Steve, Phillies, Arlo discussed on The No Film School Podcast

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

And I think it became a very important part of that peace process. You know is a discussion document is what is a great film. So then how did you know, I guess, right. I mean, after hunger, that new and Steve would have this relationship, what sort of characteristics in Steve as director really made you stop and think I want to be involved with this guy's work for the rest of my career. Don't a lot of, you know, done a lot of work BBC. Being a a all-stock commend Edita and a comedy editor and lot of comedy. And then I was working my way up sort of police procedural films and drama series and things. And then I said, went freelance and I kind of felt I needed to move away from the mothership and seeking avoi-, so strong void to'real voice to. And I think with hunger, I saw the opportunity for somebody who's really bold. I mean, really bolt and prepared to jettison things, you know, not to be too faithful to script sometimes, but see it as a launch pad into a film, and certainly with hunger, there was a really bold attempt to be nonverbal. For example, the first third of the Phillies very little spoken a joke, I think, in somebody's admitted into the hospital, but there's a creates kind of escalation of tension and violence, and then. When you're ready for people to really discuss what's going on your deliver that in twenty one minute unbroken dialogues, he can, which is incredible tennis match of Arlo seen. So the kind of bold voice of that really appeal to me looking for that for a long time. It's this choices. Those is it like a decisiveness to maybe in the edit room where you know you have so much stuff on the floor and Steve came at you and was like, no, this is this is gone. This has gone or was that something that you kind of took more control of? It wasn't really. I would say the thing appealed to me as well. They wasn't that kind of just autistic indulgence of it..

Coming up next