And then later on, he says, the longer this goes on, there's going to be some content on the margins that we're going to look at and say it may be better served to be distributed in another construct or a different construct. I love that we have that option now. So to me and CEO speak, I read that as Tenet is going to be in theaters because number one, it's Christopher Nolan and he places a big emphasis on that. And also we've just put ourselves financially and narratively in such position that we can't balk now. We have to put it in theaters. But everything else,

it seems like they're at least softening the ground to reconsider. And I thought that was really interesting. It's a great point. We saw Warner Brothers put Scoob on PVOD and then on HBO Max within six weeks. And that strikes me as more likely the future than holding ground for movies like Tenet once we get through the production cycle of films that are coming out over the course of the next 12 months. But we'll see. We just don't know because we just don't know how deeply indebted the studios feel to the theatrical experience financially. And that is largely what is going to end up driving this. It's not going to be creative concern. It's going to be financial concern from the studios. What's next, Bobby? All right, this next one's kind of bleak, but it comes from John.

If production shutdowns continue, are we going to lose iconic studios altogether? Interesting question. I think we've seen some very interesting choices by Paramount, which is, of course, a legendary film studio and is responsible for some of the most incredible films ever made, particularly for the people on this podcast. This is the home of films like Mission Impossible and Top Gun. And so, you know, Paramount has had some struggles and has lost increasingly market share over the last few years. They've had hits, they've had some, some successes, but they are by far the smallest. They're, um, one of the few studios that does not have its own standalone streaming

service. And they are a studio that does not have a kind of an MCU or a Pixar to lean on. And they've been selling their films off to Netflix and essentially in real time and, and, and shifting properties away from their studio and into the hands of streamers in an effort to essentially grab cash to, to make up for the, the inability to release these movies. We saw the lovebirds come to Netflix recently. That was originally developed as a Paramount movie. It was supposed to come out in the summer. So, you know, I'm not suggesting that Paramount is going to close, but it's making decisions for a reason. A friend recently texted me and asked me which studio is going to be the first to go out

of business. And then that's a question that I have been posing to some other people in conversations that I have been having. And again, this is just a guess, but the answer that I gave and the answer that I've gotten in every other conversation, paramount, which is a shame. And again, protect Mission Impossible, protect Top Gun. Those are important to everybody. I think all three of us felt a little pang when Top Gun was finally taken off the 2020 calendar. We knew it was coming, but that's sad. Yeah, we certainly don't wish bad news on any studio. And I think every studio is highly

susceptible to this. It's just that Disney, for example, is diversified in how they make money. Now it's challenging when you can't open parks, but at least they have a streaming service, they have merchandising they can rely on. They have this back catalog, this extraordinary back catalog, which they found a way to profit from. The same is true for Warner Brothers in some respects and HBO Max. The same is true for Sony in terms of the other areas of business that they have. And they may be able to float the theatrical business for a period of time. Lionsgate, a small studio like that, who knows? And forget, I mean, we're not even talking about the indies. Palm Springs is one of the hits of the year in a movie that we both loved. It was supposed to be released theatrically by Neon. Neon isn't releasing any movies. They're

fortunate to have a co-deal with Hulu at the moment, but they're not generating theatrical revenue right now. A24 is not generating theatrical revenue right now. Everyone is susceptible to this and no one is immune to it. So it's a very challenging time. Honestly, I think a lot of people who work in this business are really scared. So we're trying hard to not make light of it. It's just some studios are obviously going to be more vulnerable than others. Do you think that these studios that you've named so far, the smaller ones are candidates to be acquired by larger studios and that that might be a trend that we might see? Or is it more likely that they'll go out of business before they get acquired by larger studios and that that might be a trend that we might see or is it more likely that they'll go out of business before they get acquired by disney or sony or another studio that

size well they'll get acquired in some respect regardless because the libraries are valuable right it's valuable to own top gun it's valuable to own mission impossible those things matter so there's long been speculation that both Lionsgate or Paramount could be, they've been stalking horses for Apple historically. You know, when Apple was attempting to build up its content business and it's still, you know, making strides to build up its content business, people thought that the smaller studios could be subject to purchase. The Fox purchase by Disney was in an attempt almost like to, you know, supersize its powers.

And that's made it even more difficult for smaller studios to survive. But I, it's really hard to say it's really hard to know how, how these studios are valued, you know, and what right now Paramount is owned by Viacom, which is a, still a big media conglomerate, but smaller than it was say 10 or 15 years ago when, when networks like MTV were in their heyday. So I don't know. I mean, it was, say, 10 or 15 years ago when networks like MTV were in their heyday. So I don't know. I mean, it's really, the coin is in the air, as they say. Okay, next up from Jordan. As the regulatory doors seem to have opened up for studios to buy theater chains, do you guys envision a world where we see studios only playing their movies in their own theaters? That's a good question. The question is essentially referring to United States versus Paramount Pictures, the studio

we were just talking about, which is a case that happened in 1948 that essentially is an antitrust case that disallowed theaters, or rather studios from owning movie theaters and controlling them essentially to control both the means of production and distribution throughout the movie industry. Despite the fact that right now studios and theater chains are very much in business together and our partners, they are not owned and operated by the same conglomerates. And that rule was functionally overturned recently. And that allowed for Netflix, for example, to buy the Egyptian theater and the Paris theater.

And I, so I don't know. I mean, on the one hand, this could be a good thing. You know, it could be a good thing if Paramount can build an ancillary theater business to support itself through this time, or it could be a bad thing and become the Disney, like Disney could then buy every movie chain and then be the sole distributor of all films, meaning the only films you'd get in movie theaters would be Disney films. So it's a very complex question and it really just depends on kind of ownership and authorship

of these theaters. What do you think, Amanda? I mean, it's interesting because to the extent that the original law was to prevent production and distribution being under the same umbrella. You know, Netflix produces and distributes its own movies. Amazon increasingly. You know, a lot of these companies have major control over the distribution of their product. And in some ways, Netflix is the only place that is releasing movies right now. And that has more to do with technological and real-life realities than anything about

that particular distribution model being good. But in some ways, it doesn't seem as scary to me as I think it did five years ago, just because we need movies. And it really doesn't seem like the theater chains on their own are going to be able to survive at this point because of in the way that they are now, just because of the realities of home viewership and the financial strain that they've been in the last six months

and seem like they'll continue to be in for the next year. So if you have to reimagine the way that movies are distributed, like who else is going to pay for movie theaters to exist in a few years? Maybe it's the people who want to make money from the movie theaters, which would be the studios. And on the one hand, sure, that's bad if it's just like the new mutants for every half hour at every movie theater for the next three months. But as someone who has some hope that at some point we will be able to go back to a movie theater, I don't know realistically who else is going to pay for it. So we'll see. It's really challenging because the people who are most threatened by this

are also the people who need this the most. You know, it's independent cinemas and independent filmmakers need these places to stay open. But the only people who are ultimately going to be incentivized to keep them open, I think you're right, Amanda, are big studios. So it's just a, it's a real conundrum. It's paradoxical in many ways. And so there's just a it's a real conundrum it's a it's paradoxical in many ways and so there's no there's no really good answer to matthew's question which is a really good question and and you know i hope we get some clarity on and get some good news on in the next 12 months what's next this is from benjamin when movies return to theaters do you think there will be more dependence on big tentpole ip or less way more more way more

only only yes i think i think that uh known quantity is the name of the game at this point and top gun maverick is a known quantity and palm springs is not a known quantity you know people like andy sandberg but they don't know what that movie is about. In fact, you need to call that movie Groundhog 2 colon Palm Springs in order to make it known IP. And that's- I'm on a boat guy. Exactly. Yes. Not T-Pain though.

