The Big Picture - Life and Death in the American West With ‘Lean on Pete’ Director Andrew Haigh | The Big Picture (Ep. 58)

Episode Date: April 13, 2018

Ringer editor-in-chief Sean Fennessey chats with filmmaker Andrew Haigh about his emotionally devastating ‘Lean on Pete,’ about an orphaned boy (Charlie Plummer) and his horse, the titular Pete, and their journey from Oregon to Wyoming in search of a long-lost family member. Haigh also discusses his long career as a director and the difference between making TV shows and making movies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

I wish that all directors were maybe a little bit more honest about how they felt after they watched their assemblies of their films. You know, most of them end up heading their hands going, oh my god, my career's over. I'm Sean Fennessy, editor-in-chief of The Ringer, and this is The Big Picture, a conversation show with some of the most interesting filmmakers in the world. It's not often I see a movie that really devastates me. When you see hundreds of movies a year, you can become pretty desensitized to the structure and the tricks that filmmakers use to manipulate audiences. But I was crushed by Lean on Pete, the newest film from writer-director Andrew Haig.

It's a movie about an orphan boy played by Charlie Plummer and his horse, the titular Pete, and their journey on foot from Oregon to Wyoming in search of a long-lost family member. You may remember some of Haig's past work, like HBO's Looking and the films Weekend and 45 Years. He makes intimate, patient movies about deep relationships, and Lean on Pete is one of his best. I talked to Andrew about telling his story from a European perspective, taking your time as a director, and capturing the beauty of the American frontier. Here's Andrew Haig.

Delighted to be joined today by Andrew Haig. Andrew, thank you for coming in. It's nice to be here. Andrew, beautiful new film, Lean on Pete. It's a little bit different from some of your other films. It shares the idea of intimacy and closeness, but it's in this great expansive world in some ways. How did this story come to you?

I read the book probably, oh God, it was five years ago. I got given the book by my partner actually. He said, you're going to love it. You're going to really respond to this book. And I read it. And it's just sometimes when you read material, it hits you on a very kind of gut, kind of visceral level. And that book did. And it's sometimes hard to articulate exactly why it has such an effect, but it just really did have an effect. And then the fact that it was a very kind of oddly intimate story, but set in this wider context, both kind of socially, politically, just in terms of the landscape, everything, it felt like it was a small story that also kind of

expanded into a wider scope. What's it like to decide to adapt something? It's hard because, you know, I read a lot of books with the thought about whether it could be a movie. And in fact, when I read anything, I can't help but think of it as a movie. It's just how my brain works. So it's a tricky thing. You have to consider, can this even be adapted? Is the material correct for adaptation? What can I do to it that's going to be my version of this story? And it takes a while to kind of understand if you can do that. Do you speak to the author? Do you say, I want to take liberties with X, Y, and Z? How does that work? Yeah, I mean, after I got the rights, I spent some time with him. And I went out to Portland and visited him.

And that's where he lives and chatted about stuff. And he was really helpful in the process. I would send him first drafts and, you know, drafts after that. And he would make suggestions and say, this doesn't sound like anything that Del or whoever Charlie would say or doesn't make sense. And that was really useful for me because, you know, even though I spent, before I wrote the script I spent probably four months

out in Oregon and in fact you know I went on the whole road trip from Portland all the way to Denver and so I spent like three months on the road there and a month in Portland going to race meets and so I kind of embedded myself in the world as much as I could but still Willie the writer of the book understands that world more than I ever could so it was very useful for me to get his side of it and get his understanding of the story a bit so I could try and be as kind of authentic and grounded in the world as I possibly could be. Was that the first time you had been to that part of the States? I've spent, I've actually done a lot of road trips in my life. I'm sort of obsessed by driving around America, so I've done a lot. Oh, interesting.

