Archives

Q&A with Brett Morgen

Posted on by

The following questions and answers are excerpted from a conversation that followed the NBR screening of Moonage Daydream.

This film was created with something of a new genre in mind: the “IMAX music experience.” Can you talk about that decision?

Brett Morgen: I have been doing biographical documentaries for the past twenty years. And when I finished Montage of Heck, I just… kind of feel like, for music documentaries… I love these speakers [gesturing around the theater]. I don’t think facts need to be delivered through these speakers! And so I got to this point where I wondered, “could I just take over an IMAX theater and create a musical experience?” And one that’s not biographical, but is instead almost like a theme park ride. And sort of have this intimate and sublime encounter with our favorite artists? And so that idea predated [this film]. I had this idea, coming off of Montage, to create this kind of genre, if you will. And, you know, what’s really difficult and challenging about that is the role that genre plays… we take it for granted. If you go to a comedy thinking it’s going to be a horror film, you’re going to be pretty disappointed. If you see this film thinking you’re going to get A-Z of David Bowie’s life… quit now, because you’re not going to learn anything along those lines from this film. There’s no names, no timelines, and… there aren’t even any album covers! So, you know, my feeling is, I don’t want to use cinema for that. The cinema is for stories. My films are always about, “what can I do that’s specific to cinema, that you can’t get in another medium?” Which is the experience. What’s the opposite of fact? Experience. So this started as a totally immersive kind of adventure, an experiment in sound and vision, and then I arrived at Bowie. And then everything changed. I mean, originally the plan was to have the IMAX music experience be forty minutes. So it didn’t really need to have a narrative included, it was just going to be a planetarium show! And then you extend it to feature length, and you realize the audience is going to get kind of freaked out after twenty minutes if they don’t know what direction they’re going. So this project really kind of evolved over time, from that original conception.

I was totally out of control. My life had no balance.

BM: Should I go full-circle to explain how it became what it is now, after starting with such a different idea? This is one of the things I’ve learned about David: Every moment is an opportunity for an exchange of ideas. I watched every frame in existence of David Bowie. The estate provided me with access to everything in their archives— it was the first time a filmmaker had been granted that kind of access, along with final cut. And then we collected all the material from outside of the estate. So we had everything: it took two years just to screen it all. I was my own editor. I looked at every frame in existence. And one of my favorite moments came when I was watching an interview with David in the ’80’s, with an MTV journalist… the journalist was not really versed in “Bowie-isms.” And you know, in the ’70’s, the rock journalists had the same cultural references as David. But in this ’80’s interview, he’s sitting down with this journalist and I’m thinking, “oh god… this isn’t going to go well.” And David is, like, talking to the journalist before the camera starts rolling: “Have you read any books lately? What have you read?” And he’s fully engaged with her. And he’s sharing some stuff that he’s just read… and it’s sort of going over her head a little bit. But I realized that David viewed every moment as an opportunity for exchange. So this is not my time; it’s our time (if I can borrow a little Bowie-ism). So… the estate provided me with everything. I don’t know what I was thinking, I decided to produce by myself, write by myself, direct by myself, and edit by myself! Someone recently said to me, “isn’t film a collaboration?” And I just said… “uhh… yeah but…” You know, you get this film if you don’t collaborate. This film is very personal. And it got very personal for quickly. Shortly after I got this assignment — or after I gave myself this assignment, I should say — I had a massive heart attack. And I flatlined, and was in a coma for a week. This was at the very beginning of the project. January 5th, 2017. My daughter and David share the same birthday, January 8th. A year to the day that David died, I was in a coma. And it was severe. Like, my wife showed up at the hospital and they told her, “he’s not going to make it, call everyone, it’s over.” And when I woke up, when I regained consciousness, within the first few words out of my mouth to the surgeon were, “I need to be on set on Monday. I’m directing a very important pilot for Marvel, it’s called ‘Runaway’ and I need to be on set on Monday.” Of course the doctor told me I wasn’t going anywhere. And I said, “you don’t understand! It’s Marvel! I have to go!” And my wife was terrified. She could see that even a major heart attack couldn’t quell me. And two days later, I pulled the plugs out, I drove over to ABC, and went to auditions. I was totally out of control. My life had no balance. I have three kids— my youngest would give me Father’s Day cards with messages like, “thank you for showing me the work ethic.” You know? That’s great, I had a cardiac arrest at 47. What sort of legacy is that? And I really started pondering these questions. What was the infinite pearl of wisdom that a dad would say? And I didn’t have it. And it was from that point of view that I began the two year dive into all of Bowie’s media. And as I was getting into it, I realized that Bowie was offering me a roadmap to how to lead a more balanced and fulfilling life. And that in the event something should happen to me, I could leave this film to my children so that they can always go to it and find the answer. Because I do think that it is almost like some sort of religious text: ways to live your life, according to Bowie.

