The Big Picture - 'Ad Astra' Is a Masterpiece, and Brad Pitt Has Won 2019. Plus: James Gray on Making His Space Epic. | The Big Picture

Episode Date: September 20, 2019

Sean and Amanda dive deep into the career of Brad Pitt by sharing their top five favorite performances and examining his work in two of the year's best movies, 'Once Upon a Time ... in Hollywood' and James Gray's new space drama 'Ad Astra' (0:38). Then, Gray joins Sean to talk about his long career, working on a bigger canvas than ever before, and the perilous future of movies (48:47). Hosts: Sean Fennessey and Amanda Dobbins Guest: James Gray Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What's up, guys? It's Liz Kelley, and welcome to the Ringer Podcast Network. We hope you enjoyed listening to Break Stuff, the story of Woodstock 99 on Luminary. Now continuing with our 99 theme, I wanted to let you guys know we've got all new episodes of The Rewatchables 1999 starting back up right now. Since we've returned, we have rewatched Eyes Wide Shut and Election, and up next is Never Been Kissed and many more 1999 classics. So make sure to check out The Rewatchables 1999 on Luminary. I'm Sean Fennessey. I'm Amanda Dobbin. And this is The Big Picture, a conversation show about the man, the myth, the legend, Brad Pitt.

Later on in this episode, I have a long and fascinating conversation with really one of the Hall of Fame members of The Big Picture, writer-director James Gray. He's got a new movie set in space called Ad Astra starring Brad Pitt, who is perhaps our greatest living movie star. Amanda, you and I are here to talk about the top five Brad Pitt performances. And there's a lot going on with Brad this year. I would argue that Brad is winning 2019 right now. I'm with you. As long as we don't term it a comeback, because you know what, Brad Pitt has always been with us as this podcast is going to explore. And I really resent the younger members of The Ringer who are trying to put this as a comeback. It's just, it's another level of Brad Pitt, you know?

We're on the journey with him. Why do you think that is? Because I feel like as we looked, as I look back on his films and his work, and you may have some extracurricular work in your list, he is really consistently at least interesting and often good and he's made a few bombs a few stinkers in his career but for the most part he's he's often in good movies and often a good celebrity in that way so why would someone think that he needs a comeback well he

hasn't been in movies as much he hasn't starred in two movies in the same year in like a decade probably. And he has, with a couple notable exceptions, Allied, which I think we would all like to forget. We'll be skipping Allied on this podcast. roles in movies that he has produced. 12 Years a Slave, The Big Short. And he has been being the producer plan B guy. And so as a leading man and a movie star, we don't see him as often as we used to. So that's possibly a part of it. Also, people are just used to having someone in their face 24 7. So if someone takes some time away for themselves, apparently that means they need to come back. It's infuriating to me. More power to them. Last week, we did an episode of tracking the career arc of Jennifer Lopez. I'll be honest, one of the challenges of that episode for me was not just talking about the fact that I think Jennifer Lopez is really hot

and that has a certain kind of charge to it. Sure. We did talk about that. We did. And that's okay because she is extremely beautiful. And she uses that in her performances as does Brad Pitt. That's why I bring it up because I think that they share a self-knowledge of their attractiveness, of their energy against us in a lot of ways to have us bend the knee to them. And tell me a little bit about when you first came across Brad, the icon, because I think a lot of people have signal moments with him where they have been turned on by a young movie star. So what is your intro to Brad? This is so weird. And it's not on my top five, but my first Brad Pitt was definitely A River

Runs Through It oh man because we read it in high school speaking of fathers and sons someone was like here watch this movie and I was like who is this unbelievably beautiful person and also Brad Pitt is in his 20s in that movie and I was like in middle school in that movie so the age difference really works he I watched it again last night and I was like wow Brad Pitt in that movie. So the age difference really works. I watched it again last night and I was like, wow, Brad Pitt looks really young. And this is a little spooky. But yeah, so I knew about Heartthrob Brad Pitt, which is kind of like early 90s, obviously Thelma and Louise, River Runs Through It, Legend of the Fall. And, you know, going back,

I think obviously those movies use him well and that he is like unbelievably attractive and that is like a thesis of all those movies but as as performances are a little flat yeah he hadn't quite figured out the essence of himself at that stage of things and I feel like the the other performances true romance California that are happening around the same time are a little bit closer to the person he's going to become. They're noisier and showier. River Runs Through It is one of the most placid, static. It's so boring.

And it's such a riff on. Why did I have to read it in high school? I don't know. And I think it's clearly Robert Redford identifying Brad Pitt as his heir and wanting to put him in a position, but also making his movie slightly dull, almost maybe just a dull Brad Pitt's future in a way. Do you like fishing? I like the idea of being able to say I'm a guy who likes to fish. There is kind of a thematic, like the stillness and the patience of fishing required are things that Brad Pitt is good at? Well, it's fly fishing in that movie. It's not the same. You know, I grew up on Long

Island. You go out on the dock and you can just fish for bluefish and it takes 45 minutes and then you come back in. Fly fishing, that's a five hour, nine hour excursion into the water. Not for me. At some point, you're just like sitting alongside a body of water waiting for a fish to bite something. To me, it's all the same. Anyway. It's an interesting movie, though're just like sitting alongside a body of water waiting for a fish to bite something. It's to me, it's all the same anyway. It's an interesting movie, though, to talk about as a that's probably close to when I first saw him, too, because I also did not see Thelma and Louise until a little bit later in life. Honestly, I wasn't there when that movie first came out. And I do recall River and Stuart having quite a run on HBO as we were growing up. And River and Stuart has a little bit in common with Ad

Astra, his new movie, you know, a movie about a guy trying to forge his own path and figure out who he is in the face of his father's shadow. And I wanted to know what you thought before we get into the top fives about Ad Astra without spoiling a movie that I think in some ways is sort of unspoilable. I was very moved by it, even though I am not a father or a son, which is it's it's clearly about that. It is also about loneliness and trying to connect with people as Brad Pitt has been on quite a press tour talking about that. I thought as a movie about Brad Pitt, it was fascinating. And there are a few scenes featuring Brad Pitt just kind of having some emotional moments or revelations or meltdowns, as the case may be, on screen that were unlike anything I've ever seen from him.

And I was just like, holy shit, I can't believe I'm watching this. And at one point, I remember thinking to myself, have I ever seen Brad Pitt cry before? And you have in movies, but there is one scene in particular. I don't want to spoil it, but it's him in a microphone. And I was just like, this is possibly some of the best three minutes

of Brad Pitt I've ever seen on screen. It's a showcase and it's an interesting movie. The movie attracts a character named Roy McBride, who Pitt plays, who is an astronaut, who is also the son of a very famous astronaut played by Tommy Lee Jones, who has gone off to an excursion to a far off planet in search of life. And Roy is, I guess, platooned into a role in a rescue mission of sorts. But the movie doesn't really have the kind of shape or beats of a traditional sci-fi adventure movie. It's a lot more still. It must be a fairly short script because there's not a

lot of dialogue. It does have three or four, particularly for James Gray movie, whiz-bang set pieces that are kind of amazing. That gives it some of the distinction of a science fiction movie, but for the most part, it is this meditative character study about a guy who's alone. Who's alone and asking himself, are we all alone? How does one know thyself? How does one know where we come from and who we are and why we are? And it's just an unusual and fascinating big top movie. And I think one of the things that Pitt has done for the last five or six years especially is essentially use his power, his stardom, his wealth, his charisma, his intrigue

to get movies like this made. I don't think this movie happens without a star of the order of Brad Pitt. And the truth is that there are not really very many stars of the order of Brad Pitt anymore. Do you think that people are going to respond to this movie? That's a great question. I have obviously been consuming the Brad Pitt press tour, which has been quite extensive, which is really interesting because this is, as you said, it's not a small movie. It's actually a really expansive movie. And there are those set pieces. And I thought kind of the world building of space that they do is pretty remarkable. The production design is incredible. James Gray, please come design our podcast studios. I was just so distracted by the beauty of this modern,

which honestly, Brad Pitt loves architecture. Maybe Brad Pitt designed the podcast studio. Brad Pitt, please come design our podcast studio. That sounds great. I'm in. So there's a lot there. It's a rich text, but it is also quiet, thoughtful, meditative, as you said. And Brad Pitt has just been on NFL on Sunday being like, hey, watch the Saints and also come see Ad Astra. And I do think that there is a disconnect between what maybe someone thinks of when they think of Brad Pitt space movie and the experience of Ad Astra. So I think it's hard to leave that

movie and be unmoved. I do think expectations will be confused for some people. I think you're right about that, especially because of the way that the movie is marketed to some audiences who are expecting perhaps a big space fight. And there is some fighting in space, but maybe not enough to satisfy fans who are checking out Falcon Saints on a Sunday afternoon. Should we go into our top fives? Are you ready? Are you ready to talk about what makes Brad Pitt such a special actor? Yes, I'd love to. Okay. So for those of you who've never heard of Top 5 Podcast, it's very simple. We list five movies and we talk about why we like them. In the event that one of us has a similar movie but at a different space, we'll identify, oh, Amanda's number four is my number two.

We're going to start, of course, at number five. Osborne Cox. What's your number five Brad Pitt performance? Hello, it's Osborne Cox. Who the fuck are you? What documents are you talking about? Burn after reading. Oh, wow.

All right, we're already going there. I'm ready to have that conversation. It's not on my list. The bureau chief in Belgrade we all call Slovak the butcher. He had very little report with his staff and his dispatches. Rapport. Very little rapport with his staff and his dispatches. Rapport. Very little rapport with his staff. I went through, you know,

the Stations of the Cross making this list, as I do every single time I do one of these. I know it's boring to hear about at this point, but at first I was doing Editor Brain and being like, I will make a good list that is representative of a career and has like a clear idea and shows like Brad Pitt moving through time or whatever,

which I sort of did. But at the end of the day, I was like, screw it. I'm just doing my favorites. I love Burn After Reading. I think a personal anecdote, much of it was filmed in the apartment building right next to where I lived in New York. So I have like personal affection for it. But I also think it's Brad Pitt's like funniest, like ultra comedic performance. And I think we're going to talk a lot about Brad Pitt being funny and his comedic timing. And there are different shades to that. But this is just kind of pure in on the joke humor. And that's what I like about it.

It's also sometimes there is... I don't think anyone thinks Brad Pitt is dumb, but he has played some dumb characters. There are shades of Floyd from True Romance in it. There are shades of even the kind of airhead Thelma and Louise guy. I think the quality of the intelligence dictates how high up he is. But he is, he's not dumb. He's playing a dummy. And I respond to that.

Water? I got a hydrant. I got tap water. Are you kidding? How do you know who he is? Sources. What do you know who he is? Sources. What do you mean, sources? He's got, like, Gatorade or anything besides, like, Maryland Swamp. He plays a character named Chad Feldheimer.

I'm not sure that there is a person who looks less like a Chad Feldheimer than Brad Pitt. This, of course, is a Coen Brothers movie, and Brad Pitt is not the star of the movie. George Clooney is sort of the star of the movie. George Clooney is sort of the star of the movie. Frances McDormand is sort of the star of the movie. But he is definitively a supporting actor. And one of the things that people like to say about Brad Pitt, it's become a bit of a canard, but I think it has some truth in it. I know what you're about to say, and I'm going to revoke it after you say it.

But go ahead. Is that Brad Pitt is a character actor trapped in a movie star's body. Yeah. And I think that that is something that maybe Brad Pitt has compelled us to say about him because of the way that he's managed his career, especially in the 21st century. In the 20th century, he was acting like a movie star. He was taking roles like Interview with the Vampire. In the 21st century, he has taken on a lot of parts that are supporting and odd and force him to uglify himself or make a fool of himself or remove some of the essential Brad Pittness

that we know from the tabloids. Sort of. Revoke away. Well, number one, the reason that he can pull off any of those roles from basically 1999 on is because he's Brad Pitt and because he's a movie star and because he's selling stuff. You cannot divorce the movie star quality from any Brad Pitt performance, even in Burn After Reading. Like part of the reason it works is because it's it is really handsome ass Brad Pitt with terrible hair doing dorky dances that you can see he knows that he is being ridiculous in this movie. And that is playing on the Brad Pittness of it all.