I've done probably three, four-month road trips around the States, and I've driven a lot. I've lived here and stuff. So I wouldn't say I know America, because what does that even mean? I don't know. Nobody does. You know where you live, I suppose, and that's about it. But I've certainly spent a decent amount of time here.

So is that sort of what spoke to you about Charlie, this sort of itinerant person who is traveling across this part of the country that maybe we don't think about as much to? It wasn't so much about that, although that was interesting to me. I liked the fact that it sort of played with kind of a more American genre a little bit, especially just in a very simple kind of way. Traditionally, you think of kind of, I suppose, the American myth is people traveling west to discover their freedom.

And, you know, this was this kind of slightly strange story about a kid traveling east, like on the reverse Oregon Trail, essentially, like not looking for freedom, but looking for security and stability. And I found that really interesting what that said about aspects of perhaps the American dream and perhaps aspects about America and certainly aspects about this character. And it was certainly his isolation and his aloneness in the world and how if you do not have family to support you, you don't have friends to support you, you don't have people around you to help you, you don't have society around you that helps you, how you can fall through the cracks incredibly easily and end up just alone in all senses of the

word. There's something interesting in the movie where there's sort of outer monologue. You know, a lot of times you think you're reading a novel and you hear inner monologue, but because so much of the film is Pete and Charlie and they're on this journey, Charlie is talking. You know, what was that like to kind of craft a story with sort of a one-sided dialogue? Yeah, I mean, for me, what's so interesting about that is that, you know, I never wanted to sentimentalize the story. I mean, I think it's hard when you do a story about a boy and an animal because suddenly you have these visions of what that is in your head.

And this isn't that film, I don't think, and we tried very hard to not. It's not a sentimental version of that kind of story. And the aspects of him and the horse you know when he you know essentially he has nobody apart from that horse so the sadness to me and what i find interesting is that he opens up to an animal that doesn't understand him that isn't understanding him and i find that sort of heartbreaking so and it was never about the horse is like understanding what charlie's going, you know, or, you know, feeling his pain because he's not. He is just a horse.

Right. Their connection is there's a blankness to Pete. You know, there's no. He is just a horse. He may, like, react sometimes that makes you think, oh, he understands. But he isn't understanding what. I mean, he may pick up. I do think animals can pick up on your emotional state.

So I think he is picking up on Charlie's emotion. But he doesn't understand the extent of his pain and what he's going through. And that to me fed into the wider idea of this story about a kid that has nobody and is losing everybody and has no one to rely on. And his relationship with the horse is about his need to be cared about and cared for, which he's not getting. And he wants to treat the horse like he would like to be treated. He wants to care for that horse like he would like to be cared for by other people. Are you a horse person? No, not at all.

Not at all. I mean, you know, like I like them, but I don't ride horses. I can't say I've ever been around them. I rode a horse once and fell off it when I was like 10. So I have no feeling about them. I mean, it was great working with the horse. And that world, the world of like low-level horse racing is very interesting to me. And, you know, I knew nothing about that either.

But people, you know, existing in those worlds of, you know, making no money. This is not glamorous. It's not like being in a nice horse racing track in California. It's like low-level racing where jockeys are making no money, where trainers are making no money, where the horses are probably being pushed too hard because they need to make more money. The idea of the story being populated by people who were struggling at every level, everybody is struggling, nobody's demonized. That was what was in the book is a very tender exploration of all of these groups of people that he meets along the way

and part of the journey, who don't have much and that when you don't have much, you sometimes don't always make the right decisions. What was it like to sort of build that world? Because I think we think horse racing and we think like Seabiscuit, you know, and the grandstands and the betting on the horse racing in that way. But this is obviously way more low level, way more to the ground. And I've never seen a horse racing set up like that. How did you figure out how to build all of that world? Yeah, and luckily a lot of it is in the book, but it was just going, seeing those environments and seeing the kind of people that go to those environments.