Q&A with Halina Reijn

Posted on by

The following questions and answers are excerpted from a conversation that followed the NBR screening of Bodies Bodies Bodies.

How did your experience in the industry as an actress influence your approach to this film?

Halina Reijn: Yeah, I used to be an actress, mostly on stage. I was in a theater company and lived in Amsterdam. It was all consuming, but in the wings I was always thinking how I might want to do my own thing. I directed Instinct, which was a very different film than this one. It was based on a true story about a therapist that falls in love with a rapist that she’s treating in jail, kind of like Fifty Shades of Grey gone dark. Then I helped create a show about sex work in Amsterdam, and then A24 sent me the original script for this film and we began to talk. To me, the big thing in that script was the game. There was a killer in that script, and there were a lot of things going on, and I said, well I’m an arthouse director, I’m not sure if a slasher film makes sense. But then I saw this wave and was like, what if it’s not a killer but it’s all about young behavior and what if it’s more like Mean Girls meets Lord of the Flies. And A24 was totally open to it and we hired the playwright Sarah DeLappe who lives here in New York and wrote the play Wolves. I was obsessed by that play. It’s centered around young girls who play on a soccer team and how they all talk to each other. The language is amazing but all the characters have such distinct voices and I thought, I need to work with her. That was how we began to craft what you saw today.

what if it’s more like Mean Girls meets Lord of the Flies

I was impressed by how inclusive this film was from the very opening scene with the two young women kissing. It’s something natural that should have been seen as normal a long time ago, but it wasn’t.  

HR: So much has changed, also as an actress. There have been huge shifts, even for me as a woman to get the opportunity to direct in this way is very special. Within this film specifically, I hope that we were inclusive in our casting. We wanted to make sure that with the queer characters in this film, their storylines weren’t about their queerness… it was just there. Some of them are queer, and some of them are messy characters, some are manipulative and others are more innocent, and their orientation is unrelated to all that. I feel like there’s a huge shift taking place but there’s still a lot of work to do. Especially with a slasher film. There are archetypes of the innocent girl and the beautiful girl and the evil guy, and we really wanted to transcend those traditions and make all the characters many things at once, light and dark. Even though this film is a fun roller coaster, the darker theme is the beast inside or outside of you, and I believe that is inside all of us.

How did you assemble the cast?

HR: Amandla Stenberg was the first one to sign on. I am a total collaborator; I was born into a commune and all I know is people doing everything together. With the cast, since I am older and making a film about young people, it was really important for me to get them on board and know that it wouldn’t just be me telling them what to do. With Amandla, she’s also an EP on the film. With her activism and her queerness and her talent, I really wanted her to really come on board and collaborate. I was so eager to get her. The first meeting was magical and I was so in awe of her intelligence. Then I was sure I wanted Pete [Davidson] and people were like “really?” and then A24 was like, “okay, if you want him, sure.” My thing with Pete is that even though he’s done a lot of comedy, I wanted to go into darkness with him. I wanted to show another side of his acting. We also needed someone who, despite a short amount of screen time, would really be that character and have that energy. Myha’la [Herrold] I chased because I had seen Industry and she was classically trained, so I felt a strong connection there. She would be responsible for the whole story, and not just her own. And then Maria Bakalova, I was amazed after seeing her in Borat and thought, who is this creature, this strange force of nature? Everyone else came through Zoom auditions, and I have so much respect for how challenging that must have been.