My thing about the character actor trapped in a movie star's body is just like, that's fine, but it's based on the idea that anything he did in the 90s was great. And I just think he was in the wrong roles for 10 years. They didn't know what to do with him. Or movies in the 90s and our idea of like a movie star movie didn't really fit Brad Pitt. Yeah, that's an interesting point. And there's probably a particular kind of run in the late 90s with movies like The Devil's Own, Seven Years in Tibet, Meet Joe Black, where he's taking on these sort of weighty, idea-laden dramas that didn't work and didn't allow him to really do anything interesting. And we got, and even though that,

if you read the logline to Meet Joe Black, you'd be like, this movie is fucking weak as hell. But it seemed very stodgy and it was very long. They're serious with a capital S. Very much so. And once he broke out of that, and what happens after that is Fight Club and then Snatch and then Ocean's Eleven. And he starts making movies that have a different kind of energy and working with filmmakers

that are not maybe taking themselves quite so seriously. And he's not taking himself quite so seriously. And you might say that Burn After Reading is sort of the apex of that sensibility. Yeah. It's a very, very funny performance and a very, very funny movie. Is it high in your Coen Brothers ranking?

Yes. I couldn't give you a Coen Brothers thing off the top of my head. They are great filmmakers, but it's more, I just know the good ones and there's a vibe. Please respect the Coen Brothers.

We're moving on. I think that this is a very funny movie and I enjoy it. My number five is the movie called Seven. Someone comes to your establishment. They want to go downstairs. They want to get a little ooh-la-la. Whatever. They gotta come to you.

Yeah? Yeah. You didn't see anyone. Okay. I am a bit torn about talking about this because Seven is not the best david fincher movie it's not the best brad pitt performance in a david fincher movie i think it's probably safe to say that the work he does in benjamin button is a deeper and more complicated and more interesting role but that role in seven is one where i think a lot of guys like me met brad pitt for real and

two i think it's the first time he was embarking upon like a kind of meta commentary about himself where he's playing a hot shot detective who is slingshotted into this murder mystery case the serial killer case with morgan freeman's older. It's a very familiar shape to the movie. It's a wizened, cranky guy. It's a young guy who thinks he knows everything and is kicking the door down to make every move happen. But there's something kind of damaged to the character that he's playing that isn't necessarily on the page, but you can see. And it's obviously most noticeable in the final sequence sequence of the movie for those of you who have not seen the movie seven shame on you also you're weird uh but when we learn that of course his wife's character has had her head chopped off and placed inside of a box which is then delivered to the desert which is the thing that happens at the end of this movie put the gun

down i saw you with a box who's in the box box? Because I envy your normal life. Put the gun down, David. It seems that envy is my sin. Oh, what's in the box? What's in the fucking box? Give me the gun. He just told you. You lie! You're a fucking liar!

Shut up! That's what he wants. He wants you to shoot him. No! No! Brad Pitt has a meltdown, and it's a meltdown that I think has kind of been memed over the years and is a bit ridiculous

and the what's in the box and the gun pointed at Kevin Spacey's character John Doe but it is it's a version of Brad Pitt that I like it feels like maybe we're not watching the same actor but it is a guy that I enjoyed so much more than the River Runs Through It guy

and it's also basically where I got a real more than the River Runs Through It guy. And it's also basically where I got a real sense of what David Fincher was going to be, who of course is a very important person to this podcast. And I like the idea of those two guys. I like the idea of Brad Pitt being the stand-in for Fincher's, the different phases of Fincher's life. Yeah. And vice versa, I think Brad Pitt discovers a lot of phases of his career with Fincher because, obviously, Fight Club, which is kind of when, I think that's when it flips, his career, and he starts doing weirder stuff. It's also when Dickhead Brad Pitt comes out, which I would like to talk more about. Do you have an opportunity to talk about that?

Oh, yeah. Of course. And Benjamin Button is also, in terms of him just doing weird stuff, you know, in a lot of ways, that's what we consider to be like old Oscar Bader. It's an adaptation of it. It's a Fitzgerald short story, right? And it is costumes and period drama. But it's also Brad Pitt is playing a person who de-ages and looks like a weird old baby. He's playing an old baby. He looks like an old baby. He looks like an

old baby for 80% of the movie. That's such a weird thing to do with Brad Pitt. Yeah, I love Seven and I love Fight Club and I don't love Benjamin Button, but let the record show that Brad Pitt has played an old baby, which is really just some of the greatest transformational work. Can I just say, I make some on there, if only because he's playing an old baby, it's just Brad Pitt's face doing the work for the whole thing because it is CGI'd onto other things. And it is kind of a testament just to the power of looking at Brad Pitt's face. Do we know if the stand-in baby was actually an old baby or was it just a regular baby?

We don't know. I think it was a regular baby. Okay, just a regular baby. What's your number four? All right, what's the matter, partner? It's official, old buddy. It has been. My number four is Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

Okay, this is tied for number two for me. Oh, you put them, okay. Yeah. You cheated? The thing is, you have to cheat on this show. I took a stand. No, this is a show that I work very hard on, and I am cheating, and I'm doing what I want.

Okay. So Once Upon a Time in Hollywood just came out. Yeah. It came out six weeks ago. And I think it probably has not left our consciousness since then. But what can you say about it maybe that you have not yet said? Well, it was interesting to think about it in the cumulative terms of Brad Pitt's career. Because to the point about using the identity of Brad Pitt

and using movie starredness, this movie is doing it, like that's the text as well as the subtext in a lot of ways. But I think I was thinking a lot about all the different things that make a Brad Pitt performance. And one thing that stands out for me is there's just like, there's an easiness, which is not to say that he can't be aggressive. He can't be really physical. He can't

be a dickhead, as I mentioned, but it's a, there's a confidence and a slightly reserved nature to the performances that I respond to. It's like a pace almost. And I think a lot of that comes with age. It's not something you can really do at 22 or 23. And the thing I like about Once Upon a Time is that it really is about, it's the perfect role for Brad Pitt in 2019. It feels like a match of actor and character. Agree.

I think, as I've said many times on this show, that is the ultimate genius of Tarantino is knowing when to pluck people from their stations of fame and place them in one of his movies and let them comment in real time on that fame. It's interesting in particular because Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,

if I had to make a wager, I think this will be the movie for which Brad Pitt wins his Oscar. And if you look at the shape of that category at the moment and also just the fact that he's been so praised. And even though he came forward and said that he will not be campaigning for an Oscar, that is the clear sign of a person who is going to be running for Oscar is making note of the fact that they're not participating. My man literally was on The Ellen Show and did a segment where he sat in the audience for a full five minutes. The bit was just that like super fan Brad Pitt is in Ellen's audience and it's five minutes of him sitting in with all of

the women. It's only women in the audience on Ellen like doing bits because he wants people to see Ed Astor, which obviously he has a financial responsibility to do as well as being the star. And also the producer of the movie, which is a notable aspect of his role in Hollywood now. Sure. But he's running. He's definitely running. Can you name the three movies for which he was nominated? Moneyball.

Yes. That was for Best Actor. Yes. See, this is an interesting part of his persona, his identity is he's been nominated three times, but you couldn't necessarily name when and where and why. And there was never really a feeling like he was going to win any of these Oscars. Was he

nominated for Jesse James? He was not. Okay. I've lost now. The two other movies, one is Benjamin Button, which we've talked about yeah uh for moneyball he lost to to well i'll i'll save that for benjamin button he lost to sean penn for milk okay which was sean penn's second oscar but as a is a truly great performance and a transformation and he was also nominated in for 12 monkeys as best supporting actor oh really which is a movie that i suspect we're not going to be talking about on this episode. Though it is a very good movie and it is a very interesting, I'm trying hard Brad Pitt performance in which he plays, I think, the scion of a very wealthy man who kind of goes mad in the midst of the apocalypse.

He lost to Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects, which is complicated. And for Moneyball, can you guess who we lost to? Moneyball was 2011. One of the all-time travesties. Is this Jean Dujardin? It is. He tap danced or whatever pretty nicely. I don't know. Amanda, no.

Okay. Under no circumstances. I agree with you. I agree with you. I agree with you. We do not recognize the artist on this podcast. My number four is Snatch. Okay. And I got to say, it's weird to me that I put Seven and Snatch on this list. I was not expecting that.

You're really, really putting your shoulder into that phase of Brad Pitt. And probably that phase of my life. But the thing I like about Pitt is that every time he does something, they are like, oh, you made Troy because you feel it's necessary to platform yourself as a handsome movie star. He then does something extremely strange right after that. Snatch is just a weird movie. And it's particularly weird what he's doing in the movie,

which is essentially playing a British gypsy who is a bare knuckle boxer who loves dogs yeah or dags as he says in the movie his the accent work I think is credible I don't know how to really fact check that okay I just I I appreciate like he invented it so well there's at least other family members in the movie that are speaking like him. I think I just like the flex of it. I think it's just a ridiculous role. It's probably the most physically imposing he's ever been in a movie, even more so than Troy, maybe even more so than Fight Club.

It's an interesting riff on Brad Pitt, Golden God. It's somebody who is dirty and poor and fights a lot and you can hardly understand him. Right. Which is

a move I appreciate. What's your number three? Saul makes 10. 10 ought to do it, don't you think? Do you think we need one more? Do you think we need one more? Ocean's 11. Great. All right, we'll need one more? Do you think we need one more? Ocean's Eleven.

Great. All right, we'll get one more. This is not on your list? Not on my list. Wow. I mean, this is Captain Obvious, but I think we were talking about Brad Pitt as a movie star. Here it is. We've talked a lot about the Once Upon a Time performance and how it is responsiveness in a lot of ways.

He doesn't have a lot to say. And you know what? He doesn't say a lot in Ocean's Eleven either. He just is there being wry. One of my favorite scenes is Brad Pitt and George Clooney. You think we need one more? You think we need one more? All right, we'll need one more. And that shot is literally just Brad Pitt sitting on the bar. He doesn't move. He does nothing. And it's hilarious. There is, but there's just a confidence and a control and a reservedness, which I was talking about,

that he's not giving it all away, which makes you want more. It also starts the Brad Pitt eating thing, which is one of my favorite gimmicks, 20 years running. Yeah, I noticed that in a couple of movies I was rewatching last night too which is one of my favorite gimmicks, 20 years running. Yeah, I noticed that in a couple of movies I was rewatching last night too. The one thing about Ocean's Eleven, and maybe this is the reason why I didn't put it on the list,

is does the movie still work if he's not in the movie? I think it probably does. But it's not as cool. That's the other thing. It's kind of peak Brad Pitt as a cool person. And that is an undercurrent of everything that he's doing, whether he's playing like a scrappy outsider or a washed up person like Rick Dalton,

or whether he is playing someone like Rusty or someone, you know, even a leading man. I think part of the thing with the 90s is that he was often a little too cool for the movies that he is in, or it just doesn't fit. He was 37 years old when he made Ocean's Eleven, which is the age that I am right now. Okay. And I must say, I do not feel at all like Brad Pitt seems to feel in Ocean's Eleven.

I want to say, I'm glad you don't have like the frosted tips that he has in that movie or whatever the hair situation. You think I should get into that? No, I really don't. What about bleach blonde? It's amazing because he does often try to make himself less handsome. We were talking about this on gym session. He wears that hat to distract from the fact that. The newsboy cap? The newsboy cap, which he has in like four colors i realized this week and it's it's ridiculous but i think some of it is just kind of he knows the effect people who are that attractive know the effect that they have on someone and they use it in a lot of different ways and sometimes they and he often does try to hide it he is often doing weird haircuts or or movies where he's like really dirty all the time.

