‘The New Radical’ Review: A Provocative Tale Of Anti-Government Activism In A New Era
We construct our lives by making choices based off of our own moral balances.
We place our options on a scale and decide what’s important and what’s less important—that which we consider an afterthought to more pressing needs. Director Adam Bhala Lough places his film on a different scale– with Cody Wilson and Amir Taaki’s new breed of radicalism for the sake of freedom on one end, and the status-quo conceptualization of global security on the other. The New Radical is filled to the brim with intense, thought-provoking refutations to all your preconceived notions of American liberty and a transparent government.
The film is split into several chapters. In the first, we meet Cody Wilson: an ambitious Southern intellectual whose claim to fame was his innovation of the “WikiLeaks for guns”– consisting of instructions for a 3D printable gun which was also completely anonymous, undetectable, and available from the comfort of your own home. The product’s capabilities landed him a spot on Wired Magazine’s “15 Most Dangerous People In The World” and the United State government’s watch list by the time he was twenty-four. Wilson sees the internet as the most powerful medium for government resistance.
By Chapter 5, we meet Amir Taaki, a British-Iranian software developer who was once on Forbes' “30 Under 30” list. Taaki’s pursuit of financial free speech also rests in the hands of the internet, specifically, through the digital currency, Bitcoin. Bitcoin can be used to buy anything and is able to bypass central banks and government agencies. With both men seeking liberation from central government and regulation, they make a partnership and the byproduct of their relationship becomes Dark Wallet– bitcoin software that enables the undetectable purchase of products on a global scale.
Wilson compares the right to print instructions to build a 3D plastic gun to the right to print out instructions to bake chocolate chip cookies. Sure. It’s not about having guns for the sake of having guns (or cookies). It’s about our right to do what we want...
Dark Wallet allows for millions of dollars to be transferred from one place to another without a trace. Opponents of Dark Wallet fear this will force the government to ‘go dark,’ in a time when the state’s ability to track criminals could be the key to stopping the next mass shooting or terror attack. Like the distribution of instructions to 3D printed guns, the Dark Wallet gives everyone, even domestic criminals and terror groups, easy access to mass weaponry. When asked if he would stop groups like ISIS from using Dark Wallet, Taaki replied, “No. You can’t stop people [from] using technology because of your personal bias.”
The New Radical leads us to question the line between criminality and technological and social advancement. Just when you think you’ve got an answer, Wilson turns the tables on you once again using political philosophy and sophisticated syllogisms. Wilson compares the right to print instructions to build a 3D plastic gun to the right to print out instructions to bake chocolate chip cookies. Sure. It’s not about having guns for the sake of having guns (or cookies). It’s about our right to do what we want, without government officials policing our every move. Why shouldn’t you have the freedom to print out a recipe for whatever you choose? Anything can be used as a weapon in the hands of the wrong person. But if one item is significantly more likely to put humanity on the brink of self-destruction, should our right to freedom of speech be strictly circumstantial?
The New Radical is a refreshing, philosophically fueled conversation—something we need in a world of hyper-partisan politics, fake news, and PC culture. Director Adam Bhala Lough hovers over the noise controversy and argument, offering only objectivity: never sympathizing with the film's subjects, nor aiming to discredit their ideology. He tells one side of a multi-faceted story of our political landscape but never seeks to force feed the advocacy of a stateless society. The New Radical features journalists, a former FBI agent, and Julian Assange, among others and raises unsettling, but timely questions. It is telling of the capabilities and repercussions of an increasingly digitized realm that transcends the grasps of Big Brother. Whether you think this is an issue of second amendment rights, freedom of speech, or just sticking it to ‘the man,’ The New Radical puts discussion at the center of the table, and we all need to take a seat.
‘The New Radical’ is not rated. 117 minutes. Opening in select theaters December 1st and on VOD December 5th.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-Us3DeNZLM
Shirley MacLaine, Amanda Seyfried, and ‘The Last Word’ Cast On Labeling Women, the Elderly, and Themselves
On a Friday afternoon, director Mark Pellington, Shirley MacLaine, Amanda Seyfried, Thomas Sadoski, and up-and-coming star, Ann’Jewel Lee, took their seats at the front of the conference room at the Four Seasons Hotel in Beverly Hills—with a guest appearance from Amanda Seyfried’s adorable dog, Finn. Even in just the few minutes leading up to the press conference’s start, it was easy to recognize how the cast’s on-screen chemistry translated into a real-life relationship of respect and admiration for one another. Amidst all the joking and compliments, the cast and Pellington discuss the biggest risks they’ve taken, their life stories, and a feminist perspective on gender roles.