Can you talk about working with your Cinematographer?

HR: Our DP, Jasper Wolf—see Monos if you haven’t already—he jumps right in with the cast. He’s like a war photographer and likes that kind of dynamic. I worked with him on Instinct, but that took place in prison so we wanted it to be more static. But for this, I told him we need to go back to his core style. It was important that the big group scenes didn’t feel forced or staged or stiff. The actors didn’t know each other, it was Covid, we couldn’t tell them to go out for a night and have fun together. We could only rehearse in very specific spaces. That was really challenging. As the filmmakers, we felt it was important to create an organic feel to the film, like we’re right there with them and it’s very sensual and sexual and animalistic. So we developed that kind of style. Because we see so many of the killings as they take place, I wanted Jasper and the camera to be part of the group behavior, as a witness. Cassavetes was a big inspiration for that, loose and spontaneous. I told the actors that we’re not going to use the word “coverage,” we’re never going to plan to shoot one person and you’re never going to know where he’s going to be but he’ll feel you. As an actor, that’s kind of thrilling. You have to be alert at all times. Because I’m an actor myself, I wanted to create conditions where they feel it a little bit.

I originally thought this film might be a commentary on a generation, but I actually think it’s a commentary on the viewer.

HR: I agree. I don’t want to be overly pretentious or heavy or about this film, but we do try to say something about human nature. What I like about it is that we can do that in a very contemporary way. The film speaks about group behavior and whether it’s in the Middle Ages or now or the beginning of time, group behavior has always been there. We have a very primal need to belong. I arrived here in New York during Covid and I have never felt so lonely in my life, it was horrible. I could identify with Bee, who wanted to be seen and heard. She tries to make a joke, no one gets it. To me, that’s the heart of the film. But, there is this Gen Z theme that is totally fascinating. I think it’s interesting at any time to get a group of people together that are fresh out of college, and who now need to become grown-ups. And then we incorporate technology and ask what it does to intimacy. That’s why we start the film with “I love you” and a second later they’re on their phones. I don’t want to make fun of the generation… I admire them. When I used to have a panic attack before going on stage, I would hide out of fear. These actors come on set and are like, I had six panic attacks this morning because of this thing that happened! And they have the words to face these things and acknowledge them, while not being ashamed of them. I am in awe of this generation, but I also think it’s important for us all, in every generation, to be able to make fun of ourselves.

Q&A with Ron Howard and Raymond Phathanavirangoon

Posted on by

The following questions and answers are excerpted from a conversation that followed the NBR screening of Thirteen Lives.

What was it like bringing a production of this size to Thailand?  

Ron Howard: That was the big question I was asking of myself, going into the movie. I knew there was a genuine hurdle there. I love the story, I believed that I could do it– I thought my experience in recent years, but also going back to Apollo 13, and even Backdraft and things like that, were a real advantage and a benefit. But I just knew that I could not will this into existence. I needed collaborators. I needed to know that I could be collaborating with the cast with real confidence, and that they would speak up. I just needed players of support in that way, and it just became my mantra that that was sort of priority number one. And that was sort of how I met Raymond, and then Raymond brought Billy [Producer William M. Connor] in.

It’s not mysterious: it’s just a lot of hard work

Raymond Phathanavirangoon: It’s really to Ron’s credit that, you know, he dared to make a Hollywood film with literally 30-40% of the language in Thai! Because I think that in itself is a quite unusual thing. We were very much involved in working on the script in Thai, because obviously there are a lot of things that need to be translated, but they were also not just straight translation. We wanted to make sure that the dialog fit the characters. There are just so many nuances about Thai culture that Ron was incredibly open to. For example, when I first told him that, “Oh, the governor can’t express his feelings to the Navy Seal captain,” and Ron asked why, I just said, “because in Thailand… we just don’t do that.” So it’s little things like that which help us make sure the Thai characters were authentic, not just in terms of the language spoken, but also in the way that they acted and reacted together and to each other. And of course, during casting, we were very involved. And Billy was absolutely an amazing asset in every way with the kids— he really performed miracles.