Even on the biggest race day, the stadium is not full of people. You're lucky if you get 200 people there. And Pete in the story is a quarter horse race, which I didn't even know existed. It's a short sprint of a race. It doesn't go round and round the track. It's literally like, you know, it can be like 500 yards and that's it. Right, like a sprinter.

Sprinter, yeah. And so that was a new world to me. And so I just, you know, I spent time, I met jockeys and trainers and, you know, met the people that, like, live on the backside of the track and look after the horses, and all of that was really fascinating. There's such a sense of community. Were you eager to try to delicately lard each of those experiences with some sort of metaphor or feeling about what was going on in this country?

Yeah, I mean, it's hard. I didn't want it to be like people shouting at the audience. It's not a state-of-the-nation film. It's not about that. It is about Charlie, essentially. Can't help but also referencing what's happening in society and the incredible inequality that exists. And it isn't just America.

It's no different in the UK or in many parts of the world. That level of inequality where there are huge swathes of people really, really struggling just to get food on the table. I do think we seem to live in a world where that's forgotten about a lot of the time and doesn't become almost politically important. There's a sort of loud, quiet, loud feeling to the movie. It's very deliberate at paces, but then there are these shocking and dramatic moments that come in short bursts.

Was that a very purposeful choice to sort of pace it that way? I think it's weird. I think all my films end up being paced the same way. It's like I almost can't help it. I think even if I tried to make some big thriller, it would probably end up being the same as what this film is. And even if I have tried to do things

differently, but it's just for whatever reason it can't. The way I make films comes out a certain way. The pace is a certain thing. Why do you think that is? I don't know. I think I suppose it is how I see the world, which I see the world as like a slow slog. You have such vibrance today, this morning, as we're chatting.

But I think that's the thing. It's not that life is slow, but life is consistent, I think. The majority of our lives follow a very consistent flow and pattern. And sometimes things do burst into them. You know, tragedy can burst out of nowhere. Pain can burst out of nowhere. You can suddenly be perfectly happy and then drop into misery very, very quickly. But I think on the whole, we go through our lives on a pretty even

keel. And I suppose I think instinctually I want my films to reflect that, I suppose, the ongoing endless nature of our lives rather than a fast-paced hour and a half and then

happy ending and that's the end. Right, no Transformers movies for you coming any time soon. I have a funny feeling that they wouldn't want me to make a Chad Swarbrows movie. You never know these days. You never know. It could be interesting. There is something, like I said, a little different about the big vistas and the beautiful photography of this movie. There was some of that in 45 years as I was re-watching it.

I realized that you did do that, but this is much more expansive. And what was it like to sort of photograph this country? Yeah, it's good. I mean, look, it's hard when you grow up in Europe or you grow up in England, which is small. It feels like a small country. And it is a small country. And the landscape is small and the environments are small. You grow up looking towards America.

It feels like this big expanse, and not just in terms of landscape, in terms of everything. Like America's been very good at, you know, exporting its culture around the world. So we see all that and we grow up, you know, interested in that. And I think Europeans can't help but be drawn towards America to that extent. Look, let's face it, most of Americans came from Europe. A lot of Americans came from Europe.

So I think it's part of our nature in Europe to be drawn towards whatever America feels like it holds. So it was great to be here and film that. But I think for me, I like to think of, there are some like, he does end up being in the wider expanses of kind of the desert. But for me, it's all about environment and how environment affects us individually on a profound level. So whether it's weekend and it's the environment of Nottingham and

the buildings, or whether it's 45 years in the environment of a small town in Norfolk, and then the fields outside the town, or the racetracks, or the suburban elements of Lean on Pete, or the desert, it's all about what you are surrounded by and how that affects you. So to me, I like to photograph. Photographing the desert was the same as photographing the inside of a house to me, if that makes sense. It's all about how does the environment affect my character. It has this incredible sensation when Pete and Charlie are walking and you sense that they are lost and they don't even know where the next road is