And you're just like, what's happening? Or he's an old baby, you know? And even in Ocean's Eleven, he's wearing like gross Vegas stuff. And he looks amazing. Yeah, I think his inability to actually be ugly even as an old baby is a testament to his all-world handsomeness. I don't even know. I donomeness. I don't even know. I don't know. I don't even know how to comment on it.

This is a movie where he gets kind of close to somewhat ugly, but my number three is the assassination of Jesse James by the camera. Robert Ford. I will tell you a story about that Scalawag George Shepard. Shepard's one of Quantrell's lieutenants. He gave me a story much like Bob's. What bring him to mind going on about how much we hadn't in common and so on so we could get in the gang. How could I have known he had a grudge against me?

How could I have known he was lying to get on my good side? Which I think is a very interesting double feature with Ad Astra. And maybe a triple feature with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Three movies that seem to be obsessed with self-mythology and mythos and also fathers and sons and why we believe the things about people that we think are heroes but are actually perhaps more flawed. And for those of you who haven't seen it,

and a lot of people have not seen it because it's a historic bomb, it's a retelling of the man robert ford who eventually killed jesse james but the first half of the film essentially tracks the james gang and pitt plays him as kind of a crotchety kind of a dumb guy kind of a kind of a i don't know an ill-fitting icon somebody who is not exactly what we imagined them to be. And over time, we see the movie through Robert Ford's eyes and we learn how sour he becomes to the idea of idolizing somebody.

And it's a super interesting movie to look at through the lens of what Pitt's trying to do to himself around this time. You know, your husband, Zach Barron, profiled Brad Pitt in GQ magazine. And there's an interesting conversation, there's a quote that he has in that piece from Dee Dee Garner, your husband, Zach Barron, profiled Brad Pitt in GQ magazine. And there's an interesting conversation, there's a quote that he has in that piece from Dee Dee Garner,

who is one of the folks who works at Plan B, Brad Pitt's production company. And she talked about making the assassination of Jesse James by the coward Robert Ford. And she reflected on the fact that it just didn't do well. Nobody really saw it, even though it was a very praised movie at the time.

It didn't have an audience. It's probably one of the biggest losers in Brad's career. And Brad spoke to her and all the folks that work at that company and said, it doesn't matter. I'm so proud of what we've done here. These movies are going to stand the test of time. That actually was true for Jesse James. It actually has emerged as, at least among a certain kind of cinephile bro, as a very beloved movie of the 21st century. And I feel like part of it is because he has very carefully managed his presentation and he knows when to make a movie at the right time in his career. And that's why we still, at 55 years old, we're still kind of reflecting on him in this way.

It's really impressive and there's not a lot of examples of it in the last 25 years in terms of movie stars, you know, like you and I love Tom Cruise or Will Smith, two people that we really love. But I feel like those two guys have kind of embarrassed themselves a lot in the last 15 years. They've done a lot of things where I'm like, why did you do that? This was really bad. It seems a little schlocky. I think of like Tom Cruise doing the young jock dance at the BET Awards. And like, that's hilarious that that happened. But it's weird that I could never imagine Brad Pitt doing something like that. I could never imagine Brad Pitt being all over Instagram like Will Smith. Like he is a different kind of famous person.

Yeah, there's a social intelligence to it, I think, that comes across in the performances of he can read a room, he can read a scene, he can read an audience and knows how to play it. So you want to be closer to him. And I think that explains the savvy and some of the choices and also in marketing some of the stuff i mean we don't have to get into it too deep too deeply but he hasn't embarrassed himself but he's definitely had a tough time in the public eye the last few years he went through a very difficult divorce there have been child custody elements and he um has talked a lot about substance issues as a result of that but even there he has been able to talk about it in like an open enough way that people understand it. Like he's even handled that situation with Dexterity. So I agree.

I think it's a singular ability to read a room. a little bit more in the lineage of the Paul Newman, Jimmy Stewart kind of Sidney Poitier famous person where you might know things about them if you read the tabloids, but for the most part, we remember their work and we think about their work. And if I had to guess 30 years from now, that's probably how we'll understand him more than say Tom Cruise, who we understand probably more clearly as a celebrity and a movie star, but not as an actor really very much at all. And that's, that's, it's just worth noting, I think. Yeah. Well, I think it's probably equal on Brad Pitt. I mean, Tom Cruise is an interesting comparison because he married Katie Holmes and did Tomcat pretty much at the same time as

Brangelina became one of the giant couples of that era. And it's funny, Jennifer Lopez is also in there with Bennifer about a couple years before. They really are very similar in a lot of ways. And it's hard to underestimate what a big deal that was, especially the Jennifer Aniston and that divorce and then Angelina swooping in. And there's a whole movie about it, Mr. and Mrs. Smith, which is not on my list. Nor mine. I love that movie, though. I actually it's a great movie about marriage, actually. And those therapy scenes are fantastic.

But it's, you know, it's kind of dialed in performances from both of them. But I think that all of his personal stuff or gossip stuff, we can't divorce it, but he has figured out a way to use it. And in both in movies like Jesse James and Once Upon a Time to an extent, and also how to navigate the exterior parts of it. Whereas I think someone like Tom Cruise got swallowed by it. I think there's also a little bit

of a gender thing happening here. When we talked about Jennifer Lopez, we think of her not strictly and certainly not first as an actor. With Pitt, I think that we do. The same way we don't necessarily think of Elizabeth Taylor as an actor. We think of her as a celebrity who hawked perfume and was married eight times. Yeah.

Though, in Jennifer Lopez's case, it's also because she is a TV star and she does have eight other... And she's also a musician and she has the perfume and the clothing line and all of those things. She is a business in a way that which has been very successful for her and is I think the way to be really famous right now for the most part. But

you know, that is different. It is different. What's number two for you? Inglourious Bastards. You didn't say the goddamn rendezvous in a fucking basement. You didn't say that goddamn rendezvous is in a fucking basement. I didn't know. You said it was in a tavern. It is a tavern. Yeah, in a basement.

You know, fighting in a basement offers a lot of difficulties. Number one being you're fighting in a basement. Number two for me as well. I wonder if we have the same top two. That would be so nice if we did. We probably do. Wouldn't it be nice? I have a slash once upon a time in Hollywood on my number two.

But, you know, I don't know if you and I have really had an Inglourious Bastards conversation. It's my favorite Tarantino, hands down. Okay, why? Well, I think some of it is just that it is more in line with my interests than say reservoir dogs which is you know there are like women in it and it's it's set in europe and there it's about movies and there are like historical elements as opposed to kind of the gritty i like the old hollywood tarantino as opposed to like gritty crime tarantino if that makes any sense not that I don't like the gritty crime stuff but it's just my interests um do you think that okay so I don't know that I believe this take and maybe this take belongs on the hottest take but

is there a case to be made that Brad Pitt is bad in this movie oh do you want to make that if you well it's because it is the one performance where, and part of it is because the tone of Tarantino films is very unusual, but he's making a big choice with the accent. He's got this big scar on his neck. And it's a bit of a ridiculous character. And in some ways he sticks out in the movie and in other ways he blends in.

It feels very self-conscious. And that doesn't mean I don't like it. I do like it. In fact, it's probably one of my favorite movies ever made. It is truly a wonderful movie. We just did a rewatch of what was about it. It's great. But Brad is, it's very noticeable what Brad is doing

and not in exactly in the movie star way. That's what I like about it. Okay. Rewatching it, the cadence and the voice speak angus pretty good for a german well connor artillery yeah they made that deal but don't give a fuck about him they need you what is that english expression about shoes and feet looks like the shoes on the other foot yeah i just think i am now i am the direct descendant of the mountain man jim bridger well we'll be leaving a little earlier.

Stuck out to me as an achievement and also kind of unlocking like a thing that Brad Pitt does. He is a very physical actor. He obviously looks great on screens, but he can do voice work. And the Aldo Rain voice is so central to this performance. And the reason that I know that it works is because I can hear it in my head right now. He created a whole like rhythm of talking. Buongiorno. Grazie. Gourlami. Gourlami. Gourlami. Gourlami. Yeah. And, you know, even just that, yeah, you know, like anyone can do it. And I hear other people referencing it all the time. He just created

something that was like instantly classic. So I guess that is a little bit of the character actor thing. But I just think it's him trying a new mode of acting and it works and it's and it's funny. And I don't need to interrogate it too much after that if it has such an influence and stays with you like, OK, this works. One of the things that I think has aged an influence and stays with you like okay this works one of the things that i think has aged well about it is the fact that he has now done once upon a time in hollywood with tarantino and used his beauty and his charisma and movie stardom to obvious effect and so now if you put these two movies together you can kind of see that they're part of a package of brad pitt and tarantino's vision of movie stardom.

Number one. Billy. You got to carry the one. Billy. That's his time. Yeah. Who's that? That's Pete.

Does Pete really need to be here? Yes, he does. Okay. Here's who we want. Number one. Jason's little brother, Jeremy. I assume it's Moneyball for you. It has to be Moneyball. Good Lord, is Moneyball a great movie.

I rewatched it last night just as an excuse to rewatch it. And there is nothing that makes me happier than this movie. It is absolutely amazing. I can't believe we don't talk about it more. I just want to watch it every day. You know, it was a very early rewatchables. I don't think either one of us was on it. No, I think that was just a Bill and Chris. A Bill and Chris Ryan affair. And upon reflection, I'm quite mad that I was not asked to participate. It really is one of the best movies of the last 20 years. And it is almost entirely because of Brad Pitt. Yes. He's in almost every frame of the movie. All the performances 20 years. And it is almost entirely because of Brad Pitt. Yes.

He's in almost every frame of the movie. All the performances are great. It's really well made by Bennett Miller. It's a great script. I love that book. I'm a huge baseball fan. There's a lot to love about the movie intellectually, emotionally, visually, etc. But holy shit, he's so good.

And it's doing none of the things that we're really talking about here. Well, I think it's doing none of the things that we're really talking about here well i think it's doing all of them is it because he's not really bending over backwards to impress you with anything you know there is a natural charm and intelligence and ease in the role right which is for me what once upon a time in hollywood is about that's true i think that and there is like that just natural charisma that he's relying on. He's reading the room. The emotional intelligence is there.

It's really physical, even though, I mean, both in the seeds of him working out, which are just hilarious to me. But also, you know, that scene, the first time that Peter Brand is in the room. And there he's explaining the new Moneyball system to all the other scouts. And it's like, when I point at you, yes, I want to talk to you. And then he leans over and is like, you got to carry the one.

And even the way he takes the cap off the marker and just like blows it out, it is like actually the physical presence of Brad Pitt that is selling all of that. I think that it is both kind of reserved, looking for connection, making sense of what all the father figures in his life promised to him, Brad Pitt, and also dickhead Brad Pitt, where he is a little mean and a little aggressive and fires people and throws stuff in the clubhouse and I think he's

both wearing terrible clothes and it's like maybe the hottest he's ever been in a movie so the gold chain I don't even know what to do about that so to me it is the summation of all of all of the Brad Pitt and it is it's relaxed and anguished at the same time and only he like who else is gonna make that movie work it's a it's a great point it's very similar to ad astra in that way where it's sort of like i don't even know if this movie happens if you don't have somebody who can do this work and billy bean the real life billy bean who is you know it should be stated this movie the book is um i don't know probably 15 years old the season that they're tracking is 17 years old. Billy Beans still is the general manager of the Oakland A's.