RH: He’s a teacher — young guy — burgeoning director, he’s done some really interesting films. And so he’s just great with these boys. And I’d also like to give a shoutout to Janice Chua, who runs international for Imagine Entertainment. She’s from Singapore, but also acutely aware of Asian cinema. And of course when I was thinking about doing this, one of the first people I talked to — in addition to Karen Lunder at Imagine, and Brian Grazer, and my own agents and whatnot — was Janice. And she really liked the script. She knew the story fairly well. And she actually introduced me to Raymond. 

RP: She told me when she described me to you, she said, “oh… Raymond has opinions.”

RH: And I said, “good!” And I did know… I knew by reputation that Thai people are generally very kind, and very gracious. They’re reluctant to give criticism, I would say, generally speaking. I appreciated that on the one hand, and I wanted to understand it… but I also really love to deputize actors. I count on that. I’ve benefited from doing that, over the years. So I really wanted the cast to feel like they had agency. And I wanted to continue fleshing out those storylines in a nuanced, granular way. The elements of them were all their in Bill Nicholson’s script, but as I started doing research I realized that these Thai people aren’t just being helpful— this is its own brand of heroism on display, in a few places, that I could recognize. All that said: Still running through my — through our — filter, there’s still so much to this story. So much detail. But I did feel that a scripted, dramatized version would be a way to reach a large audience. And if we get the spirit of the truth — if we got it right, and got the facts right — and could create that pathway for the audience of empathy and understanding, we’d begin to recognize that there was heroism beyond those divers that was very real, and in fact, the operation depended upon.

What were the first conversations about, concerning the creative vision for this film? What did you want to accomplish?

RH: Performance. I knew that it wasn’t a star-turn, for anyone involved. And I described it that way, from the beginning, even to Vigo [Mortensen] and Colin [Farrell], that it was an ensemble piece that I wanted to continue fleshing out and developing. And I felt that doing a scripted version could offer two things that a documentary wouldn’t be able to tackle quite as well: One, we could really go into those caves and dramatize the near-misses. Because there were so many difficulties! We didn’t come close to dramatizing all of them, even. And I thought, well, that’s something we can do: We can get a camera in there, we can get enough light in there, we can build the sets… we can bring those moments to life in a really suspenseful, cinematic, harrowing way. That’s an obligation. It’s not mysterious: it’s just a lot of hard work. But the thing was to get to the heart of this internationalism, and this sort of cross-cultural set of relationships and interactions, and really… even though it’s all kind of a mess, and people have their eccentricities and personalities, and so forth… to really dramatize that, and to let actors play out these moments of decision where they really have these threshold choices that made a huge difference. Some of them work out, some of them don’t— but I thought if audiences really start empathizing and connecting with not just, “can we get the air tanks and go in,” and not even, “should we anesthetize the boys or not,” but also if the audience could just connect with the journey — with the exhausting journey — of being engaged in this, knowing it’s a long shot, and yet continuing to work the problem… we’d really have something. So, from the beginning, I just felt like we needed to be culturally authentic and specific for everyone there… and to dramatize those turning points.

RP: Let me volunteer one little thing, which I think epitomizes the spirit in which Ron made the film: when I was first talking to Ron about joining the film back in June of 2020, or thereabouts, what he told me something that was really powerful: he was saying to me, “look, we’re going through this terrible pandemic, and the world has a lot of strife socially and politically… and this event that happened a couple years ago is really a testament to the fact that we can come together — regardless of nation, regardless of all our differences — and perform something that is absolutely miraculous. And isn’t that a good message to have when we’re going through all this stuff that is happening right now? To show people that we can overcome our cynicisms, and selfishness, and really come together and do something really great for humankind?” And I remember hearing that and thinking, “oh my God, I have to do this film!”