and they're just even know where the next road is. And they're just surrounded by nothingness. And it's kind of it speaks to that endless feeling that you're talking about, too. We're just sort of like this is just going to go on and on. And we have no sense of when they're going to get where they're going. Yeah. And it does. It becomes it becomes relatively plotless at that point. And that is he desperately he's looking for the simple things that most of us take for granted, like somewhere to live and to be able to go to school and have enough food on your table. And that, to me, was what was so interesting,

is that in the end, that is the key. If we can't have that in our lives, we can't have anything. Yeah, even watching the movie, I was thinking, there must be somewhere for him to go. There must be some, because in movie logic, we're so used to there just being a solution or a quest. And he is on a quest in this movie, but it is way more vague, and we don't know what's on the other side of it.

So it's fascinating to have a movie like that with loose ends. And also someone said to me, is it a coming-of-age movie, which is just the obvious way to describe something about someone that's young. And I don't think it is a coming-of-age movie, because to me, a coming-of-age movie is about identity, I suppose. It's about discovering your identity. That's what coming-of-age movies, to me a coming of age movie is about identity I suppose it's about discovering your identity that's what coming of age movies

to me feel like they're about and what I thought was really interesting about the novel is that it has nothing to do with that it's nothing to do with identity

which is what let's face it most things are about nowadays this wasn't about that and I found that really interesting it's like Charlie is only probably

going to start to come of age and understand who he is and what he wants and who he wants to love and all those kinds of things after he has some stability, after he has some space to be able to be nurtured and grow. And I thought that was really interesting. Hey guys, we're going to take a quick break to hear a word from our sponsors. With the Google Assistant, you can complete over a million actions on your phone, in your car, and around the house, like this. Hey Google, get directions to Majordomo restaurant. Sounds good. Let's make a reservation with OpenTable for four people at Majordomo.

Download the Google Assistant today. Warby Parker believe glasses should be viewed as a fashion accessory. Just like a bag, a shoe, a necktie, a hat. They make it easy and affordable to accessorize with glasses. Their glasses start at $95, including prescription lenses, and those lenses include anti-glare and anti-scratch coatings. For every pair you buy, a pair is distributed to someone in need. Warby Parker makes buying glasses online easy and risk-free. Their Home Try-On program allows you to order five pairs of glasses shipped directly to your door,

where you can try them on in the comfort of your own home and get feedback from friends, family, colleagues, the mailman. We'll be right back. dog or a cat or me can do it. In fact, I did do it. I got a pair of Watts glasses recently in the sugar maple cover and they're beautiful and I'm really digging them. And so, you know, maybe think about checking out Warby Parker. To do so, head to warbyparker.com backslash big picture to order your free home try-ons today. Choose the five frames you'd like to try on, mail the frames back, choose your favorite pairs to have your prescription added to, and order. Warby Parker We'll be right back. X's TrueDepth camera to map and measure key facial features. Using these measurements, Find Your Fit recommends approximately 12 Warby Parker frames that are likely the best fit for your face. I tried this. It actually worked. The process is seamless and takes only a few seconds. Check it out. Okay, and now back to my conversation with Andrew Haig. Tell me about raising money for a movie, being an independent filmmaker. What is that like for

you now at this stage of your career? It's definitely easier than it ever was. It was so hard to raise the money for Weekend, and the budget was less than $100,000, and I still couldn't raise the money for it. It took ages. So it definitely gets easier. This was probably quite a tough film to get the money for because you need enough money to be able to make it.

You're out in the middle of nowhere. You're at racetracks. You need horses. So automatically that raises the budget. But at the same time, it's not a hugely commercial movie with a lead that is not a star because he's a 15-year-old kid. So there was challenges in terms of getting the money. My producer was very good at we pushed it to the level that we could get.

And it was, you know, I think after 45 years, that helped at least. I think the problem is perhaps with my movies, there's an idea of what they are. We can know it's about a couple of guys that, you know, spend a weekend together, 45 years, it's about a married couple, whatever. But the films end up being not exactly what you think they're going to be from their concept. But you've got great elevator pitches. Yeah, they end up nothing like the film. Oh, it's a really sweet story about a boy and a horse. And you're like, oh, no, it's not.