Right. Yeah. Right. Yes. So yeah, listeners of the show are well aware of the fact that I try not to consider IP the scourge of all movies. There are plenty of IP movies that I enjoy. We were just praising Top Gun and Mission Impossible. Those are IP franchises. Top Gun was not until a year ago, but it is now. And so there can be versions of it that we love. There are MCU movies that I love. There are sequels that can be

great art. But if that's all that we're getting in movie theaters, that's bad. That's just categorically bad. And discovery is such a meaningful part of the movie going experience. And there's really not a lot of discovery in play when IP is the order of the day. So it is a depressing question. In a lot of ways, it's just like the amusement parkization of movies once again you know on and amusement parks are obviously like in a very very tricky moment right now i think our answers to this question are predicated are more about are predicated on the fact that we think the world will go back to some version of if not normal then

at least people being out in public again. And, you know, and that is like a really big if at this point, and I don't mean to diminish all the concerns and the hurdles standing between us and that point. But if we do get to a place where people are gathering in public again, then I think it, the viewing patterns, people will need that level of event and big top entertainment in order to justify moving to leaving their home because otherwise they can just watch it at home there's a follow-up question here from david that says shauna amanda will i ever watch a hundred million dollar movie again i think that's a little bit of a dramatic way of phrasing it because of course there are going to

be big ip movies that come out but do you think there's going to be any kind of delay on them like maybe years on the larger 100 million dollar plus movies that might come out I don't think so necessarily you know one of the movies that got pushed last week and it was a much quieter push but I think it's a movie that is of great importance to both Amanda and I as the last duel which is the Ridley Scott, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck movie. That's an original story that is from a major filmmaker with major movie stars. And that strikes me as a movie that could make $100 million that's going to come out at some point, probably at some point in the fall of 2021 would be my guess. And so, you know, we'll still see those movies. There will still be the Once Upon a Time in Hollywood movie. You know, Quentin

still got to make his 10th film. but increasingly, you know, David Fincher, who is, was one of the few adult filmmakers who could make original stories and get a big audience to go see them in theaters. You know, his next movie is on Netflix and Spike Lee's last film was on Netflix. And I just think you'll see increasingly more and more of these directors moving their films to Netflix where hopefully we're getting a Steven Soderbergh film on HBO Max soon. You know, that's going to increasingly be the case. The same way that it is, I'm kind of getting ahead of myself with this next question here, but the same way that it is with television, you know, almost all key showrunners have now moved to streaming services. Very few of the sort of high profile names who are sub 70 years old are working for broadcast networks or cable networks they are

working for some version of streaming yeah this next question that you alluded to sean's comes from mark it feels like streaming culture has made tv shows less eventized causing them to gain popularity more slowly over time are we in for a similar shift in movies palm spring comes to mind as an example of a less front-loaded marketing strategy. What do you think, Amanda? I think this is both a smart observation and also a little bit like apples and oranges in terms of the types of movies. Palm Springs, we loved it. If you haven't seen Palm Springs, go see it and then listen to our podcast about it. But I don't think that Palm Springs would have been a hundred million dollar opening weekend at the box office. I think in part because of how it would be distributed. I don't think that it would be trying to compete with like new mutants or whatever

blockbuster. Now new mutants is the only blockbuster I can think of, which is horrible. I don't want to live in this world. Get me of 2020 um but you know i do think that there are probably fewer movies this year that have that oh my gosh it's we have to watch this movie on friday night or else it's over and that's because so much of that is predicated on everyone goes to a theater on friday night the eventization of it. And TV, because now everyone just watches it on their own time. It's interesting that Mark kind of feels that TV shows are gaining popularity over time. I am kind of experiencing them as everyone talks about it for five days and then moves

on. And I have experienced less of a slow burn and more of a just really segmented short attention span. And because there's so much, everyone is like, look over here and now look over here and now look over here. But maybe that's wrong. And maybe we just do live in a world where everyone gets a lot of smaller projects that are interesting to them and you find them on your own time and that Palm Springs can be a part of that, that, that, that would be nice. I do think that as you watch more things at home, there will be naturally that bit of segmentation though on the flip side, I think we have a question later on about the top 10 original Netflix movies, according to Netflix, um,

which were not particularly segmented, at least according to those tallies. So I think maybe it means that there could be a little bit, there's more space for personal taste, I guess, but maybe at the behest of a lot of people saying things. Let's just go straight to that question that you alluded to, Amanda. It comes from VicaroProf1. I hope I got that right right much has been made about the death of monoculture as it relates to film capturing the public consciousness but doesn't the release of the netflix top 10 movies viewing numbers um skepticism about the lack of context and transparency aside prove its demise is greatly exaggerated i i don't think so i i think actually the opposite

is true um i think we all know that there's a bit of there's a dubious aspect to that top 10 and that top 10 and isn't it is an attempt and a savvy one i think to replicate the culture of reporting that built up around box office numbers over time. And after the success of Jaws and Star Wars, Americans got very interested in what movie is number one at the box office. And Netflix is hoping to smartly replicate that sensation of, oh, if this is at the top of the feed, then I know that a lot of people are watching it and I want to be a part of a community that is catching up on this thing.