The Oakland A's are still hugely competitive despite having a significantly smaller payroll. They're probably going to the playoffs again this year. The movie has aged beautifully in that respect. It's still an active story. It's also been so useful for me to understand all other sports because Moneyball has sort of filtered through all of them. It really has. It's a kind of a crash course in ringer in so many ways. I appreciate you. Yeah, it works really well in that respect. It's also, Pitt is such a credible ex-baseball player. He has the swagger and the walk and the physicality that

you're talking about. And when he's throwing that you know that water cooler that's what losing sounds like you know you buy it that's not the first time he's thrown a water cooler you know what i mean he's spent he's spent a lot of time in the last 30 years doing that and at the same time he's capturing something that the real billy bean couldn't capture you know what i mean as much as we have come to worship billy bean and the consciousness of somebody who helped change sports really and business maybe even for good pit has something elevated and ephemeral that you can't put your finger on and it's it's just so great i think also the way that he interacts with everyone in that movie especially spike

jones which is the funniest fucking thing as i said i was watching it last night and my husband was like i'll just watch you know 10 minutes and my husband was like, I'll just watch, you know, 10 minutes. And then it was like, should I go to bed now? Should I go to bed now? And he like sucked me in. He tried to go to bed before the Spike Jonze scene. And I was like, you got to see Spike Jonze. And he was like, yes, you're right. I do.

And that's just an amazing example of the reaction. Brad Pitt just sits there at the cell phone thing and he's still and is just making that angry face. And you know everything that you need to know. But the way he reacts to Jonah Hill, his whole interaction with Philip Seymour Hoffman, all of the scouts, who I think many of them are real scouts. And it's just him, you know, reading the room again. He really does react to people. I think that's like an underrated aspect of Brad Pitt. Um,

and it's, it's magic in this movie. The movie has a huge, really bad beat for Grady Fusin, the former scouting director for the A's. I got to say, returning to the movie, I was like,

wow, they really shit on this guy. Um, it's just an absolutely wonderful movie. If you haven't seen it, I would highly recommend it. Let's just do a speed round of honorable mentions. This guy's made a lot of good movies. And we've hardly talked about two-thirds of them.

You know, I think one of the interesting things he's done along with movies like Ad Astra is very quietly and with calm measure place himself in movies like 12 Years a Slave. And I think Zach actually wrote this in his piece so that he can appear briefly in the trailer for the film, but then that is what allows a movie like 12 Years a Slave to get made. He has this fascinating career just as a producer, which is impressive.

And he still gives good performances in those roles, but True Romance, also a rewatchable, Floyd the stoner is just hilarious and perfect. And I get the impression that that's one of the few things in True Romance that Tarantino thinks is perfect because he didn't direct that movie, even though he wrote that script. And you can see why he keeps returning to him again and again. I'd be remiss if I didn't just say that his role in the tree of life is also in this continuum of dads and sons and his fucked up relationship to them or what seems like a fucked

up relationship i that one's just a little too buttoned up for me okay i mean i know i'm sorry terrence malick's really important i respect ter respect Terrence Malick, and I respect the But him sitting in his chair and making him listen to his records, you know, that's some real shit. Yeah, no, I know that's like, I know that's real. I know that's an important scene, but I just think that it's a slightly too strict version of Brad Pitt. Okay.

What would you put on your honorable mentions? So, as I said, I put Benjamin Button on there just for the power of his face. Sure. I can't believe you didn't put Fight Club on there.

Yeah, it's on here. It's on honorable mention. Yeah. Like I said, I just think it's the turning point. It's when dickhead Brad Pitt comes out

and he's very important. I think I have to have some level of self-awareness of self-parody about overstating my interest in Fight Club. Okay. You know,

especially as I get older. Great. I like it a lot. I think Tyler Durden is, especially as I get older. Great. I like it a lot. I think Tyler Durden is not a hard role for him. That's the thing. I think that that's easy for him to do. It doesn't really seem like he's stretching himself. Right.

And it's very showy. I think the Ed Norton performance is the performance in the movie. That's the one where, and Helena Bonham Carter too, to be honest. But that's just Brad Pitt's natural power. He's like, I don't have my shirt on yeah I look amazing and I'm being a dick yeah and it's great well but it's important to honor that that's

a that's a central aspect of the Brad Pitt experience um I was gonna be cute and put the the friends cameo on this I don't even remember that he was on friends when he was married to Jennifer Aniston and it's then I put burn after reading on instead because actually burn after reading is his best comedic performance but yeah Gwyneth Paltrow to Jennifer Aniston. And then I put Burn After Reading on instead because actually Burn After Reading is his best comedic performance. But yeah, Gwyneth Paltrow to Jennifer Aniston, Angelina Jolie is just extraordinary. Yes.

Is there any precedent? No. Is there any precedent to Brad Pitt? No, there's not. There's not. Any final notes? Any other films? I had one more.

I put Ad Astra on honorable mention. I have it on mine as well. It's a great performance. It's fascinating. I think Ad Astra on honorable mention. I have it on mine as well. It's a great performance. It's fascinating. I think if you're this far into a Brad Pitt podcast, you have to go see it because of, you know, I think at times it's a bit uneven or there are aspects of it that are better, particularly when it's just him alone on a camera. But in terms of studying a movie star and what it happens when you put a camera on someone like Brad Pitt and ask them to emote, it's astonishing. I completely agree. It's a beautiful segue into my conversation with

the filmmaker James Gray. Amanda, thank you so much for pouring your heart out about the great Brad Pitt. Thank you to you, Sean, and thank you to Brad Pitt. I'm just delighted to be joined by returning champion, James Gray. James, thanks for being here. Returning champion? That's you. Last time you were here, we had a delightful conversation.

Do you remember? I remember the conversation. I don't remember me being a champion. Then again, I don't never, I never remember being a champion about anything really, to be honest with you. Maybe taking out the garbage.

I'm not a champion at that. I'm a champion of your work, so we'll think of it that way. No, you'd be the one. Thank you. You have a new film called Ad Astra. I have a lot of questions about that. But I wanted to start this conversation by asking you, 25 years making films, seven films. Are you happy with where you are as a filmmaker right now?

No. What a great question. That's so weird. I've just done all these interviews. No. What a great question. That's so weird. I've just done all these interviews. I've never gotten that question. I would say the answer is no. But you know, it's funny. I remember reading somewhere

or maybe hearing it now, you forget these things. Elvis Costello was saying that your style is basically how when you imitate all the people whose work you love and how it falls short is your style. Sure. But I don't see that.

I only see what's wrong. You know, if I, I can't watch the movies, you know, after they're done. You don't return to the work? The only time I return to the work is if I have to readjust the projector at home because I know the way the movie is supposed to look. So it's good for me to, you know, I'll put on a scene from, you know, one of the movies because I'll know whether it's, you know, too much contrast and all that.

I don't know how to adjust the projector. And that's about the only time. And whenever I do that, almost about five seconds in is something really horrifying and mistake that i made so i have to turn it off do you have any regrets about any of the films you chose to make that's an even better question because on that i can be very clear the answer is no i don't regret a single one of them you eat you make them for a reason and almost always there's a very important reason

for yourself. And it's funny because people ask me all the time, do you have a favorite film? And, you know, there was just an interview I did where I guess I said, because I didn't remember saying this, of course, but usually the worst thing in the world is when somebody reports that you said something and it's actually what you did say, that a film that I made was my favorite. And the truth is is that means the easiest or most enjoyable experience making it but that never translates into quote the best or a movie you love the most after it's finished it's almost like saying what's your favorite kid you know that that's the kind of relationship you have with them and the answer is there isn't one do you wish you'd made more films yes absolutely i there was two periods in my life particularly between my first and second film and my second and my third where i think i stood on ceremony a little bit about them i had them made

exactly the way i wanted to make them but i don't know some point, I think you only become, dare I say, good at what you do through repetition. You know, there's this book, Outliers, which is, you know, it's kind of cheesy in some respects and has a lot of pop psychology and all that stuff. But I found it very entertaining to read. And, you know, he talks about Bill Gates and he talks about the Beatles and he has this whole 10,000 hours theory. Malcolm Gladwell, you're afraid of him. Yeah, the Malcolm Gladwell book. And in it, he says that the Beatles played together for two years, eight hours a night,

six days a week in Hamburg, Germany. And they left Liverpool for Hamburg. They were kind of a group of motley musicians. And 10,000 hours later, they came back, and they were the Beatles. And you need that time to put in. And I think that that's the thing I robbed myself of, the chance to practice the craft. If you talk about any director, even the directors of a more modern era, but let's say you chose

John Ford, who is routinely called the greatest cinema director ever. By the time he did Stagecoach, 1939, I believe he had made something like 30 movies. Now, practice doesn't make perfect, but practice certainly makes much better. And a lot of movie making is a craft. I also would say that there's a very dangerous idea that we get the idea of he or she and unfortunately it's usually white male he is a genius i think this is a bogus idea the older i get the more i realize that that's that's absolutely the case if you chose maybe the most significant maybe behind bach but this is up for

mozart is maybe the most significant musician in the history of western culture you know most people don't know he had a sister who was every bit his compositional equal apparently and he and his sister used to tour around europe now she was forbidden after a while from from touring because she had to become a homemaker according to tradition but mozart relied on her apparently to the end of his life wrote letters in other words he needed the the dialogue you know lennon needed mccartney to use the beetles again as an analogy freud needed young and so it's always a collaborative experience making a film and uh why am I talking about this? I don't know.

Who do you have? That raises an interesting question. Who is your young? Well, I've worked with a lot of, well, I'm not Freud, so that's a problem, right? But I've worked with a lot of incredible people. And I think that. But does that mean like Joaquin would be someone like that? Yeah, he certainly would be.

Or is it someone who you're more in competition with? Oh, I'm not in competition with anybody. I used to be in film school. That ended a long time ago because, you know, different movies give you different pleasures. Even movies that you think, you know, you hold. I'll give you an example. One of my favorite movies ever, Godfather 2, right? Very famous movie.

Everybody loves it. The Godfather. Everybody loves it. They're incredible. And everyone loves them for a reason. But they don't provide you the pleasure that watching Fred Astaire dancing does. Now, Fred Astaire dancing doesn't tell you that American civilization is getting more and more corrupt, which, of course, is what The Godfather is about, really.

And so different movies give you different pleasures, different works of art. Who's better, Velazquez or Van Gogh? It's a ridiculous argument. Each thing gives you different pleasures, different works of art. Who's better, Velasquez or Van Gogh? It's a ridiculous argument. Each thing gives you different pleasures. So on each movie, you have a different set of collaborators. And I just feel that that's the thing that allows you to do something that's of value. Even jobs that are solo, maybe there's an artist or two in his or her time who just went off and did something by him or herself but always you need some kind of dialogue i mean jackson pollock and willem de kooning and mark rothko all those guys knew each other and they feed off each other i'm going to ask you about your rothko's and your de kooning's because there are some in your generation too but let's

hold on one second sure did you have a moment when you felt like you crossed your 10 000 hours where you want to set and you're like, oh, I actually have more command than I thought I did? No, because the minute you feel that there's a level of command, the cinema teaches you otherwise. You know, I'll tell you

a brief story about this. I had huge confidence when I was in film school. I thought I was the greatest thing since sliced bread. You know, it's almost like, you know, when your mother

holds you up to the mirror when you're an infant and says, look at you, you're so beautiful, you're marvelous. And of course, you sit there and you go, yeah, I am as a kid, you know, it's almost like, you know, when your mother holds you up to the mirror when you're an infant and says, look at you, you're so beautiful, you're marvelous. And of course you sit there and you go, yeah, I am as a kid, you know, and then you look in the three-way mirror and you go, wait, what's that image to my left and right? And you're like, that's very different than the way I look in front. It's sort of like that for the cinema. And, you know, you don't have any perspective.

And also I had to learn a very valuable lesson. I was shooting my first film, which is called Little Odessa, and I was getting dailies back and I was working with actors I loved. And everything was coming back roses. And I sat there watching dailies going, oh, my God, I'm a genius. I've done it. I've arrived. Look how good this is. I'm 23 years old.