So it's always a bit strange. I think in concept, my films perhaps feel like they're one thing and then the reality is there's something different. But it's become easier now because people who are willing to give me money understand that that's probably going to be the case. Where did Charlie Plummer come from? We sent out an audition call or whatever it was

and he sent us a tape and it was just so good. In that tape, he auditioned with one of the early scenes from the film, the scenes with his dad. And there was just something very different about his performance that wasn't like the other kids that were auditioning. Not to say the other kids weren't great, but there was something just, I don't know, more unusual about his performance, more guarded.

And it's a slightly unusual character, Charlie, because he's sort of sensitive and innocent, but also isn't. So it's a really fine balance between he's not quite a man, but he's not quite a boy. And it was a hard thing to cast

because even physically, if the kid was too small, you wouldn't believe he could bring a horse across the country, deal with a horse. If he's too old, you're like, okay, why are you making bad decisions now?

Because let's face it, he doesn't always make the best decisions. He's a bit like a skittish horse. He just makes a decision and heads forward with it. But you had to believe he looked old enough to be able to get a job at a racetrack. So there's all these kind of things that were difficult. And I think I like a performance that doesn't give everything away. To me, Charlie is quite similar to Charlotte Rampling in that respect they draw you in to them and they invite you in to look at them and watch them

and try and study their face and what they're feeling but they're not saying this is exactly they don't want you to know exactly how they're feeling all the time and I like that, I like a slightly more objective lens on my camera. I like that with the performance as well. And he was just so good at bringing interesting nuance to things. You also put together sort of the Indie Actor Hall of Fame for all the supporting characters, you know, with Chloe Sevigny

and Buscemi and Steve Zahn. And how did you go about just sort of, it feels like you just cherry-picked the best indie actors of the last 20 years for these small but really vital roles. How did you go about just sort of it feels like you just cherry picked the best indie actors of the last 20 years for these these small but really vital roles how do you go about doing that yeah I mean it's really hard with supporting roles like it's because you know you have to be a certain type of actor to want to do that too and especially with this film because it's slightly odd supporting roles in that they they like bubble up into the film they appear and then they drift away from the film they're not like they don't have their big defining

grandstanding moment that they think is going to get them like you know supporting not a lot of big speeches in this movie no

let's face it for some supporting roles you want that because then they think you can get an Oscar nomination for the actor like to put it really bluntly yes

and so a film that is more doesn't have those big grandstanding moments of things it's you know it takes a certain type of actor to want to do it really bluntly. And so a film that is more, doesn't have those big grandstanding moments of things, it takes a certain type of actor to want to do it, I think. Both the Steves and Chloe, I think actually really responded to that grounded nature of those characters within the world. And all of those actors are also character actors,

both Steves and Chloe. I feel like they can fit into worlds. They can embed themselves into environments really easily, and not all actors can do that too, and I think that's why they are who they are, and have done such interesting films, and a variety of films in the past. Do you write to

actors' faces, or are you just doing character? No, I just do character. It's too dangerous. Unless I've spoken to the actor and they want to do it beforehand, it's too dangerous. I'm not famous enough to automatically think, oh, I can get whoever this actor is. You know what I mean? You finish the script and then you hope that there is a certain caliber

of actor that wants to do it. So you talked a little bit about I'm not famous enough for that, but is there a part of you that aspires to be bigger, to be making bigger films? Is that the direction you want to go in? Not necessarily. Like, if a project feels like it needs to be bigger, and I really like the project, then great. It's not like I want to stay doing small, independent movies,

but I also don't desperately want to be doing whatever $100 million movie. I mean, I can't imagine myself ever doing that kind of movie. I mean, to me, it's always just about does the project resonate with me? It takes years to work on something. It takes so long. I can't just do something for the sake of it. I have to care about it and want to do it. So it might be that the next project ends up being $20 million.