But simultaneously, I think the point that Amanda was making about the last question is very true, which is that segmentation and curation is essentially what the boom of streaming has allowed for. There are still shows, I think, that are able to grab either significantly big audiences, for example, Yellowstone, which has four to five million people watching it on a weekly basis. And there are also still shows that are able to drive the sort of cultural consciousness. Like I'm watching I May Destroy You, which is an incredible show and is a show that is being released on a weekly pace. And I would be surprised if that

show had more than two to three million viewers on a weekly basis. But the people who are watching it are driving conversation in a meaningful way. And in the same way that Kevin Costner is able to make Yellowstone successful because he is a brand name, Michaela Cole is able to make a massive career for herself by having a zeitgeisty show. I think both of those things will continue to happen in the same way that Amanda and I will have to sift through whether or not 87 million people watch the first two minutes of extraction. You know, I think that there's no true way to understand what is at the center of culture anymore, the same way we did when we knew that the Joshua Tree sold 24 million albums. That aspect, that sort of transparent, you know, look into the numerical success of things is going away because it doesn't behoove anybody ultimately. And the same is true for even just making podcasts. The one thing I want to say

about this, Amanda, before I let you finish the thought, is just that we think about this on this show. We're trying to capture the most people with the most amount of interest on a weekly basis and trying to guess what people will care about and what movies they're going to be watching in an attempt to reach more people. And everyone, people who are making things, people who are commenting on things are all playing the same game, which is how can as many of us get on the same page as possible to reach as many people as possible. And it's harder than it's ever been. Yeah, I completely agree with that. I was just going to add that I think the monoculture is really as much about like the overlap and, and the conversation as it is that just like a lot of people watching something. Um, and now a lot of

people are just like watching a lot more things. So it, you know, look at these wildly inflated Netflix numbers. It's 99 million people watching Extraction and 63, I think, 63 million people, they said, watch Triple Frontier. I mean, that's a lie. And I know that because Sean and I have been trying to make Triple Frontier monoculture for over a year now. And it's not working.

I don't think any of you listening have watched Triple Frontier. God bless you. Then that's okay because there are a million other things that you can watch on Netflix or on HBO Max or on Amazon or, you know, on your regular TV. And so, but the fact that everyone is just consuming so much more does not necessarily mean that we're all consuming the exact same thing simultaneously and then, and sharing them. And I think a little bit, that's what the monoculture was always a measure of, of like, you can't avoid this and

everyone has an opinion about it or is brought together by it. And we are not brought together by anything anymore, except guessing when Tenet is going to come out. Before we get to the next question, let's just take a quick break to hear a word from our sponsor. Today's episode of The Big Picture is brought to you by An American Pickle. An American Pickle. An American Pickle stars Seth Rogen as Herschel Greenbaum, a 1920s American immigrant who was accidentally brined in a vat of pickles for 100 years, emerging in present-day New York City. Seth also plays Herschel's only surviving relative, his great-grandson Ben, a mild-mannered

computer coder living in Brooklyn. While not your typical Seth Rogen comedy, An American Pickle tells the heartwarming story of two men from different generations who must learn the true meaning of family. From the producers of The Disaster Artist and 5050 comes An American Pickle, streaming August 6th only on HBO Max. It's rated PG-13. Stream the new Max original An American Pickle August 6th only on HBO Max. Okay, we're back on the show, Bobbyby let's get to the next question okay next question is about the oscars you guys remember that television broadcast that we talked about for a lot of time it comes from dan if theaters don't reopen fully for the rest of the calendar year do you think

they should just cancel the oscars and other award shows and if so do you want a 2020 and 2021 combined show? Let me just say, what the fuck, man? I felt like we were getting some good energy going with this show. The Parasite win happens. The Academy is diversifying. We're connecting with wonderful movie watchers and award show watchers around the world here on The Big Picture. COVID strikes, and then the Oscars has no idea what to do. We saw earlier today that the Golden Globes also agreed to use the exact same window, which I guess is February 28th, 2021, rather than at the end of the year for its awards.

Who knows if that will hold? Certainly feels like that could be changing at this point. I don't know what they should do with the Oscars. I don't even know how to make a bold prediction because I think every studio is reluctant to release its shiny object right now onto PVOD. What do you think, Amanda? I really don't know either. And I feel really, really disappointed and slightly depressed at the idea of canceling the Oscars, which is just absolutely ridiculous. Let me tell you, we have really big problems in this country and the world at large, and the Oscars just, they don't matter. They are a made-up awards show. It doesn't matter, except to the extent that they provide employment and help people continue to get jobs,

which is really important. And when movie theaters are closed and when films are pushed back and productions are pushed back, that's a lot of people who don't have employment. And that is really tough. And I don't know how to solve for that. But putting that aside in terms of whether or not Sean and I get to geek out about who gets a trophy, it doesn't matter. It really doesn't matter, except it is a little bit how we evaluate things. And we were just talking about the lack of the monoculture and the lack of, which is a lack of community and a lack of getting to talk to people

and argue about things and share in something. And so I feel bummed out if I won't, if I don't have the Oscars to argue over. That said, there definitely have not been very many Oscar-worthy movies released this year. No offense to many Oscar movies. And I don't know whether redefining what it means to be an Oscar movie for one year only helps or hurts the Oscars going forward? Because once you kind of point out that it doesn't matter and that it's a real joke,

which I know I just spent a long time talking about that, but once the Oscars are kind of in on its own semi-irrelevance or once they admit that they can be paused or put away, then how do you get that back? It's a really interesting question because we've seen in sports over the years during lockout periods or strikes conversations about the nature of an asterisk season. And I think we're in the midst of an asterisk Oscar season because of what's happening here. And it reminds me a lot of the 98-99 NBA season, which was shortened to 50 games by a lockout, and which resulted in a very memorable thing for me, which is that the New York Knicks entered the playoffs as an eight seed,

and they went to the NBA finals, which is not something that could have happened more than likely if this were played in a full season. But because that was a fairly young team, they somehow overcame Eastern Conference foes that they might not otherwise have overcome. And I wonder if we'll have a similar outcome here with the Oscars, where a film that is being released because the studios are like, you know what? Screw it. Let's put this movie out in the world and see if it can connect. Maybe it gets a chance to garner more awards attention than it otherwise would have during this period because we're dealing essentially with a shortened season. It's unlikely that typical Oscar fare

is going to start to come out before October at this point, with the rare exception of the Netflix movies. And that's the flip side of this too, is there, we know for a fact, and I've said this a few times now on the show, that Charlie Kaufman, Aaron Sorkin, and David Fincher are releasing movies in the next eight weeks, which is phenomenal news for this show.

And it's great for the Oscars and it's great for Netflix for every other studio. It's going to put them behind the eight ball. You know, the Aaron Sorkin movie, I read the vanity fair preview of that film, the trial of the Chicago seven. It just,

it sounds, it sounds like it should be called the trial of the Chicago seven, AKA Oscar. Like it is the most Oscar movie I've ever seen ever. I didn't like the description of the story and the way that it captures the trial in 1968 after the, the, the riots and the prosecution in Chicago at the democratic national convention is it is the most down the middle Oscar story ever told. So we're still going to get a season of

some kind that's clearly going to happen because Netflix is not going to turn off its machine. It makes no sense. Netflix is eagerly pursuing a best picture Oscar. And so they have an opportunity to do this. It's just, how does this affect every other team? Does that mean that Netflix is the New York Knicks in this case? You know, they've been behind the eight ball for years. They've had difficulties getting a look and now they have a chance really to overcome all the Eastern conference foes and, and win a best picture Oscar. I think it's, I think it's very, very possible. Yeah. The other thing to keep in mind is that we're obviously focused on Hollywood and us based films because that's where we are, but not every country is having the problems that we are right now and if this could kind of further the academy's openness to international films that that would be nice