RH: I often — not for every movie — but if I think of it, and find it, I like to put a super-simplistic message on my script. For me, this one was, “anatomy of a miracle.” And just trying to parse out the beats and bring them to life for an audience in this way.

Q&A with John Patton Ford, Aubrey Plaza, and Theo Rossi

Posted on by

The following questions and answers are excerpted from a conversation that followed the NBR screening of Emily the Criminal.

Can you talk about how the idea for the film came about? I read it was somewhat autobiographical.

John Patton Ford: That sounds weird off the bat. I have not committed fraud. But I did get out of school with a lot of student debt and I worked the same job that Emily had in the movie, which is a catering job. And it’s not like I was doing that when I was twenty-two; I was thirty-three years old when I was doing that, with $100,000 in debt. It was weirdly inspiring, you know. I wouldn’t go back to it, but when you’re in it you’re 100% alive. You’re inundated with the constant challenges and the emotions are so big. And the frustrations are so big. That’s probably where this came from.

I didn’t want to make something where she would be the victim of other people’s decision making

For the actors, what were your first reactions to the script?

Aubrey Plaza: My first reaction was that I couldn’t believe how quickly I read it—the story really moves. It has an energy and momentum and barrels forward. I loved it. This was a couple years ago, but just like today, it was relevant then and probably even more so now. I thought it felt like it could be a great film, an entertaining film, but with something to say.

Theo Rossi: Right off the bat, I love writer/directors because it’s all in one place. If you have questions, it’s all been sitting with them for a very long time. I love stories of the human condition that ask “what are we capable of when we’re put in certain positions?” My favorite films involve watching the humanization of someone who is up against it. This film feels like it reveals who people truly are inside. And I thought people would be able to connect to it. You don’t have to be in student debt, it could be mortgage debt, medical debt… and that may cause you to wonder what you’re capable of in a desperate situation.

The character intros in this film are incredible. With Emily, we learn so much immediately, but with Youcef, he’s more of a mystery that we get to discover as the film progresses. How did you approach each scene?

JPF: I think that was informed by my short filmmaking. I made a ton of short movies. And one of the things that has become permanent for me based on those experiences is how little time you have in a short to introduce a character—what they want, why they want it, and perhaps why they’re having trouble getting that difficult thing, as well as introducing the context and the setting. And in a ten-minute short, there’s like no time to do that so you become a weird scientist of narrative and figuring out what you can do quickly and effectively. When it came to making a feature, I was still kind of in short film headspace, in a way. I was figuring out how to get all this exposition out as efficiently as possible and hopefully do it in a scene that is dramatized and has conflict, as opposed to someone being told something. That’s where the opening scene came from. I was resistant and hesitated about starting the movie with a job interview. Like, come on man! But there’s a reason that happens so much and it’s because it’s so effective in cinema. So I leaned into it and said, okay, if we’re starting with a job interview it’s going to be three and half minutes long. If we’re going to do that thing, let’s go 100%. No regrets.

And with Theo’s character, you’re right, it’s the opposite. I wanted to withhold information on him so the audience would be curious, and the central character would be curious. Instead of laying it all bare, I wanted to give them breadcrumbs. I also wanted people to wonder if he was maybe an antagonist in the beginning, someone to create more crisis for our central character.  And I wanted them to be warmed and delighted when they realized he was an ally and he might actually be the most ethical and redeemable person in the whole movie.

Did you each have discussions with the John about planting flags for your characters as they’re introduced early on?

TR: It doesn’t really figure in as early as the opening scene. I just try to think about the character as a whole. In any great story, the character changes. In the case of Youcef, it felt like we were peeling the onion. There’s the scene in the van that always gets me. He turns and says “kill someone” and then goes “just kidding.” It revealed that this is a person, and that’s his personality in there, and he likes Emily. You can tell by the way he looked at her that she was different than all the other people in the room. She was bringing something out in him. I don’t think he’d ever made that joke, or done that. We were so fortunate to have rehearsal and we had talked at length, so when you’re there, shooting a film without a lot of time, you have to have the shorthand of the character ready to go on the day. You do all the work before the shoot, and then you just go and do as many takes as you have time for, and then you figure out what works best. A lot of the process is also getting along with the other people and having the confidence that you can tackle it together.