It might end up being $200,000. I don't mind going back to doing something really small either. It's like, what is the project? What does it need to get it made? And take it from that level rather than desperately wanting to be whoever those big famous directors are. Yeah, I hadn't realized that you had worked as an editor for a long spell before you were making your own films.

What did you pick up on in that experience? You worked with Ridley Scott quite a bit, right? I did, but it's so hard because I was an assistant. Like an assistant on those big films, you're literally in a room. I met Ridley recently and he had no recollection of me working on any of those films. I was like, oh, I work with you on like Gladiator. It's like, oh, it's nice to meet you.

That's what those films are like. But at the same time, you are still in the edit room. The edit room is a really fascinating place to learn, I think. Learn just the building blocks of making a film and what you need to tell the story and watching other directors do their cuts. Like on some of the smaller films I worked on, like I worked on Harmony Corrine's Mr Lonely,

and that was a really great experience because it was just one room with Harmony the editor and me and you see the decision making that goes behind every single choice. That's a fascinating movie. Yeah, I really like the movie and it's really interesting to be witness to that

and I think oddly the biggest thing I learnt from working on any film was that directors are terrified all the time. Or not terrified but they're still struggling to make their films work in the way they want to

or resonate in the way they want to. And I think starting out, I had this idea that directors always knew what they were doing and they would go into a film and be like, well, I know what I'm doing. Yeah, you think of John Ford or something. Yeah, and he just goes in and he does it and then he watches the first cut and he's like,

fantastic, this is amazing. I wish that all directors were maybe a little bit more honest about how they felt after they watched their assemblies of their films. Most of them end up heading their hands going,

oh my God, my career's over. You know what I mean? Just because you have an idea of what the film is and then you're like, oh no, okay, it's working and then slowly you get

to fall in love with it again. But working in the edit room was really interesting for that purpose, to see directors going through that process. And it made it feel like, oh, I could do this. What about when you're making a film? Are you willing to show some doubt or some unsureness around the process that you're using? It's a tricky one, because I certainly want to be able to make mistakes when I'm working. Like for me with actors, it's like you want to create an environment

where they can try different things. And if they try something and it's awful, it doesn't matter and no one's judging them. And if I try, if I come up with an awful suggestion, it doesn't matter. But at the same time, you do have to hide your anxiety a little bit.

I watched that Spielberg documentary recently and he talks about that, how he's scared every time he goes on set every scene he does he's nervous again and i was like oh that's really interesting but it's true it doesn't matter if the scene is a two-person dialogue scene or it's a horse racing scene like you're nervous about it because you're like i feel like i know what i need this scene to express i know how i need it to feel. And it's not always apparent when you're making it. You know, you can shoot something

and think, I don't know if I've got it. I rarely know after a scene, oh, I've got it, it's fine. There's always some doubt. I listened to Ridley Scott talk about this a lot with All the Money in the World. And he's obviously quite a bit older

and more experienced, but he is so sure of himself and so overconfident in its way. You know, was there a moment making this film for you when you had a lot of doubt or uncertainty? I think for me what it's always about is that my films are definitely about feeling, I suppose, more than they are about anything else. I want my films to have a certain type of feeling and understanding

that exists in the movie and then maybe lingers on afterwards and stays with you and kind of resonates differently that must be elusive it is it's incredibly elusive and that's the thing it's very hard to know if you if you're achieving that or you've got that so that's where my doubts come in and it's so fragile you know you can push a scene too far in one direction and suddenly something suddenly feels off balance in the whole. And I don't really like to work on scene-by-scene basis. It's all about the entirety of the film. So you end up having to watch it so many times to work out if something that you've kept in on minute 10

is having an effect on minute 80. Is there some echo that's helping you feel differently later on? How do you feel about television at this point? You obviously had a fascinating experience with Looking, which is such a great show and sort of overlooked already after just a couple of years. Is that something you could see yourself doing again? Yeah, I've got a limited series that I'm doing.