like when i said that there were not a lot of films released that were oscar worthy i was definitely only speaking about hollywood movies so the the academy definitely has made moves towards being a more global body and if that wouldn't be the worst thing, but it wouldn't, there's an interesting wrinkle to that too, which is that when the Oscars first made their announcement and it was unclear what the globes were going to do. Some people in the critics bodies, particularly in New York and in LA were discussing openly. And in some cases, even flaunting the idea of just treating this like a traditional year and saying that for their groups, at the end of the year, they would give

awards for calendar year 2020. This change, I think, might shift some of the thinking there because this change also indicates that the studios are likely to push movies further and further into that January and February window. So it's a little unclear if we're going to even get an award season until December. I think we relaunched the Oscar show last year, the Tuesday show, on September 1st or maybe right after Labor Day last year. Does that sound right? It was Labor Day because you went to Telluride and then came back and talked about seeing I cut gems and,

and all of, all of that. What a, what a glorious film that was. It was completely overlooked by Oscar. God damn it. Um, but we're not going to have that this year.

I'm not going to tell you right. And we're not going to have that conversation. So when our conversations more specifically about the horse race and also when things are even coming out starts is, is still unknown to us. We'll just have to wait and see. Eric asks any insights on whether festivals could viably go to a virtual format just so they don't have to cancel or is that a total non-starter? They could. They certainly could

do this if they wanted to. I think that there's two issues at play here. One is the sacrifice of sponsorship dollars and whether sponsors are interested in continuing to participate and support these events if they're executed virtually as opposed to in person, where people can hobnob and there can be all sorts of hubbub about activations. And, you know, we can get people at parties so Adam Sandler can have a conversation with somebody who works at, you know, Fiji Water. You know, those are the sort of things that happen behind the scenes at festivals. And then secondarily, will filmmakers allow films to be shared for the first time virtually? Will they let people, we just saw that Cannes and Telluride

essentially canceled because they probably were not willing to, not able to convince their filmmakers to share their films before the world had seen them virtually, which is the same issue that I think we see with Tenet going on August 26th. Will there be concerns about piracy when that movie hits in France or elsewhere in Europe? There probably will be. And then how will that affect US interest in that? And I think that's a factor too for the film festival formats, not to mention obviously just the general philosophical anxiety of what is a festival. If you're just sitting in your house and watching movies on a streaming service, even if it's a protected streaming service, is that a movie festival? If it is, then I'm having a movie festival every single night in my house.

I mean, you are a little bit. I thought that there was a really interesting Richard Brody piece from a few weeks ago, and it was about the future of cinemas. And Richard Brody is obviously a critic at the New Yorker. And the piece was interesting to me for two reasons. One, because it reminded me that Richard Brody just watches movies very differently than I do, which is the mark of a good critic. He was like, Portrait of a Lady on Fire is great to see at home because of the intimacy. And I was like, wow, I completely disagree. But also that's how most people actually saw Portravely on fire. And so, and it's, that's his opinion. Anyway, but he was talking a lot about how streaming services specifically like the Criterion

channel have kind of become curators of retrospectives and really many film festivals. And so there is a way to do it at home in terms of the curation and shining light on films that otherwise, um, might not get seen. And, you know, the difference between pulling up a movie from like this, the sixties on criterion that you've never seen versus a new movie that someone whose taste you also trust tells you to watch like i think we probably could get there but financially as sean noted is that viable for the sponsorships for the filmmakers for getting the next the next film made i have no idea what's next bobby all right we've only got time for one more but i'll squeeze two into one just to cheat so this comes from slay triarchy it's a great name with new

restrictions on production and a need for safety to affect creativity, do you think we'll see a surge of, quote, bottle movies, like bottle episodes, that take place in one location with a few characters? And then from Mitch, I'm curious how you think future movies will deal with COVID. For example, if there's a scene in a restaurant,

will the waiter be wearing a mask? If the main actor walks down a busy New York City sidewalk, will they have a mask on? Hmm, interesting questions. What do you think? It's a great question. If the main actor walks down a busy New York City sidewalk, will they have a mask on? Hmm. Interesting questions. What do you think? It's a great question. To the bottle episode, one is easier because I think we already have had an example of that happening in quarantine, which is the Sam Levinson and Zendaya and John David Washington made a movie in an architecturally significant home, which is just my favorite phrase

to have in a movie description or really in any other content. And following COVID protocols, and it has been kind of compared to Marriage Story, but it seems like it'll be one location, domestic drama, which for the purposes of this example counts as a bottle episode. I bet a lot more of that will happen

in the next few months. I bet a lot more of that will happen in the next few months. The masks thing and kind of how we represent COVID is interesting to me. I mean, there's how to represent COVID, and I assume that there will be various genre and historical films and paranoia films made about this moment in time. We are living in a historically significant time. So that makes more sense to me. But will masks be in movies going forward is like really ultimately an existential question of like, what is the new normal? And like movies will reflect how we are living in the world. And are we wearing masks in a year or two years or three years. You know, like I don't know the answer to that. So that last question kind of remains a to be seen for me.

I can say from my experience, very limited experience and meetings I've been in on the documentary side of the company where we work, we've talked about this a lot and whether or not masks and distancing and COVID-19 in general should be reflected in the films that we're working on. And almost to a person that I've spoken with, whether it be filmmakers, line producers, creative executives, researchers, almost everyone has said, I really don't want to be reminded of COVID-19 when making this or watching this. I don't want to feel like I'm consuming quarantine material, even though it's content I'm likely to consume in quarantine.

And so there's going to be a little bit of a creative crisis. I think there will be a lot of stories, like you said, Amanda, that are in single locations with small casts. That seems to be, we know Michael Bay is producing a movie like that right now. If Michael Bay is doing it and Zendaya and Sam Levinson are doing it, that means we're running the gamut creatively. And there will only be more. We talked about The Conjuring last week on the rewatchables. And Bill was asking, why do haunted house movies persist? Why are they so significant in the history of the horror movie? And there's one of the major reasons for it is they're easy to make because they have one location and movies with one location will always get made. They're always manageable financially. Most of the independent cinema

that we think about when we think about the history of that sort of category is made in these single or two location spaces. John Cassavetes made so many of his early movies are only in one apartment or two apartments or one nightclub in one apartment. And so I think we're going to see a lot of that stuff. I'm a little bit more dubious though, about whether or not we're going to see a lot of masks in movies, whether or not, you know, creative people are going to want to spend their time, not just behind the camera, but in front of the camera, reflecting that new normal that you're talking about, Amanda. I just don't know, guess is no that's it that's all the questions we have it's an

incredibly sour note to go out on is there a happier note that we could have gone out on that i could have included about the future of movies which is what you prompted the listeners yeah andy in the uk andy in the uk is going to get to go to a theater following all local regulations to be as safe as possible, Andy. Andy gets to see Tenet on August 26th. So that's one positive thing for one person. And as you noted, Bobby, this is a community at the big picture. So congratulations to Andy. Amanda, I want to throw something to you right now live on the show.