AP: Like Theo said, I don’t think about it scene by scene but I definitely think about characters and their entire journey from where they start to where they end up. What was so fun about this movie is that Emily was starting at an eleven. Normally movies would start and you’d see her build to the moment where she’s had enough, but she’s had enough three minutes into the movie. Then it’s like, now what? There’s also a difference between preparing to do it and what you do on that day. I’m so proud of how many takes we got on this film. John is really focused on performance, which was really fun for me, and sometimes rare. I definitely had an idea of how it would go, but we were able to try things totally different ways, and that was a real luxury.

There’s something so thrilling about watching Emily self-sabotage throughout the film. Is she a great criminal, or not such a great criminal?

JPF: Well I’ll tell you this. I didn’t want to make something where she would be the victim of other people’s decision making. I wanted her to be driving the narrative points. The reason things are challenging for her are not because of the people making her life difficult; it’s because she’s making her own life difficult. That feels much more reflective of life. She probably could have done fine in that opening scene and gotten that job. Or she could have worked at the ad agency and done credit card fraud at night… why not do that? But like so many of us, her problems are self-generated. That to me feels deeply true and I wanted to lean into that. Is she a great criminal? Eh, no, not really. To me, she becomes herself, and whether or not that person is impressive at what she is trying to do is not the most important to me. What’s important to me is that she allows herself to become who she is over the course of the movie and suspends judgment on that, and succeeds at that for better or for worse.

AP: I keep thinking about the movie Straight Time with Dustin Hoffman, because I just saw it. There’s a scene where he’s banging his hand onto the jewelry box, and Harry Dean Stanton is like, “we gotta get out of here!” and he won’t go. And you’re like, oh, that says everything right there. He’s flawed, and that’s just who he is. He’s not that good at what he does and he’s going to get caught. For this movie though, I feel like there’s a similar vibe in that the predictable thing would be to watch her become this criminal mastermind. But that’s not true. She’s flawed. And it shines a light on her impulse control. It’s complicated. I don’t think she’s that good yet, but I think she’ll get better. We’re watching her beginning, give her some time! There’s a reason she gets into shit. She can’t help it; it’s who she is.

She’s also living the fantasy that everyone who is trying to make it has by telling off everyone at those interviews.

AP: She’s saying everything you want to say but you don’t say. It’s kind of heroic. But then you see the other side of it.

Q&A with Max Walker-Silverman, Dale Dickey, and Wes Studi

Posted on by

The following questions and answers are excerpted from a conversation that followed the NBR screening of A Love Song.

Where did this idea come from, and how did the project get moving?  

Max Walker-Silverman: Umm… that’s the most reasonable question in the world, and I’ve never figured out the cleanest answer to it. A whole mix of things, I think. Falling in love seems to make people just want to tell stories about that same thing, and I have certainly been swept up in that old tradition. You know, writing for my home, and where I live, and what I see out my window every day… thinking about my community out there, my folks and their friends, where people are at in life. The way love was entering lives, and leaving it… and then I started picturing these actors, who I didn’t know, but admired dearly. And I write for very specific things: I wrote for that specific lake, I wrote for these specific actors, and I guess you spend enough time driving around listening to that music with these faces in your head, and these places out the window of your truck, and that starts to spin itself into scenes… and ideas. And the script kind of comes out of that. But I have to give a lot of credit to Dale and Wes. Even just the idea of it, they’re such inspiring performers, and I flattered myself by picturing them in the landscapes of my home, and was very honored that any piece of that came to fruition.

if we can spend any amount of time in a pleasant place, I think we aught to

What attracted you to the project?