Look how good this is easy. And then March 5th 1994 happened which is the date when i went and watched the assembly of the film and it was the worst thing i ever saw in my life and what happened was you learn no no narrative is context that what you thought was awesome on the set doesn't work at all and that little scene that you thought this is going to wind up on the cutting room floor has turned into one of the most important scenes in the film. Narrative is context. And then you realize, no, no, this is really, really hard. It's why there are very few albums

in popular music history that you could put the needle down if you were a record player, or if you press play or click on your computer computer and you don't have to skip a single song context is everything so i learned very quickly to be humble and the movies are they have a very interesting and horrible way of punishing you whenever you think you're really good at it and let me just say also you're not always growing the trend line is not always upward especially in american cinema. Now, American cinema is different from Europe or even Asia. So for example, Kuro Kurosawa made one of his really great movies, Ron, when he was in his mid-70s. But usually for American cinema,

it's a young man's game. If you look at a lot of the directors we revere, they do their best work in their 40s. Some, it's not the case. Alfred Hitchcock peaked later, but that was a different period. So my point is, whenever you've achieved that mastery in your mind, well, good luck to you. I think you're finished. This might be a little too probing, but you are not in your 40s. No, I just turned 50. And so do you feel like you are in your prime as a filmmaker? That's a tough question.

It forces a level of distance that I don't have about myself. I can tell you that I think people do change a lot. I think I'm very different than I was when I was 23 years old. Knowing how little I knew, I would never have let me make a movie at 23. That was a mistake. New Line Cinema, Cam Galano, her name was, she was the best, and Rolf Mitwig, they had great faith in me. They made the movie with me, and I would never have made the movie now, thinking back, oh my God, I didn't know anything. But you change a lot as a person, and I don't know how to assess that. I don't,

it's interesting. If you look at the history of that dirty word art, think about this. You're Pablo Picasso. Les Demoiselles d'Avignon is 1917, I believe. Could be wrong about that, but I think that's about the year that he painted that. That's a huge break in art. He did that. He was quite a young man.

Cezanne hadn't done anything of value until he was in his mid-50s. Everybody peaks at a different period. It's why you can't assess yourself. You can never even take that into account. And you have to kind of let time do the work for you. So you asked me that question. What I can say is I've appreciated the chance to work at my craft more, and what I can say is I think I've learned to be more open,

and what I can say is I'm honest, I think, with myself about what I think is wrong with the work. Watching Ad Astra, it struck me as seeming like, and I have no way of proving this, the most personal movie you'd made since maybe The Yards, Little Odessa. Just knowing what I know about your life, your history. I'm sure that there is a great deal of yourself that goes into every film, but did this feel like a return to a certain kind of idea?

I didn't feel that I was returning to a certain kind of idea, but you're, I think you're right. It's, it is very personal to me, the film. It's strange. You try to bring your personal life into everything. The previous film that I did was called The Lost City of Z, and I was trying to put my feelings of being a father and my relationship with my children and my wife into the film as much as I could. The issue really is how much do the, what you might call the A story elements, you know, the jungle, the historical aspects, how much did they get in the way or how much did you allow them to be integrated properly? And here, I think you're allowed to access the personal much more because he's by himself for

so much of the film. And it's such an interior journey. And he's such a lonely person that the ruminations and the workings of his mind are very clear. It's a more subjective movie, I think, than something like The Lost Suzie or The Immigrant. There's less distance. So with the less distance, I think you're allowed more access into my personal feelings. But, you know, not to get too sententious but i i believe i've actually used this quote before and if if i have forgive me but if i haven't it's great to tell your listeners edward hopper the painter said uh somebody said well what are you trying to do when you paint a lonely guy in a diner or something or what are you trying to do he said i'm not painting loneliness

so what's your aim he said my only aim in painting is the most exact transcription of my most intimate impressions which i thought oh my god that's fantastic because that's really what you do you try the most exact transcription of your most intimate impressions and then let everybody else judge the The character in Ad Astra that Brad Pitt plays. I'm talking too much, aren't I? I'm sorry. No, this is literally

the purpose of this show is for you to talk. Well, I'm bloviating, but okay. Not at all. That character is actually the opposite of what you're identifying right now. Very quiet, very still,

very interior. You are not like that. At least the small amount of interaction I've had with you, you're very convivial, you're friendly, you're a storyteller, you're a fun guy to talk to well thank you why do you why is that why did this where did that character come from i don't think i'm the same person with

you that i am with my teacher from fifth grade you know i mean we're different yeah we're different with everybody right you know that's part of the magic enduring legend of Citizen Kane. That every person is almost like you have to, it's like an onion. You keep peeling the layers away and there's no core. You know, it's interesting. We're talking about this. How do you know a person?

What side of the person do you see? Herman Mankiewicz was the co-writer of Citizen Kane along with Orson Welles. And it's a matter of ongoing debate, which weirdly was started by Pauline Kael, which I think is a bit silly about who deserves more credit for the script. But one thing we're sure of is that Herman

Mankiewicz came up with the idea of the sled at the end. I hope I'm not ruining Citizen Kane for anyone who hasn't seen it. Exactly. And Welles detested it. Welles said, this is pop psychology because you're giving the audience the answer. He wanted it to be just this mystery you never actually knew the answer to.

Now, it's weird. I would actually argue against, if I may, Orson Welles' argument because I think that's precisely the point. It's this inanimate object, which is so quotidian. It's a kid's sled. And in a way, it says exactly what he'd hoped it would say. It's just that the idea that this word, the meaning of this word, what's it going to mean, is going to give you all the answers about who the person is, is folly.

So when you say to me, you don't seem like that person, that's true. I'm not that way with you. I'm certainly not that way with my wife or my children, but I've dealt with lengthy, lengthy bouts of, um, well, to be candid, depression and, and, and also lengthy bouts of terrible loneliness. And just because you don't see that side of me, it doesn't mean I don't have it. Sure. Of course. So I think it's incumbent upon the creative person or people to put the side that you're least comfortable with on the screen. I don't think it's our job to put what we're really comfortable with on the screen because if we're doing that, we're not revealing an unseen truth.

I don't think it's our job to give you the truth. I think it's our job to give you the truth. I think it's our job to give you a truth. And a truth for me, or any person who wants to be creative, is to reveal something that might not be comfortable. You mentioned fatherhood and your family with The Lost City of Z. And I thought about that a bit watching this film as well. I was going to ask you about your father, but I'm actually curious also about what your kids perceive your job is and if they have an understanding of the work that you do and if you present that to them. My children are absolutely glorious. I'm completely biased. very entertaining individuals and have provided me with great meaning in my life,

which everybody always says it's to the point where it's cliche, but it really is true. They have a very warped sense of reality. You know, I grew up in a semi-attached row house in Queens, New York, working class neighborhood on Friday and Saturday nights in front of Gantry's Pub. It often got violent. And it was 70s New York. That was a tough place to be. And my children don't understand that.

They understand walking the red carpet at the Berlin Film Festival. You know what I mean? They don't really know. Yeah. It's a different life. It's a different life. And, you know, we have dinners where, frankly, a lot of interesting and oftentimes famous people come to dinner. And it doesn't, and I think this is, by the way, a very good thing.

It doesn't faze them and they don't even really care. If you had said to me, you know, I don't know, you're going to, uh, David Hockney when I was in high school. Um, and yeah, I did know David Hockney was in high school. I'd be freaking out. My kids, they're like,

oh yeah, that's the guy who painted the thing. Isn't that cool? You know what I mean? They don't, it doesn't land with them. And I think that's great because they have a, an openness and a lack of social pretension and pretense and it's very

good it's very good but but at the same time i do worry about a certain not entitlement because i think i've raised them and my wife has raised them brilliantly by the way and done more of it than i have because i've been going off to make movies and so forth but as i've raised them not to be entitled but also they don't have a sense of reality about how fortunate we are to be occupying the space that we're in right now. And maybe that's good. Yeah, I wonder about that.

I mean, I have a little bit of identification with you, blue-collar family, New York, et cetera, et cetera. And I think that that shaped something about the way that I pursued my life. I wonder, and I guess the other thing too is that they understand that you're an artist and that the way that I pursued my life. I wonder, and did they, I guess the other thing too, is that they have an idea. Do they understand that you're an artist and that the opportunities that they do, that they do. I've, my wife and I have tried to impress upon them because my wife is an artist as well. We've tried to impress upon them the importance

of art for the soul. Now, my son, for example, my eldest child, who's going to be 14 fairly soon, which is a fact that my wife doesn't like to say out loud, but I'll say it for you. He's totally into cars, you know, and he often brings up absolutely absurd vehicles, you know, that I could never drive. Dad, when are you going to get a Corvette Z06?

I'm like, when you're 50. What do you mean? When am I going to get that car? I could never drive. Dad, when are you going to get a Corvette Z06? I'm like, when you're 50. What do you mean? When am I going to get that car? I got three kids. I can't put them in the back of a Corvette. What are you talking about? Dad, you need to get a Corvette. I need to get a Corvette.

Dad, when are you getting the BMW 7? I'm like, who am I raising here? Like Richie Rich? So I say to him, I say, well, it's very important that you, you know, you try to tell your 14 year old, about to be 14 year old son, not to be some materialist who's into cars. And you try to expose him as we have to as much art and as many artists as we can. Now it has some effect. It's interesting. When I first showed, when I showed him the Godfather, his reaction was, he said, the cinematography was very beautiful, Dad.

I like the buttery yellows. Wow. That's really your son. That's pretty good. That's pretty good. So he has. Good for Gordon Wallace. Yeah, he has developed a real eye, which is fantastic.

So you try to inculcate them as much as you can i think the importance of material wealth has been so obviously overestimated and the one thing i wish i could really tell my kids and have them know and understand is a fulfilling and passionate life is everything because you know i've seen all these you know, most of the kids I grew up with at public school and public school are dead or in jail. Most of the kids that I knew in high school when I went to a prep school, an elite prep school that Donald Trump, by the way, went to, they're all doing swimmingly well. A lot of them working on Wall Street and so forth. And I don't know how necessarily happy they are either. So you have to find a path that has nothing to do with either

winding up in jail or winding up doing something you don't really like. And that's what I've tried to tell my kids. Well, it's a segue to a question about work ethic. And this strikes me as a, at Astra Astra as a very hard film to make. I'm sure every film is also hard to make, but this is a different sort of genre, a different sort of setting. Can you tell me a little bit about what it was like to make this movie? Yeah, I mean, I stupidly said to myself, I'm going to go off to the jungle and I'm going to make this movie in the jungle. And that's going to be tough.

And I knew it would be. And then after I finished that movie, I said, I'll just go and I'm going to do this movie on a stage in LA and that'll be much easier, which is monumentally dumb. I mean, I had a more difficult time on this movie than I've had on any movie, and that includes Amazon. First of all, when you make a scene, the essence of the scene, they always say, is one character wants something from the other. Now you've got Brad Pitt sitting in a room by himself. Well, that's the core idea of a scene one taken away from you then you're going to put him in zero gravity so he's got to hang on wires which means in the wide shots it's in the vertical set and the close-up it's the horizontal set so you can't shoot them at the same time then what about

the backgrounds well we can't be near Neptune so it's got to be a green screen or project or in our case often not green screen but still something you can't be near Neptune so it's got to be a green screen or in our case often not green screen but still something you can't interact with really and you're robbing the actor of the ability to interact with the set or listen to the other actor so then you have a creative challenge coupled with a logistical challenge and i found myself very frustrated with doing two three four shots in a day when traditionally i like to do about 15 and you find yourself doing not too many takes because you know when you have a vertical set and brad is on a harness hanging 30 feet in the air by the way he was a trooper about it. He never complained to me once.