So you and I are both reading Oliver Stone's memoir, Chasing the Light. I've been rewatching all of Oliver Stone's movies, which I think I mentioned on a previous show. And in fact, I tried to prompt the audience months ago into an Oliver Stone episode. I want to do an Oliver Stone episode. I'm interested in Oliver Stone. I think he is an imperfect artist, but a fascinating artist, complicated human being. His book is really quite well-written, though he's certainly, he's going through his journey of life. That's all I can say about the book.

I'm having the time of my life. Can I just, can I spoil one thing about the book? Certainly. I went to the beach yesterday with my husband and we socially distanced and I was reading this book and I just announced to him, I just got to the part where Oliver Stone admitted that he voted for Reagan in 1980. So there we go. This book is a journey. It's fascinating.

I really want to do this episode with you, but I don't know if we should do this episode. What do you think? Do you mean like morally uh intellectually um from the friendship of from the perspective of friendship you know if we're gonna if we're gonna ride together wearing diapers should we talk about the complex political moral tales of oliver stone yes no i okay number one i just like i have been preparing for this because i thought we were doing this so i've been re-watching all the movies and I'm reading the book. And I think the book is absolutely fascinating. And in terms of a, I think it's really well-written and as you know, I love a celebrity

narrative and just the construct of a mind is fascinating. And it's a great insight into boomer culture right now. And I also think, you know, how we think politically and the political and artistic forces that shaped our generation. I feel like it's fascinating. I don't think that it's going to be like a hundred percent endorsement of every single thing that Oliver Stone says in his book. I mean, I have some thoughts, but don't, I mean, don't you think it is such an interesting journey of the mind? I couldn't have put it better myself. It's an interesting book. And for anybody who's interested and interested in the conversation we're going to have on the show, I would recommend checking the book out. I think even if you don't even like Oliver Stone's movies, it is exactly

what Amanda said, which is a window into how a generation of theoretically, ostensibly revolutionary figures made their way into mainstream Hollywood and then whether or not they were able to introduce the ideas that were meaningful to them. And Stone in particular, as a veteran of the Vietnam War, has a very complex, paradoxical point of view on the American character. And speaking of filmmakers who come from that generation, what an elegant segue to my interview with Ron Howard, a man of significantly less controversy, but no less interesting. So let's go to my chat with him

right now. Ron Howard, thank you so much for being here. I'm honored. It's a pleasure. Nice to talk to you. So, Ron, since 2013, you've made four documentaries. And I was hoping you could help me understand what got you so excited about the form in the last 10 years. I've always admired documentary filmmaking and filmmakers. And I've been reluctant to attempt it. You know, I remain really busy with my scripted work as a director and a producer. I imagine entertainment is sort of an ever-growing production company. And, you know, I care about it.

But it's always been a bit of an itch. You know, there was a time in my life where I think if I had not succeeded having a sort of an adult career, either as an actor or a director, I thought I would become a journalist or, you know, kind of a high school English teacher slash basketball coach or something like that. And those are sort of my two areas of interest away from all this. And the more I began delving the research and understand what digging through those situations and characters and, you know, and details around these stories, how fascinating it was. I also found myself really benefiting from watching documentaries,

you know, around the subject. There were these really interesting limitations that they had to confront because they couldn't, you know, they couldn't stage scenes. They couldn't necessarily say exactly what they wanted to say, especially if they didn't have a narrator. But they would do sort of interesting things that, musically, editorially, that would sometimes even inspire me.

But I was always impressed. And it just kind of deepened my interest in documentaries. But I wasn't really willing to jump in. Brian Grazer produced a couple of documentaries. One was about wrestling called Beyond the Mat. The other one was about Inside Deep Throat uh and really had a good creative experience i you know helped out pitched in saw cuts and and offered a little you know an opinion here there but i wasn't really involved but um you know he did it and every once in a while an opportunity would come my way. This is turning into a hell of a long answer.

They won't all be like this. But but it and I would I'd always turn them down because I felt like I didn't have time. I just couldn't do it. I was committed to scripted projects. But now my kids were grown. I had a little more discretionary time. And I was I'm on the board of the Jacob Burns Film Center in Westchester County.

And I love it there. And I happened to be at a board meeting. And on the same day I was going to the board meeting, one of the founders was the late, great Jonathan Demme, a director who won an Oscar and, you know, and many awards for scripted, his scripted work, but also tremendous documentarian, both political, music, you know, and a remarkable guy. Very gracious, very brilliant guy. day of this board meeting, Brian Grazer called me up and said, Jay-Z, Brian had worked with Jay-Z before on the American Gangster soundtrack. Jay-Z and a producing partner, a guy named Steve Stout,

they want to do a behind the scenes documentary about this music festival that Jay-Z's curating in Philadelphia. And, you know, they're actually curious whether you'd want to direct it. But it happened in two weeks. They just got this idea. What do you think? And I said, well, God, I don't know. You know, I really don't. I was editing Rush, the movie Rush was my latest and I was working on it. And, um, and I, this is going

to happen over a three-day weekend. I probably Labor Day, I think. And, um, my family was going to be out of town, but I was stuck there working on Rush. I went to the board meeting and I saw Jonathan Demme and afterwards I said, Jonathan, I have a chance to do a documentary. You've done so many great documentaries, large and small. What do you think? And he did not hesitate. He said, you've got to do it. And I said, yeah, but do I have time? I'm, I'm in post on rush. He said, that's the beauty of all of this is the docs unfold in their own timetable, you know, and, and when you can't physically be there for an interview, you know, you can send, you know, a field producer can go and cover a few. It's really about understanding the story you're going for and it's, and, and really post-production and you're going to love it. Um, and you don't

have to give up your day job. Uh, just go in there with a point of view and an idea as to what you think it is and be prepared to be wrong and discover what the real story is. If you do that, you're going to have a great, great creative experience. I mean, uh, he couldn't have said it more succinctly. And I found that experience to be great. I said yes, because my family was out of town. It was just a short shoot. I threw myself into it. I took the leap. And I was very pleasantly surprised how much of myself I was able to put into that film. That just opened me up to the possibility. And then other ideas started coming my way.

You mentioned that there are some limitations around making some of these films. And when you were watching them around some of the true life narrative features you've done, you noticed that. But are there things that you can do in a documentary that you can't do in a narrative feature? Well, the expectations from the audience are very different. So really, information is king. And it's sort of the reverse with a movie based on real events. It's the emotion, the big thematics, and the narrative drive. They're king. A movie is meant to grab you, hold you, and with a good tight grip and immerse you. Whereas a documentary audience is there because they're curious. So it can be a little more of an exploration. You can digress.