Dale Dickey: In the simplest terms, Max wrote me a beautiful letter about why he wanted me for this role that he’d written. That is just one of the most moving things you can get. And I read the script, I saw two of his short films, and I knew he was talented… and I just loved the simplicity and the beauty and the pureness of the script, and it was going to be a challenge for me as an actress— I’d never gotten to do a lead role! And I’m middle aged, with this crazy face. It was, like, “Ok! Are you sure? Let’s go play!” I couldn’t say no, and it was my first job during COVID. I was a little nervous, so the only thing I remember I did say was, “I’ll come, but I’m not flying,” so I think Wes and I both drove to Colorado. And they took great care of us. I’m glad I read the script and said yes. But meeting Max was the main thing.

Wes Studi: You know what really did it for me? It was when my manager called up and said, “hey, would you like to do a romantic kind of lead?” I couldn’t speak for about a minute! And then I finally said, “oh hell yes!” And I had never done a role like that before, a romantic kind of story. And I thought, “darn right.” And it was right in the middle of the pandemic. Let’s find out what it’s like to work in a bubble, with a number of people, and stay safe. It had all kinds of challenges. And I appreciate why we had to take those precautions.

Can you tell us more about your connection with the location, and why you decided to set your film there?

MWS: We shot at a place called Miramonte Reservoir in southwest Colorado, outside of the town of Norwood, outside of the town of Telluride. And it’s a place I spent all the summers of my life going, and catching crawdads, and swimming, and looking up at this majestic and solitary mountain called Lone Cone that sits above the the lake. It’s just a very beautiful place. And very quiet. And off the beaten path, as it were. And I always met strange and interesting people there. Because it’s lovely, and it attracts a certain type of character, but it’s remote enough and strange enough that people can sort of wash up by accident, in a sense. And I liked that people must share something, to be in that place together. Which sort of comes into this story. But, you know… at the end of the day, it’s just… it’s a place I like to be. And I count myself lucky to have stumbled into something we might try to call a job that allows me to bring people I respect and admire to a place I like to be, and to share it with them. I love hosting people, and if we can spend any amount of time in a pleasant place, I think we aught to. And of course that ties into the characters and what brings them there… and I thought a great deal about my own memories of the place, and of my own childhood there, imagining what theirs might have been like. In certain ways, based on time, it would have been different. But in many others it would have been the same. And I think that says a lot about the place.

Dale and Wes, how did you prepare for the role?

DD: The fact we were secluded in a COVID safety bubble for this film definitely helped! With a role like this… if I was on a set with, you know, 200 people… there’s no quiet time. And if you’re on a sound stage, same thing. So filming in the outdoors, as we did, was… ideal. It was safer. And, you know, I can relate to isolation and solitude… I tend to go there when I’m depressed or grieving. And so, I just needed to relax and have quiet time, and have Max whisper things in my ear to keep me grounded. And, yeah, the quiet time was wonderful to have. I could go back home and work in my books, look at my script… and we were in a ‘dark zone,’ or whatever they call the zone of the country where you can see the stars. And when Wes arrived, we just hung out at the house and didn’t talk too much about our characters because we wanted it to be spontaneous on set. We’d get to set and talk a little bit with Max. So it was really pretty fluid, and organic, and good.

WS: Well, I think the reason that we didn’t speak a lot about our parts, or do lines, or anything like that… was the fact that the spontaneity of it all is, I think, a huge part of the story itself. Because that’s how this all came about… the two characters, the story of the two characters finally coming together after a long and awkwardly anticipated meeting… you know, I think it really depended on there being not a whole lot of rehearsing done, you know? I think that just really fed into what the final performances became. It’s like… there are times when if I don’t have to read an entire script, I just read my parts, right? I call this The Studi Method. In that, if my character doesn’t have to know what the other characters are doing, and if it doesn’t effect my character in any way… well, it’s better that I don’t know what’s going on, you know? My character doesn’t need to know what’s going on with the other characters. He only needs to know what he is effecting in that particular scene. So that, in a way, is a method that has kind of proven to work well for me, and hopefully will continue to do so.