But I don't want to put the actors through that. It's physically very difficult. So, you know, I read this book called A Space Odyssey, which is the making of 2001. Great book. It's really good. And I was very entertained by it. And of course, being stupid,

I kind of wrote off a lot of Kubrick's issues to 1968 or 67 technology but you know that guy took four and a half years to make that movie for a reason these things are really hard to do and technology has made it somewhat easier but not much easier because sometimes with technology come other hurdles that you now have to you know for example even in the small area of sound well in 1930 if you recorded sound you had basically a dialogue track and a music track that was it and technology has allowed us to include all these different aspects to sound design but you've got to now worry about them so it doesn't make your life easier at all and in fact technology in some ways really makes it more arduous to make a film. I have huge admiration.

I mean, I know what Alfonso Cuaron went through on Gravity and what Chris Nolan went through on Interstellar. My jaw drops when I think of Gravity, what he went through. Because he was, I mean, I had zero G stuff, but there were times when that's not the case in the film. And I think he was in that world all the time for every scene of that movie. I mean, I think I'd go crazy. Do you think you and Brad underestimated how difficult it would be to do? Hard for me to answer for Brad. Like I i said he handled the zero gravity stuff like a champ and uh really was so patient with me but i certainly did um i underestimated also how difficult it would be to direct a scene when you really have to do it from the ground up so for

example if i'm sitting here shooting this scene, I can say to the cinematographer, okay, I want the camera over here and I put this lens on the camera and I can look at the shot and assess it. How does, is the lens too far from Sean? Is it too close to Sean? Do I have to, is it lit properly? Okay. I have a series of, I have a baseline. I can figure out how to design the shot. But a lot of times you have to create the shot from the ground up when it's all cg and so you literally it's almost like painting a picture and you have no reference what's it like near neptune and you're doing a cg shot well you have to create every single element in the shot and then you say well why doesn't the spaceship look

real in that moment i have to oh because it's not a glint on the solar. And then you say, well, why doesn't the spaceship look real in that moment? I have to, oh, because there's not a glint on the solar panel up there. You know what I mean? So in order to get some semblance of what we might call very similitude or really believability, it became an unending

and arduous process. And it's part of the reason, if not most of all the reason, that it took as long as it did to finish. Did get consumed with accuracy because i did okay because i feel like a lot of filmmakers when they make a film in space we have no conception of that as you say but still there's this desire to get it quote unquote right well you can't do it you can't it's it's a fool's errand i mean for example if if i were to really do zero gravity with Brad in zero gravity space for six months or whatever, he would look like Buddy Hackett or something. Because the zero gravity, all of a sudden, your skin starts to slack. You lose muscle tone.

I mean, it's bizarre. Your face changes. So there is a limit to what you can do. I wasn't going to do that. And I just think that it's a trap what you have to do is i think you have to do what is plausible and you have to do what is believable within the context of what you're doing in some ways you know if you're making star wars by the way i'm not bad mouthing those movies that george lucas's command of command of narrative was really astonishing,

and Empire Strikes Back, I think, is a flat-out masterpiece. But, you know, you're creating the cloud city of Bespin. You don't have to worry about what the real Bespin would look like. You know what I mean? It's totally created, and they're not worrying about zero gravity and all that. But here, if I tried to pull that off, it would be, you know, criticized and probably rightfully so. You know, it's very funny about this because

believability in the cinema is very different from believability in life. So for example, you'll do something that is actually correct and it looks totally fake. And both, that includes both the physical aspect of production, but also narrative. For example, I made a film called We Own the Night. And in the movie, Joaquin Phoenix at the end becomes what they call a provisional officer.

And then he finally winds up joining the police department. I can't tell you how many people said to me, that's just obviously that's bogus for the movie. And I did not invent that. There is something called the provisional officer program with five people a year go through it. But then the movies in the context, they didn't believe it. Now, does that mean that person who watched the movie and had that there is something called the provisional officer program with five people a year go through but then the movies in the context they didn't believe it now does that mean that person who watched the movie and had that problem is an idiot no it's your fault the filmmaker the filmmaker has to set the context where things are acceptable or not so for example steven spielberg can make raiders of the lost ark and i'll tell people this and they go, what are you talking about? Harrison Ford rides atop

a submarine for 2,000 nautical miles. Now, that doesn't mean the movie is bad. It means the movie was, the context was correct and people just bought it. They bought it in that context. Now, if I made a film where he did that, it would

be properly and correctly ripped to shreds because the context probably in my style is a little different. So, you know, this whole situation, it's really a trap. And you have to find a way to establish your reality and be consistent with your reality. Now, in my case, it was trying to adhere to what is plausible. That presents problems. But one of the things that struck me

about this movie is there's a couple of action set pieces in the movie and i don't really think you've ever done anything like that not at least in this way and i don't think anybody has to be honest with you that there's a lunar rover sequence which presented huge challenges which but it's awesome it's really well done. They tackled the moon by doing it at night with a very big light to do the sunlight on the moon. And I thought they did a terrific job. I think that was Linus Sandgren who shot it. He's excellent, the cinematographer. And they pulled it off.

I couldn't do that here because the territory they'd have to cover would be greater than our ability to light the space. So I couldn't steal from what he did. And, you know, Hoyte van Hoytema who was a cinematographer on this we tried to sort of problem solve and the solution we came up with was absurd but we shot with a 3d rig where there was a digital infrared camera an alexa infrared camera shooting the same image as a film camera and blending the images and shooting it in death valley and then the surface of the moon would be replaced by actual lunar photography so what you're seeing weirdly is partly shot on rotation on the moon and then you have to adhere to the

physics of one-sixth gravity so then when anything is flying or floating, you have to rely entirely on CG. And the movement itself of the craft, you have to choose and find a film rate that corresponds to what one-sixth gravity would even look like. So, yes, I've never shot action scenes like that, but I'm not sure who has. And I had done, I did a car chase in a movie called We Own the Night, which I found excessively boring to shoot, but rewarding to finish. You know, you storyboard these things down to the inch of their lives. And so you have a shot of, you know, it was that thing. It's, you know, a shot of Brad Pitt's eyes through a visor. And, you know, you say action and he gets kind of like wide eyed and you say cut.

And that's the piece you need for that. Yeah. So it's not really like directing a scene. And I enjoy finishing those sequences, but shooting them tends to be a bit of drudge work. And I have to say the arduousness of shooting with people in spacesuit costumes in Death Valley, that's not the wisest. I mean, if your air conditioning system breaks down inside your suit, as they did, you know, you're in a bit of trouble. So no regrets about pursuing more of a Michael Bay-esque kind of career?

You know, I know he's the butt of jokes, and in some ways I guess he should be. He does some amazing shit. He has amazing stuff. I mean, technically he is amazing. He's sort of like, if you're a musician, he's sort of like Neil Peart, the drummer of Rush, you know? Yes. Whereas, you know, to actually work on something like that.

You know, I just want to tell you, I just sneezed and I have a story about this. Tim Roth used to say that he had a dream that he could be as easygoing on screen and so easygoing that he'd feel comfortable to sneeze because he's never seen a real sneeze in a movie i think i've achieved some victory i'm doing a podcast i'm so relaxed we're keeping it in we're keeping it in well you should um what the hell are we talking about you were saying talking about neil pert, which is kind of amazing to me. Well, the reason I mention it is because there's something technically amazing. You know, you see Neil Peart and he's hitting everything ever and every gong behind him.

Now, is Neil Peart my favorite drummer? No, but the technical skill is undeniable. And anyone who's Neil Peart's favorite, you know, anyone who for Neil Peart's favorite, their favorite drummer, great power to them, you know. And I, you know, I, I've seen stuff where Michael Bay is setting up shots with, you know, six cameras and what he's shooting is you're like your jaw drops and the scale. I visited his set once. It was pretty, pretty crazy. So then you know what I'm talking about. The scale is almost unimaginable. And there were really very few people in the world who can manage that. And he's one of them.

Can you tell me about the upsides and the downsides of working on such a big production and with a big studio? Because this is really the first time you don't want to say compromise. It's sort of the wrong word because the movie's pretty uncompromising. But there's a level of collaboration and yet compromise that you have to engage in. Now, by the way, sometimes that does add to the work.

It's not always a subtractive thing. In other words, you can see those studio films that i was talking about from the 30s and often there was a mediation you know or the director would not do exactly what he or she wanted usually he oh almost always he um and in some ways that's okay i assume you've read picture no lillian lillian rossbuck with oh no i know the edge of courage yeah i well you're talking about the john houston movie yeah but that yeah it's a nightmare but that you're choosing one of the worst experiences like in the history of movies but the thing that you're saying

about the 30s and the way the films were made and the kind of like yeah that was a different kind of collaboration yeah that's that's a horrible story um you know, in Magnificent Emerson's, what happened to that film? Of course, there's all those, but there's also, I mean, look, by all accounts, Francis Ford Coppola fought terribly with Robert Evans making The Godfather. By all accounts. Who knows? Maybe that made the film better. I don't know. Maybe. I mean, Godfather 2, apparently Robert Evans was not involved and that's a monumental work.

But it's possible that the style and the magic of the Godfather is in part because of that conflict. I didn't have anything like that on this. I mean, I wasn't conflicting. I wasn't fighting with people and all that. But you still have to. It's still that discourse that I didn't have on the previous three films. I'd had final cut complete creative control and those films are for better or worse exactly what i wanted to make

here it's about 90 of what i wanted and you just maybe that extra 10 maybe there's some really great stuff in there that you hadn't thought of my my instinct is that that is the case what about working with somebody like brad you i re-watched the yards last night and i was kind of blown away by the number of wonderful actors in the movie and there are movie stars in that movie too they weren't when i made it that's true and like joaquin obviously and mark have done great fame yeah but you know i had charlize too by the way charlize of course right that cast is stacked but i don't really think you've ever worked with someone like brad who is a kind of world historic movie star yeah that's that's a whole different of course, right. That cast is stacked, but I don't really think you've ever worked with someone

like Brad who is a kind of world historic movie star. Yeah. That's, that's a whole different kettle of fish that you have to be more collaborative in that case. I mean, he is, he's got his ideas and you have to listen. And sometimes you have to sort of figure out like, okay, what's he trying to get at? Other times he's extremely clear. And, you know, having said that, he was also very open to me. You know, I mean, there are things that he's done in this movie I don't think that I've seen him do.

So he gave a lot to me and I was very grateful for that. I don't know. In other ways, it was exactly the same. I'm actually struck by how similar, for example, he and Joaquin are in terms of process, how much they have to think about it, how much you have to talk them through it, which doesn't mean they need handholding. It means that they demand the discourse. But that's good. That's what you want. And you want to be surprised by the actor. And he's right up there. I mean, he is a superb actor. Yeah. What was your perception of him before you guys

worked together? It's an interesting question. I, I, I had known him socially for a long time. He produced the lost city of Z for me. Uh, he and his producing partners, Jeremy Kleiner and Dee Dee Gardner. Um, I had, I've always liked him enormously. I mean, he's a lovely guy, extremely likable in a way that to be candid, a lot of actors sometimes aren't.

He has a good rep. Yeah. But you don't know, you know, until you get on the set. And in that way, I guess what surprised me was how sort of ferocious, passionate, intelligent, and like actively engaged. It's almost like, you know, you watch him play a stoner, for example. You don't think he's that guy who's really intense on set, but he is. He's extremely focused. He does not suffer fools gladly.

And he does not automatically defer. He wants to know what you're thinking. But like I said, this is almost exclusively a good thing because if you show up with somebody who's like, yeah, man, whatever you want, you kind of go, well, no, I kind of want more than what I bargained for. I don't want what I bargained for. I don't want what, I don't want what's in my head. I want what's better than what's in my head. And Brad will do that. Brad will give you what's better than what's in my head. And Brad will do that. Brad will give you what's better than what's in your head. Also, I mean, there's a basic truth, which is undeniable.