You want to. And so that's a liberty. Still, I found that my experience in shaping a scripted narrative, focusing on those themes, keeping the central ideas moving with the subplots and ideas sort of satelliting around them as the story unfolds, that's all been really useful in terms of shaping the documentary narratives as the narratives would finally appear. Now, I didn't know, there was no story to me with the Made in America, the Jay-Z doc. I thought we were just covering the act. But a story did begin to emerge.

So my point of view about it going in was, well, let's make this be about sort of like Robert Altman's Nashville. Let's get some different teams. Let's cover this from a few different perspectives and understand what this, this festival, this was the maiden voyage, the initial festival. What does it mean? What does it mean to Jay-Z? But Jay-Z didn't want the film to be about him. And I respected that, but what does it, what does it mean to everybody? So we followed a woman who had a food truck and was kind of on the brink of either being able to keep her food truck or not, depending on kind of how well this weekend went.

A young girl who was hoping to get in on this sort of amateur window that they had a kind of a contest. Uh, a hundred year old lady who was a neighbor who was annoyed by all the noise, uh, hard hat guy who was, who was there as a worker, you know, uh, just, uh, put, you know, putting up, building the scaffolding and the stages and then tearing it down. Uh, the mayor, I mean, we've covered all these stories and plus a lot of artists. And i just began to see a pattern in what they were all saying that the festival meant and it did keep coming back to jay-z whether he liked it or not it just kept coming back to his spirit his message his sort of leadership by example um and more than by words, which was about activation and actualization and having the passion, the commitment, and the balls to go for it.

And it was very American. It was very kind of pull yourself up by your bootstrap straps, basic stuff. And yet so many people of different ages and different ethnicities, they were, they were kind of embracing this message. I thought it was really interesting. And ultimately we just sort of understood, started to identify the journey that led certain artists to this place and also certain individuals who weren't artists, but for which this was

an important, maybe an important kind of pivot point or something. And that became that story. And when the opportunity came my way for Beatles, days a week. Um, it was a guy who'd been involved in rush. Nigel Sinclair, who's an outstanding, um, documentary producer, um, a lot of great stuff, Dylan. And, uh, I think he did the who and George Harrison. He's great. Great. And, um, he liked that documentary made in America and he brought me the possibility of at least having a discussion, um, with Apple, the Beatles Apple, uh, and, and, and, and their team about possibly doing a documentary,

but it could only be about the touring years. That was the limitation. And I did that and thought about it. You know, I'm a Beatles fan, but I'm not, you know, I'm not encyclopedic about them at all. And I thought, oh, wow. Well, that's a big limitation to just tackle just the touring years. You know, everybody's curious about everything that happens after that, too.

And as I began to learn more and more about it, I said, well, this was a, they sort of ran a gauntlet here during that period of time. And then I started to think of the movie Das Boot, one of my favorite movies, which is about a German U-boat trying to get from one place to another and their sort of brotherhood. And the fact that they really don't know what's going on. They don't know who's winning the war. They don't know where they stand. And all they know is death charges are coming their way and they're dealing with their own fragile emotions and everything. It's a very powerful human drama. And, and, and I just thought, wow, the,

these guys were kind of in kind of a submarine, a bubble. And they were, they were, they knew what they wanted. They, they, they, they wanted to get there, but all this stuff was going on that they never could have anticipated. And what was that like? You know, and, and that wound up being the the sort of the the guiding structural principle and uh you know and it worked it worked it's interesting you know that tapestry approach that you took on made in america i feel like is is rendered here in in rebuilding

paradise too where you're you know you're creating you know, you're showing the diaspora of all the people that were experienced this tragedy. What relationship did you have, if any, to Paradise before this happened? And why did you jump so quickly to cover this moment? Well, for a couple of reasons. My mother-in-law had lived in Paradise for the last five years of her life. So I'd been to Paradise a of times visiting her also have a lot of relatives on Cheryl's side on my wife's side, but really close, you know, people I love living in Redding, um, which is not far, you know, about 90 minutes away. And Redding had been through a terrible fire that they called the car fire. And and and then just and I've been we'd been on pins and needles, worried about our family. Everybody was OK. Nobody lost a business or a home.

But, you know, it was sort of touch and go. And and then and then I started hearing about Paradise and seeing these images. And Louisa Veles, who was my assistant for, I don't know, four decades, we were watching it together, some of these images. And she said, you know, that could be a film, rebuilding Paradise. I mean, how do you even come back from that? That's a documentary. And I immediately picked up the phone and called Justin Wilkes and Sarah Bernstein, who run the documentary group for Imagine. And I said, Rebuilding Paradise, what do you think?

I've been wanting to make a Verite doc. So, you know, because after The Beatles' Eight Days a Week, I did Pavarotti again with Nigel Sinclair. That was a story that we delved into, but I sort of knew what we were doing. This, I was curious about the journalist in me or the wannabe journalist in me was curious about covering a story that we, you know, that we would not know the outcome of and understanding what that would be like. And Justin said, let's get a small team to go. When can you go? And I said, well, I can, I can go in about 10 days. I can't go now. And they said, we'll send somebody now and then we'll send somebody back with you in 10 days and we'll see

what we get. You know, it's worth, it's worth investing in. And that was it. And I, I, I went, we began meeting people, um, who we would continue to follow some who were fascinating and helpful, but we didn't ultimately make them storylines, but there was so much cooperation there. And, and yet I was, uh, um, you know, pretty shattered by it because the, you know, images, not even the images in our documentary, you know, can do that kind of devastation true justice. And when you're standing in the middle of it and you can smell it and you feel it. It does vibrate in a way. And I found it almost like a pulsating thing. I mean, maybe like a heartbeat, I don't know. But it was unlike anything I'd ever experienced. And yet you could begin to identify the people who had just checked out versus some people who had a stake in this area and were, and were going to do everything they could to, to, to stay. And that was sort of part of their

mantra was, was immediately got to find a way to stay. What do you say to people when you ask permission to portray this moment of devastation and suffering in their life? How do you, how do you ask for that? Well, you, um, introduce yourself, you know, and you've got a camera crew, you gotta, you know, I had a little camera myself. I'm not a very good operator, but I've got a few shots in the movie. And hi, you know, I'm Ron. We're making a documentary. You know, do you mind if we talk, can we talk to you?

And most people said yes. Of course, they were used to it at that point. Part of the story that I wanted to tell and I told them is, you know, And most people said yes. Of course, they were used to it at that point. Part of the story that I wanted to tell and I told them is, you know, I want to understand the fire, obviously, and what you've all been through. But I also really want to understand what happens when the media leaves, when the cameras go away. And it's not a headline story it's your story and um and um so we're going to keep coming back and i'm sure that they didn't necessarily believe this but you know they cooperated um and uh you know and then your producer gets their gets their name and information so that you know if they'll they're really willing to sign a release later and things like that but but uh we had tremendous

cooperation then you know so i went a couple of times sarah bernstein went from imagine then zan parker and liz morhaime um producers kind of took over and they started going very regularly. And I went again a time or two, but I would often, they'd even like face FaceTime me when they were getting ready to interview somebody who I already knew or somebody that, you know, that, um, kind of wanted to know I actually cared, uh, about the story the story. I would do that. But the job became much more just sort of interfacing with them. They would come and go, but very regularly. And they are the ones that really made friends.