I was going to shoot it this year, but it's now early next year. So I do really like TV. I think it, to me it is very different it offers a different thing how so? I think it's just the type of story that you're telling

like I think you know this limited series I'm doing is five one hour episodes and so you've got five hours to tell your story and it's a different way of telling

a story but it's also there's a different way that the audience engages with the material like let's face it if you go to the movies and see a film you know the screen is bigger and the sound is better and you're in a seat and they're less likely to be on the internet and less likely to

leave the cinema true indeed and tv you know it was fascinating to me when looking came out you know people would be tweeting during the while watching it i like you want to kind of go out into that house and say put put your phone away, please. Like, can you watch the film? And I get a bit obsessed by that. I'm like, well, what will your speakers like in your house? And when you do a sound mix, this is so boringly technical,

when you do a sound mix for TV, you're in the mixing studio and you mix probably in surround sound 5.1 and then a little TV comes up in the mixing studio, and they say, well, so now we're going to play it for what it would sound like on a regular TV. And you're like, oh, God, it sounds awful. So it's terrifying to me.

You spend all this time working on the nuance of background sound, and then it's different on TV. You don't have that range of sound, for example. Is there a kind of story that you want to do that you have your sights set on, but maybe you're not ready to do yet? I don't know. It's like, I feel like, not really. I don't think, I think, you know, my limited series is definitely bigger in scale.

It's set on a 1850s whaling ship in the Arctic. So it's definitely like a bigger scale thing. But at the same time I think the heart of the story is similar. I think in all of my things there is a similar thread that runs through all of the material and it's all that I'm drawn to

is quite similar. And I don't know there's not a specific project that I feel like I'm waiting to do. Every film and the series as well has a one-to-one relationship. You know, it's a man and a man, or a husband and a wife, or a boy and his horse. Is that something that you are cognizant of as you're making your stories? Do you like to have this sort of duopoly? I think more than that, it's that at our core, we're just desperately trying to find someone or something to make us feel all right in the world.

I think when it comes down to it, that's all it's about. And that is usually through a partner. It doesn't have to be through a partner. It can be through a political cause. It can be through a belief system. It can be through whatever it is. A horse. A horse.

It can be whatever it is. A horse. A horse. It can be whatever it is and I think for me we can understand a person and understand a character which is what really I'm all I'm interested in through their relationship

with someone else or other people or a horse or whatever it is. So I find that prism of looking at someone's life through their relationships

it just feels natural to me Andrew I like to end every episode by asking filmmakers what's the last great film that they've seen what is the last great film you've seen

Loveless oh yeah talk about that and I can never pronounce his surname I won't try Russian filmmaker yeah

yes a great filmmaker from Russia great filmmaker and I keep trying to say his name and I always mess it up. I just think it's an incredibly bleak film. Like, insanely bleak, but just fascinating.

And that director's control of visuals and control of the medium is just, I'm so jealous of his abilities to be able to craft that kind of film and leave you feeling so disconcerted and strange and not emotional in any traditional sense, but you don't cry necessarily, but you feel like you've been beaten around the head a little bit. I had a slightly different reaction to Lean on Pete,

but I think there's some synchronicity there. Andrew, thank you for doing this show. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks for listening to today's show. And for more on movies,

check out TheRinger.com, a website in which I've got a new column up about how horror movies like A Quiet Place have become the safest bet in Hollywood. And if you're looking for something to stream this weekend, consult Adam Neiman's Guide to the Films of Brian De Palma, a personal favorite of mine.

Maybe we'll have him on the show someday. And check us out next week. We'll be back with Jay Chandrasekhar. He is the director of Super Troopers 2, and he's a member of Broken Lizard, and he's a very smart and interesting fellow. See you next week.