You'll set up a shot. Brad's not in it. You know, you're setting it up with a crew member or whatever. And you say, what's wrong with the shot? It's a banal shot or whatever. And then all of a sudden he sits in it. You go, oh, okay. The shot becomes something else. That's just a fact.

You can't, there's a reason why, you know, there's only two people like that on the planet or three people. That's just a fact. You can't, there's, there's a reason why, you know, there's only two people like that on the planet or three people. You know what I mean? There's can't buy charisma. You can't buy charisma. Did you make this movie because you wanted to, um,

not just tell this story, but I don't know, raise your status. No, not at all. Your profile, because you know, you came in and we were talking about some of your contemporaries.

This is actually mentioned in the New Yorker piece about you as well, which I thought was very interesting and I have a couple of questions for you about. But, you know, Tarantino, Fincher, PTA, Wes Anderson, Sofia Coppola. There's a group of people all mostly around the same age, all, you know, if not masters, certainly like among the most celebrated filmmakers. You're often in that conversation among cinephiles but maybe not among normal moviegoers so a movie like this which is deeply ambitious and also deeply personal and is wonderful feels like a kind of a bid to get into some of that conversation because it's big studio big movie star i'm in a way i'm sorry to hear you say that i i understand why you say that, but I've never made a film with a careerist calculation. That's not true.

Maybe the only time I ever did it was my first movie where I put a genre hook into a very personal story. But other than that, no, I didn't make the film as a career stepping stone or something. I mean, Brad Pitt's in it, but Brad Pitt is in it because you get a very charismatic movie star, and he brings a mythology to it that you can then play with. You can criticize maleness, this idea of masculinity, but you have to start, if you're going to start somewhere that's truly mythic then you can destroy the myth in other words you cast wallace shawn as the astronaut as great as wallace shawn is you're not debunking any myth right it's an interesting movie so the the calculation was i'd always wanted to work with brad and um i'd loved his work in several films

and also that you have this great myth that you can then take apart by the way he was totally open to that this is a discussion i had with him i think i'm asking no i know what you're asking slightly different which is not necessarily career no i know what you're asking the other thing i would say is and because but yeah but they're connected i know what you're asking but they're connected because a lot of it a lot of it is perception I know the cinephile thing versus the wider audience, but here's what I must unfortunately remind you. My reputation in Europe is very different than it is here. And the reason is simple. I've had better distribution there.

I had Harvey Weinstein distribute two of my films and treat both of them had you know a lot of polonium in them i mean they didn't want to touch me put them out there with tongs you know uh another time i had a film the first film i ever did was with a company called fine line which went bankrupt um another time i made a film it switched distributors uh we on the night was owned by universal then columbia bought it from them So I've been very lucky in my life, incredibly lucky, incredibly fortunate to make the films I've made, incredibly fortunate to be in the position I'm in. I acknowledge that. So all you listeners who are going to say, oh, he's taking it for you, I'm not. I acknowledge how lucky I am.

But in this one area, in distribution, I have been very unlucky. I've had pretty awful distribution on several of the films, not all, but several of them. And also, I think the films don't have as much humor as those films do by my friends that you've mentioned. Interesting. And I think that… So funny because you're a funny guy. Well, the films are about as funny as pancreatic cancer i i i don't know what that is i i have to say two lovers is funny you know i let me tell you when joaquin and i were doing it we thought we

were doing a comedy we sat there laughing and laughing on set we were laughing and like oh this is hilarious and i remember this first rough cut screening for people. We had about 25 people there, people that we knew. I screened the film. Lights came up. Several people came up to me and said, that's one of the saddest movies. And I was like, I felt such a feeling of failure. I thought, how can this be?

I was laughing and laughing on set. The truth is you can't hide you know from who you are and i have i guess this kind of slavic or russian maybe russian i'll say russian jewish kind of tragic streak in me i mean it's certainly to be pretentious it's certainly there and and the great russian writers you know that they have this i mean you hard pressed to find all the great jokes and anna karenina but i don't know i guess it makes its way into the work that culturally that's my background and it's not the same for quentin or paul thomas anderson or west or certainly sofia so i don't. I think it has to do with just your essence and who you are. And I think that that is the reason for what you're talking about.

And I don't think Europe has the same preoccupation with a sense of jokiness in the films that, that America does. I was reading this New Yorker profile. Oh, it must be. I haven't, by the way,

it must be. Okay. So I've skimmed it, you know, I haven't, by the way. It must be... Okay, so... I've skimmed it, you know. I wanted to make sure there was nothing horrible in it. Well, Martin Scorsese says he looks up to you in it, which has got to be bizarre. Well, I mean, it's bizarre.

I have to tell you, you know, they say you shouldn't meet your heroes. He is one of the most remarkable remarkable beautiful human beings you could possibly imagine the great thing about martin scorsese is he is the least disappointing person on planet earth and francis francis coppola too francis these people are you meet them they're like towering figures and there's a reason and marty is uh incredibly. And he's very generous with younger filmmakers. So he can say that, and that's lovely. But we all know that it's about his work and what he's done. I don't mean for him.

I mean for us. Because everybody in my generation looks to those guys. That wasn't just me. I mean, everybody. And that's Marty just being generous, I really believe. Was it strange to submit yourself to the process of opening up your life in a big way? I think because obviously a lot of your films you can interpret your personal life. Oh, you mean in the article?

I hated it. You hated it. I hated it, and I came to regret it terribly. By the way, I don't think that it's i hate to say this it's not an untruthful piece from you know it's the one thing i regret is you know i joke a lot and in print your jokes seem they they lack the delivery so sometimes you know i wonder if i seem uh bitter and so forth. But, you know, almost all the time I'm, you know, sort of joking with them and you can't really tell that from the print. I know this stuff because even if I had to go through it all with a fact checker who called me last week, it was a three hour long phone call going over every quote of mine in the article. And I thought, oh my God.

And I just thought to myself, why did I do it? Why did I say okay to this? I don't know. You really should speak through the work. It's funny. Stanley Kubrick himself did a New Yorker profile with a writer named Jeremy Bernstein in 1966. And he didn't really do anything after that

ever again. So. I'm amazed you're here with me now. Well, no i i like this because people if i'm joking people can hear the the delivery for example print is different and also you know he was in my home and by the way the guy that wrote it the guy named nathan heller is lovely guy and a fantastic writer i just felt like so self-conscious like i'm you know you just you just i guess i'm overly sensitive but you worry about everybody hating your guts it's why i'm not on twitter or instagram

or facebook or any of that i i if i read you know james gray's a jerk 15 times i couldn't bear it so i shut myself off from it that's a I'm curious about your relationship to the idea of success around this new movie. And what, what is success for you? Are you consumed by the way it's received or the box office, or you feel like it's done and it's in the past and I'm onto my next thing? I wish I could tell you that, you know, I'm done. I'm moving on to the next thing. But you don't, you know, you want your film to be well-received and you want the movie

to make money. That's how you get to make more of them may i say that my motive my ambition the level of my ambition has changed a lot since i was in my mid-20s so for example when i was right out of film school you know i wanted to be felini or something but you realize that that's dumb for many reasons one is that Fellini exists he's called Fellini and your job is to be you and let the chips fall where they may you can't predict any of that stuff in order to be truthful honest you can't try to be the next Fellini so then that gets taken away from you that ridiculous ambition Then you realize that nobody is really famous. I mean, if you said, if I said to you the name Bougereau, do you know who that is?

I don't. Right. So you know who Cezanne is? A lot of people do. Not everybody, by the way, but a lot of people know who Cezanne is, famous painter. Bougereau was like the most famous painter of his day in France. And the impressionists were considered kind of acts or like idiots. And we don't know who Bougereau is now. You can't ever consume yourself with that

kind of ambition. So then you say, well, do you hope the film is a success? Do you hope it gets good reviews? Yeah, of course I do. But that's simply because you want to make another one. And the more success you have, the more freedom you have, the more space to create. And may I say also freedom is overrated. There's no art without discipline. So you have to work. I like to say I want all the freedom so that I can then box myself in.

Because you have to be open to other people's ideas. The film's going to get away from you no matter what you do. So you have to be willing to accept ideas from elsewhere. Final cut, for example, doesn't mean your opinion is the only one that matters. It means you have the ability to absorb all the good ideas and also get rid of the ones that you think harm the film. And that's not an easy thing to do. You know, if you look at something like Heaven's Gate, the very famous movie that sank United Artists, I would say if Michael Cimino made any mistake at all, and I loved his ambition

with the film, I don't love Heaven's Gate as much as a lot of other people do. I think it's like the best looking movie ever. I love what Vilmo Zygmunt was the cinematographer. It was incredible. But I feel like dramatically it's kind of flabby. It's tough to get through. Yes. And I love its political ideas, but I think it's just,

I don't get into the characters enough for me. For me. Still a very worthwhile attempt. And I feel that he took Final Cut and his control after Deer Hunter, and he made a three-hour and 40-minute movie, which though tremendously ambitious, I think he didn't grab onto the limitations. He didn't, he abused, in my mind, the idea of complete creative control. In my mind. Other people would have a bigger argument with me. That's fine.

My feeling is you get final cut, you make an hour and 20, I mean, an hour and 41 minute movie. You know what I'm saying? That you use that as the opportunity to be free within a certain space. I don't want to abuse your time. I only have a few more questions for you, but- No, I've enjoyed this very much. You can abuse my time.

It's just between you and I got to go pick up the kids kids that's it okay well i won't abuse your kids time then no that's 3 p.m or something i don't know what time i gotta get them well text from my wife she'll tell me what time okay well we'll wait until she interrupts us because you mentioned before you went to the amazon you knew that there would be a challenge in it but that you wanted to pursue it you thought that that making ad astra would perhaps be a little bit easier, though it would have its limitations that you're describing. I did read in that story that you're going to return home for your next film, maybe. Well, maybe, you know, you never know. I have to do an opera next month, which has got its own set of challenges that's in Paris. But after that, you never know where you're going to be mentally,

emotionally. How does one do an opera i have no idea i've been what does that mean you're directing an opera i'm directing marriage of figaro right but so that's been staged thousands of times god i know so what have you haven't done this before no i never and they came to me many years ago and they booked these things five years in advance you know five years even mention this when I saw you last, that you, this was something you thought about or. Because I, it was one of those things where, you know, you bury it in the back of your head, you commit to it five years ago and you're like, well,

I'll be dead by then or whatever. And now here it is. And, um, you know, the guys, they were lovely from Paris came to see me and they said, we'd like you to do an opera. And I said, no, I'm really not interested. They said, okay, good. They said, what, I said, well, what opera are you even talking about? They said, Marriage of Figaro. I said, that's not even my favorite Mozart. My favorite Mozart's Don Giovanni. I said, no, that's not your favorite. They said, good. I said, well, Mozart's not even my favorite guy for opera. I like the Italians. They said, good. And the more I tried to dissuade them, the more they were excited about it. By the way, it travels here to LA, uh,

in May to the Dorothy Chandler pavilion, the LA opera. I have no idea what I'm doing. It's horrifying. And you're quite right. It's been staged a trillion times. So then the question is, what can you bring to it?

It's exciting. Well, I'm trying to get myself out of it. In other words, no, I'm, I mean, I'm going to go do it, but I'm saying I'm trying to take myself out of it. In other words, I'm not trying to make it about me. You know, the, you know, something out of what they call the Reggie theater tradition where all of a sudden it's, you know, marriage of Figaro set inside the Fox newsroom or something, you know, that it's that kind of thing.