They really bonded with the subjects in the film in a powerful way. And they're documentary veterans. And when I was there, I would ask some questions, but I actually found that Zan was better because they're journalists. I mean, you know, I get intimidated or, you know, I back away from the difficult moment a little bit too readily. And in a very gracious, humanistic way, they know to dig deeper and they know how to do it. So, you know, I'm learning a lot from from working with these people. The doc community is, you know, it's inhabited by really remarkable, interesting individuals.

The cinematographers, the producers, you know, the editors. It's a slightly different breed. And I really enjoy their company. Was there a hope when you first set out to start making this that there would be any kind of justice or restitution for the residents? Or was the just the purpose to kind of portray the attempt to heal and rebuild? It's really just to observe, you know, whether there would even be an attempt. And and and by the way, there are a lot of people, not a lot, a few people who we interviewed and wanted to find. But by the time we got back around to them, they had gone.

But no, I mean, I don't think it was ever our intention. I don't think we believed that in a year you would really know. In fact, we probably wound up seeing more definitively kind of the direction the town was going to go than we might have expected we would. Things moved a little quicker. But so, no, we weren wanted to share. And it became very apparent that, you know, those people who were in a difficult circumstance before a catastrophe like that, um, were, um, you know, um, additionally punished and, and, and, and that's a very slippery slope um the um people who are highly productive there's suddenly a brand new definition as to what productivity means and it's not really the

kind of productivity that enhances society or builds their you know their their the strength of their family it really does become a kind of survival. Even if that survival in this day and age means coping with bureaucracy and trying to identify, you know, what the various agencies, whether they're federal or state or local, you know, can really do. And in fact, it begins to beg the question, what should a citizen expect of, of, of, of these agencies? How much help do they really want? And a lot of the same people who would say, you know, I don't need much help. I don't want much help. Probably would, probably would speak a little differently today. And so it was important to see these people who I understand so well,

because they're just, look, they're also a lot like my extended family from the Midwest. It's a similar type of spirit and kind of strength of mind and character and so forth, that spirit of individual, you know, sort of self-determination and self-sufficiency really gets challenged at a time like this. And that becomes an emotional issue. That becomes a challenge to kind of their sense

of what they even stand for, who they believe they are. And so I was very grateful to the people who allowed us to follow along and understand the fallout and the difficulty along know along with um um what was achieved which was a lot you know so many of your films are very inspiring stories and they're they closely follow people who achieve something extraordinary and your docs thus far have been enthusiastic celebrations in some ways you know the first three about musicians this story is different and it is inspiring, but you know,

that bureaucracy that you're talking about and some of the kind of corporate concern in this film, like, I'm curious if that made you maybe a little bit more cynical having such an up-close look at something like that. Well, it's always disappointing when you, you know, when you believe there's a safety net or a system in place that's meant to be fair or, or effective. And it's, it's, and it's, it's less than you, than you wish it was, you know, I mean, it's just, it's disappointing. I mean, I'm old enough and I've seen enough that I can't say I was shocked, but I'm not a cynic. And I, you know, I am an optimist.

And so I tend to see the silver linings in things. But if you're a storyteller, even if you're interested in ultimately building your narratives to a place where, you know, an audience can take away the possibility of hope, you have to earn that. And, you know, even in a broad, zany comedy, you kind of have to earn it by showing the pitfalls. You have to earn it by showing the pitfalls. You have to understand that. Well, in a film like, you know, of course, I wasn't interested in hiding anything in Rebuilding Paradise. We were there to observe and share. That's it. Again, a different kind of promise. That's the entertainment value, because an audience member is there to be enlightened and is curious enough to start watching. You want to be mindful to be a good communicator and a good storyteller

and hold their attention as best you can. But again, more important is to, to, to, you know, to, to try to actually, um, satisfy their curiosity. You know, so if you're not coming up with answers, you've got to at least be probing around with, you know, in the right areas with the right questions so that they, maybe they can arrive at an opinion, if not, if not a concrete answer. Um so that was the goal here. And I was very grateful that there were some threads that I could identify as inspiring. I wasn't sure there would be any, really. I'm interested in the incredible amount of footage that you had.

You have all of this first person POV stuff at the beginning of the film that I assume is largely captured by residents of yes the town and and then obviously you got your team spent a lot of time there how did you go through all of that archival footage how do you decide what should be in in a movie like this when I got got there initially, one of the first things that I saw at the police station was some body cam footage that one of the officers shared. And it was, you know, it was riveting, it was revealing, it was raw, and it was entirely human. And I asked if we could gain

access and they said well we'd have to check with the department but yeah i mean they'd been sharing some with the news media um and uh and then i just started asking people if they if they videoed any of it and or people started volunteering like this is what it looked like. I said, well, can we can we have access to that for our film? And, you know, a couple of spikes and another really good Katrina documentary, Hurricane Katrina documentary had made good use of video footage. And so I knew we wanted to collect it. Wasn't sure how we would use it. But if people willing to share i thought we should you know collect it and have a look so then uh zan and liz i think went on facebook and now by now people knew we were there and we kept coming back and said if you're willing to share footage please do also some local documentarians would actually shot some um uh you know, some, some, you know, really beautiful and, and, and, you know, fully professional footage of the, of the, of the fire, you know, they were willing to license us some, some footage.

And, and then there was news footage. So we started collecting all of that. And early on, it became an idea. It was kind of my idea. I think we should try to tell the story with the footage, you know, and, you know,abe-Milmore and Gladys Murphy, were incredible collecting this footage and building it. And they began to say, I don't think you're going to need any narrator. Well, we knew you weren't going to have a narrator. I don't think you're going to need the news footage too much. We have radio footage. We have first responders, radio squawk and things like that. But lots of times the people are talking.

They're kind of narrating their own story as they're recording this. And they just started collecting it. And I mean, it was a lot of hours. And they just started collecting it, you know, along with a research team. And putting it into sort of bundles, I think I first saw just snippets from various bundles, you know, whether it was like on the road or whether it was, you know, evacuating a house or the hospital, you know, they just would collect whatever they could get. And and they began building it. And I'm telling you, that sequence, as remarkable as it is, as harrowing as it is. I mean, I made the movie Backdraft. We had a lot of fire in that movie. It's nothing. It's nothing. This is the most harrowing thing that I've ever sequenced. I think I've ever been involved with. And, um, and it was longer

formed a little bit differently, but basically they built it. They just built it. And we then said, you know, we were thinking maybe it would be, you know, and and the first time we looked at it i think it was 15 minutes i think it's about nine now maybe 10 but you mean that opening segment of the film yeah that opening segment of the film which really puts you in the fire um it was important to me because i as we got into the human side of the story, I just wanted audiences to have a sense from jump, from get-go, from the get-go, you know, what these people had endured, what they'd been around. But we just looked at each other and we said, this is the way the movie should start and let's not rush it. And that was, you know, that was the producers and myself and the editors. And then I got the idea that, well, as I started to watch the storylines come together, the individuals that we were, you know, began focusing on, which kept distilling down.

I mean, for the first six months, there were a lot of people we were following, but it started to focus. And I said, you know, I think every once in a while, we just need to go back and we don't need to linger, but we just, we just need to remind people of that sort of raw visceral, um, in that raw visceral way that that footage gives us, you know, what, what they not so long ago had, had, had, had been through. But as with almost any movie, you know, the, the, the real painful thing is, is, is all the stuff you have to leave out. Because there were some great threads, interesting stories, you know, I mean, we never got a complete version that sort of could live in the movie but you know the churches meant a lot there and accomplished a lot of good things and um you know that's the thing about the

documentaries is especially if you're not having a narrator um you you ultimately have to um kind of resign yourself to the fact that if you can't get somebody to say it, or if the footage really doesn't exist, you know, you can shape sequences to try to imply something you can piece, you can juxtapose comments that people make to, to, to try to, you know, um, um, lead, you know, lead an audience to understand something that you think you've, you've understood and you want to share,

but you can't invent these scenes and you can't say things that, that you, you sort of don't have. And, uh, so, uh, that's, that's, that's the discipline. But for example, um, I was editing, I was simultaneously shooting hillbilly Elegy, which comes out late in the year for Netflix. She's based on a memoir. So it's a, it's another, another, you know, scripted movie based on real events. Amy Adams and Glenn Close.

And I was spending for, there was a moment where I was kind of moving back and forth between the two editing rooms kind of almost daily. And, uh, it was, uh, we were still shooting paradise of course. And I, I did get back one more time, but I was, you know, I was often on the phone, but, but we're getting the footage in and beginning to understand what the story was. It was about a year ago, about yeah uh 13 about not 10 11 months ago and uh and we had a problem in with in a section of of uh of hillbilly elegy that i was

kind of kicking myself that i hadn't done something with the script or staged it or shot it differently and uh and i literally came up with a doc filmmakers solution uh which was to sort of build these other images kludge them together and and just kind of you know make an inference just just suggest this to the audience in a way and and uh um it was uh you know it it worked and and i was so that i feel like i'm getting a lot out of moving back and forth between these two worlds just as a as a creative person. And it's very exciting for me. That's fascinating. I mean, I'm glad you mentioned Backdraft. I was going to ask you about that. I just have a couple couple of quick questions for you. So everyone knows you've pretty much

accomplished everything someone who wanted a career in Hollywood could have Oscars and box office success and people love your movies and they don't forget them. And you really had a quite a legendary career. So I'm just kind of curious what animates the decision to take something on, you know, you meant you told the story about rebuilding paradise and just sitting there with your assistant and having the idea, but how do you say this is what I want to spend my year on for Hillbilly Elegy or anything else? Well, it often boils down to a kind of litmus test. You explore the material, you sort of explore your relationship to it. And by the way, that can be very different. You know, I did a movie, The Grinch with Jim Carrey. I'd always kind of wanted to do a Christmas story. My mother loved Christmas. She was very ill at that time. I liked the idea of celebrating Christmas in a way. But mostly, I really wanted to watch Jim Carrey. I wanted to be a part of Jim Carrey, creating virtually an animated character in the flesh because that's what the Grinch needed to be and I just felt as a creative experience it was going to be something

that I would regret missing so that's ultimately the the litmus test is I explore I understand what it is that attracts me whether it's a personal link or just a professional niche that I want to scratch professionally. Then, ultimately, it's do or die. If somebody else does this, am I going to kick myself? Whether it turns out to be good or bad, am I going to be disappointed in myself that I didn't do it when I had an opportunity to? And if the answer to that is, yeah, I will, then I do it. I'm always aware of the risk, especially because I work in a wide variety of kinds of projects. And I generally don't grab things that are sort of sure bets because I feel like those tend to, they run a risk of looking pretty stale.

So even though I've been very commercial, many of the projects that were the most commercial were projects that when we started them, you know, they're not avant-garde, they're not art house uh you know they're hollywood movies but they're they're not um you know there's a there's they're a little bit of a high wire act um and uh um and so i i feel like that's the way to maybe get at something that you know that really is special and and different you know and uh so I'm always interested in the challenge, but I've reached a point in my career now where it's really almost entirely about the sort of narrative thematics. What's offered here? What are we saying? Who's saying it? What set of characters are saying it? Am I going to learn something working with these particular characters to try to tell this story? And do I think it's going to be worth people's time? I don't, I never know about commerciality and that's changing so much anyway, because it's, you know, streamers

and box office and who knows, but you're, you are, I'm always feeling that once I make a decision as to what the story is going to be, what story I'm going to work on, that that's my kind of personal statement. And from that point forward, I really am working to try to maximize the potential of that idea in service of the audience. So I'm trying to build a bridge between that idea and the audience. Not necessarily that everybody's going to like it, because not every, you know, if your subject's a little tougher, it's not about liking it. It's about, but it is about that project resonating with you in a way that makes you glad you took the time to watch. Ron, we end every episode of this show by asking filmmakers,

what's the last great thing they've seen have you been watching anything great in quarantine uh normal people normal people i thought was yes loved it tell me about what you liked about it i loved it as well um i loved it walked a line between absolute honesty um and uh to sometimes a an uncomfortable degree uh and and and yet i'm a romantic and i found it romantic um and uh uh and i so i it was it was tremendous character work because you know the writing the directing and the acting was so honest and detailed and specific. And, and yet, you know, it did that job. I was always curious at the end of an episode. I wanted to see the next one at the end of a scene. I wondered what was going to happen next.

So in its own very delicate, but, but very elegant way, it was, it was a kind of a page turner. Uh, and, uh, and, um, you know, so I, I've seen some, some, some good stuff here while, while, um, sequestered away. Um,

but, um, I think that leaps out in my mind. Oh, I'm also loving Rami. I've just started Rami, but love, Cheryl,

we are loving Rami. Uh, I'm only in season one and I hear season two is even better, but, uh, Rami's great. I'm just thinking it's so smart, funny, and yet, you know, utterly accessible and human. Two great Hulu picks. Ron, thank you so much for doing this and for your films. I appreciate it. You bet. Thanks. Nice talking to you. Take care. Thanks again to Ron Howard. Thanks of course,

to Amanda Dobbins and Bobby Wagner. Thank you for listening to this episode of the big picture. Please tune in later this week when maybe we'll be talking about the great Oliver Stone. See you then.