Don't do that. No, I'm doing something that's the opposite of that. I'm trying to read up as much on what a production in 1786 would have looked like. Because sometimes what's old is new again. So I'm trying to do that. But really the goal is to take myself out of it, to get my ego out of it, to not put the director front and center in the opera, to put Mozart front and center. You know, he was the guy playing the harpsichord for the singers during the opera, conducting. He was very active.

Well, we don't have that. He must have been an amazing figure to watch. And we don't have that. So I feel like I've got to try and somehow bring some kind of equivalent magic to that and step away and say it's about Mozart. It's about the music and it's about the forest. It's not about me. I don't know what I'm going to do.

I'm in trouble. I look forward to seeing it in LA. Great. I'm sure it will be wonderful. I know people always ask you what's your favorite film. I'm not going to ask you that. Of all time? Yes.

La Strada. Okay. ask you what's your favorite film i'm not going to ask you that of all time yes la strada okay is that so the thing i want to know is what is the film that you return to the most that you go back and look at i love that little detail in that story about you about your family falling asleep and then you retire to the guest space and oh that's true that is true i think i can relate to that as i that is true true. The kids go to bed. My wife goes to bed early because she has to, because she's the one often gets up early for them. Don't worry, I make breakfast too. I actually also flat out need less sleep than she does.

I'm one of those weirdos that needs only about five hours. Me too. Yeah. So that's why we watch films all night. Yeah. And I go into the guest house where I have a fantastic projector. Uh,

and I, I try to watch something that's at least 10 years old. I don't, I don't watch anything new. So I'm a little out of touch with modern movies or what you call current cinema. People say,

well, why, why is that? That's a real problem. I think it's the opposite. I think people who obsess about what's current are losing the plot. Because if you were studying or examining only what's current, then you would think that Vertigo by Alfred Hitchcock was not worth your watching. Because within the first 10 years of its release, it was considered shit. So why Hitchcock really blew it this time?

I think you can only start judging movies 10 years out, and then the cultural noise starts to dissipate, and you can really focus on what the film says. Take a perfect example. Apocalypse Now, very important movie for me as a kid. Raging Bull, very important movie for me as a kid, which I met Francis and Marty. Okay, both of those films that you would be appalled to know had really tough time of it with the critics. Frank Rich called Apocalypse Now, I believe he called it one of the worst films ever made.

At least that's what Francis Copppola told me which i'd not actually seen in print which seems insane to me but you can see why frank rich might have written that right because it was 1979 in its release there was can the noise of that festival and there was of course vietnam was only four years in the past so the defeat of of obviously of south vietnam was four years in the past the fall of saigon so a lot of energy about the movie and the defeat of of obviously of south vietnam was four years and past the fall of saigon so a lot of energy about the movie and the production of the movie absolutely there was the reception exactly there was a little talk about you know apocalypse never how long it had taken now coppola had lost it raging bull it was all about de niro getting fat it's like come on guys. So you need some time away from the film to start judging it for what it is. Now, of course, through time, film's meaning changes even from 30 years to 60 years old. So I recognize that too. I'll give you an example. I showed Bonnie and Clyde to my son and he just, I think he almost sort of fell apart. He just said, dad, that's so

dark. It's so dark. Kept saying that. And I had watched Bonnie and Clyde at his age and thought, I remembered in my head thinking how funny and sad it was, how funny and dark it is. I watched it within this time and I had to acknowledge, A, that the movie was every bit as good as I remembered, if not better. But B, it's not that funny. It's pretty grim. Pretty grim assessment of where we were in 1967. Pretty grim assessment of where we were in the 1930s. And it's a pretty grim assessment of who we are. By the way, very valid. And like I said, the movie was as good, if not better than ever. But the point is that the notion of time what that means to a film matters immensely and i like to watch old movies i like to see i like to learn about what it is i don't know yet

the recent one for example i saw was a lady in the bullfighter bud bedeker movie with robert stack i haven't seen it yeah it's an amazing movie. They'd cut like 40 minutes out of it, but then it finally got restored, thank heavens, by UCLA Film Archives. And the movie's

a masterpiece. So, I don't know. How would that have felt to watch that movie when it came out, you know? Well, you know,

I end every episode of this show by asking filmmakers what's the last great thing that they've seen. I could probably ask you about any film from any decade, but I am curious if there is something in more recent history that

you really responded to there's movies i respond to all the time uh i was just on the jury running the jury president of the jury which of course immediately makes every award you give make i hate that award stuff jesus politicizes in a this in a big way. It's the worst. I mean, I had at the ceremony, this is a Marrakesh film festival, which by the way, is a great film festival.

For this, an official ceremony, we had all the directors, I had all the directors come and I had all the directors stand up at the ones that didn't win awards because I felt like the idea of giving awards out is just dumb.

It's dumb. I'm sorry. Michael Jordan can win the championship. You know what I mean? That's it. That's it. He either made the basket

or he didn't. In my unfortunate case, he made the basket. I know what I mean? That's it. This either made the basket or he didn't. In my unfortunate case, he made the basket. I'm a Knicks fan. Likewise. Um, yeah, it's a long,

long suffering Knicks fan. Anyway, the point is in that, in art, that's a absurdity. But having said that, um, first of all,

half the movies I saw in Marrakesh were directed by women. They were all sensational. And the movie we gave the prize to, I thought was totally beautiful. It was called Joy. I think it's coming on Netflix. I think they bought it. And it's magnificent. It was made by some young woman who never made a movie before.

It's beautiful. And so I see at film festivals, for example, I see stuff all the time. It's why I do it, by the for example I see stuff all the time it's why I do it by the way you see stuff all the time you can't see in the United States

you see stuff that you can see in the States but it would fall back you know behind I do love I mean I love I have

no objectivity at all I have to say about most of the people whom I know who make films but I love them all I mean

those movies I see instantly, I see the attempt to do something beautiful and whether they even work or not, I don't even know. I remember seeing Punch Drunk Love and I thought, well, this is beautiful. And I didn't care what anybody else thought or said, or it didn't even make any difference to me. So I'm in a weird way, the wrong person to ask about, certainly American cinema, because most of the time, if it's a heralded movie in some way,

I've at least met, for example, Damien Chazelle is a great guy. And I saw First Man and I thought it was terrific. I can't even, not that I even should, I can't even tell you if it's great or not. Listeners of this show know that I think it's great. Okay, I love it. I think it's terrific. But who knows? I mean, I can't even tell you if it's great or not listeners of this show know that I think it's great okay I love it

I think it's terrific but who knows I mean I don't know I know the guy I like him a lot and then does that color how I think of the film it probably does

probably but you also you know you have such a keen understanding of film history and what it takes to make something now at this stage of your career

like you must know that there is I'll tell you what it's a good question to ponder on this level. If I see that the point of the film is to be personal in some way, is to convey the inner life, then I'm a fan.

If I see it's made for mercenary reasons and I have no interest, so I don't even go to those. I mean, for example, I don't, I, I didn't,

I'm trying to think of a perfect example of a movie like that. Just made for mercenary reasons. Just, you know, well, it's, I hate to say it. It's a lot of,

you know, studio fare, which is made for, um, no reason other than to just rake in the dough. And on those kinds of projects, I just don't see them. So, okay. One thing about that. which is made for no reason other than to just rake in the dough. And on those kind of projects, I just don't see them. So, okay, one thing about that, and then I'm going to let you go,

because this is actually quite interesting to me, and I know how you feel about certain maybe superhero movies or a certain kind of action genre. Well, I want to be clear about that. I'm sorry, you can finish your question, but it's an important one. Well, and you can address this when I ask you, because you know that in the history of Hollywood, there are certain films that are assigned for mercenary reasons. And then an artist can bring something to it that makes it evolve or makes us understand it in a different way.

Or there's also a way of looking at film history where something that is made for mercenary reasons develops a different reputation over time. Bud Boddicker is a good example of a filmmaker who really worked inside the system, made a lot of movies, made a lot of movies at the time that I think the people who paid for them probably thought of them as kind of grinded out daily cinema. But he has taken on this new reputation over the last 30 years among cinephiles. So I wonder if you think that there is a certain kind of mercenary work that happens today that will evolve over time and we'll see it differently. It's a great question. Yeah, you're right. Sometimes things can be done for mercenary reasons that turn out to be beautiful. They're almost like a strange, and the cinema has this capacity for sort of one-offs.

In other words, directors whose work you don't respect and maybe are arrogant about, and then all of a sudden you see something really beautiful emerge. It's why I think individual genius is a nonsensical concept because you have all these people around you and all of a sudden it's an alchemic thing. Now, I'll give you an example of someone who I think is a very good director, but who needed that alchemic thing around him in the studio system. And that's a director named Richard Fleischer. So if you see a movie, I think is a great movie called the Boston Stranger with Tony Curtis. I know it. Yeah.

It's amazing movie. Amazing. And Tony Curtis is brilliant in it. Now it has to be seen on the big screen because he's using all this multi-screen stuff in it, but Tony Curtis gives an astonishing performance. And I'm not sure. I like the narrow margin,

which is another Richard Fleischer movie compulsion with Orson Welles. Another one, which is great about Leopold and Lomert. and I'm not sure. I like The Narrow Margin, which is another Richard Fleischer movie. Compulsion with Orson Welles, another one which is great about Leopold and Lowe murders. That's great, but I don't know if he ever made another movie which reached the psychological complexity of Boston Strangler.

Now, why he made that film, we don't know, and a filmmaker is never divorced from what is fad or fashion or or his his or her time so for example you'll see some 60s movies which have all these kind of like hippy dippy things in it which date it and the movie becomes terrible but all of a sudden some of them like for example i love midnight cowboy i I love it. Is it late 60s? Absolutely it is. I totally buy it.

I think it's consistent with the rest of the film. I love it. There are other films like, you know, The Trip or something, which are really great on my nerves. They're hard to watch for me. So, you're right. This is an ever-flu fluid form of judgment. Now, about the superhero movie thing, you know, I've been quoted, but I need to be clear about this. There are superhero films that I think are really good. And I'm glad for them.

What I declaim is that the studios are making only superhero movies. Audiences are now going to only superhero movies. Now, I would say that about anything. If every movie I saw was a Western, wouldn't you be like, oh my God, I got another Western? Another Western? And I don't understand why audiences don't seem to have that problem now. I mean. They will eventually.

They will. The only movie they're seeing has, you know, Captain America in it. Now, I use Captain America for a reason. I found Joe Johnstone made the first one a tremendously entertaining movie. I watch it with my kids and we really enjoyed it. It's a classical war movie though. Is it really? Well, it is.

You're right. Well, World War II, that's true. But it was an extremely well-made movie. I batman returns the second tim burton batman is a really interesting movie and kind of a great movie and i think uh michelle pfeiffer is brilliant and it really acknowledges her humanity obviously i think what heath ledger achieved in in with chris nolan he really got at something he was really something anarchic, and there's something in there that you cannot deny that is really personal to Chris, and that's great.

My only problem is that our industry has become like only superhero movies. So then, you know, there has to be another subject that we can explore. I mean, if you gave me every day, if you gave me the same thing to eat, you know, by day 36, I'd be pretty angry. That's my problem. It's not the superhero thing. It can be done beautifully. Richard Donner's first Superman has a wonderful sense of myth and of comic touch.

And Gene Hackman's incredible in that movie. It's really funny. Oh, despair. Oh, despair. You know, this whole thing. And so, it's not my problem with those movies. That's the only thing.

It's like they've conquered everybody. Well, I hope everyone goes to see Ad Astra, James. You're one of my favorite people to talk to. Oh, thank you, Sean. That's lovely. You're one of my favorite people

to talk to. Thank you. Thanks again. Thanks so much to Amanda Dobbins and thank you to James Gray for that conversation. Please keep your ears peeled to the big picture next week. I'll be joined obviously by Amanda and maybe our pal Chris Ryan where we'll talk about Downton Abbey

and perhaps Breaking Bad and Deadwood and try to understand why there's so many damned TV movies on big screens.