For our review of "The Last Word," click here.
Shirley’s character says a lot about challenging yourself to take risks in life. How about yourselves? Are you risk takers? What is the biggest risk you’ve taken?
Amanda Seyfried: I used to not consider myself a risk taker at all. I’m a very fearful person. I wasted some time being fearful... One day I had an artistic opportunity that scared the living daylights out of me. Instead of saying no, I said yes. And the course of my entire life has gone on a different path. I will never be the same person that I was before that. I have gotten more than I can even say out of that—that one risk that I took. I don’t look at things as risks anymore, I look at them as opportunities. And it’s like, “Fail spectacularly.” If we’re too afraid to fail, we’re not going to get anywhere and that’s another thing I love about this movie.
Shirley MacLaine: The biggest risk I always take is going in front of a live audience. I agree with [Amanda], there is nothing riskier to do. You have to really be open to your own authenticity and you find that out pretty quick. In terms of a life or death risk...don’t have an answer, can’t think of it. Went to Broadway when I was 16: didn't consider it a risk, thought it was probably what I should do. Therefore, I don’t define it as a risk. I still don’t consider anything I do a risk. Jumping out of an airplane, I wouldn’t do, therefore, I’m not going to risk it.
Ann’Jewel Lee: So far, the biggest risk that I’ve ever taken—well, I’m still living my life so...
(Laughter)
Are you a risk taker?
Ann’Jewel Lee: Yes, I consider myself a risk taker.
Thomas Sadoski: You’re brave. All of us who work with you know that you’re brave. Do I consider myself a risk taker? I don't know. It’s dependent on the person, what are your standards. What seems risky to me may not seem risky to you. What seems to be a completely normal thing for me, like hopping up on stage in front of a live audience in New York—I did at the very beginning of my career—might be terrifying for a lot of people in this room. I don’t know, like Shirley said I do what feels the most honest. In terms of the biggest risk I have taken in my life I don't know that I’ve actually done it.
"I will never be the same person that I was before that." - Amanda Seyfried
If you guys could write your own life story, what would you title it as?
Mark Pellington: Life story? “I’m going to keep going until they tell me to stop.”
Shirley MacLaine: I would write, “So far I like this lifetime the best.”
Ann’Jewel Lee: I’m still living so—
Thomas Sadoski: “Get back to me in 80 years.”
(Laughter)
Ann’Jewel Lee: So I think I’m going to go with: “Activating Myself with Ann'Jewel?” I don't know.
Thomas Sadoski: It’s a self-help book already. I like it. Me? “Not bad kid, not bad.”
Amanda Seyfried: “I promise I’m not stupid,” haha.
(Laughter)
Amanda Seyfried: Because I’m not stupid. But I’ve been going around my life thinking I was not as intelligent, and you know what, intelligence is [subjective]. You can be intelligent all different ways and I am intelligent in a lot of ways. And I’m still trying to empower myself with that. So that’s what my book would be called.
Mark Pellington: You are so much like Ann Sherman. For someone so talented and beautiful, she really had a hard time believing she was talented. But that humility is what makes you great.
Because of the mentor/mentee nature of this story, Shirley, was there somebody of another generation that, when you first came to Hollywood, really took you under their wing or gave you valuable advice that you were able to draw on in your career?
Shirley MacLaine: The first person that comes to mind is Joan Crawford and I didn’t listen to a thing she said. Really! She um...wrong. Ok, wait a minute another person...oh! I was in love with Alan Ladd. And I went to a party at Romanoff’s. I’m 5’7, in heels I’m 5’9 or 5’10. They said, “Shirley, your favorite actor—come meet him!” I turn around, he was there and I went: “Oh...” He’s about 4 foot 9. All my admiration disappeared into dust.
"Aging people are underserved in this culture. Big time." - Shirley MacLaine
Mark and I were speaking earlier about the movie from a feminist perspective and I thought it was interesting that women of a certain age tend to be labeled, much like your character had to have a mental disorder. Why do you think that is?
Shirley MacLaine: Me?
Anyone. I thought it was interesting, I don’t think a man who’s strong is seen the same way—where there’s a desire to label them.
Shirley MacLaine: I don’t think people in this culture know what to do with women. Women know what to do with women, but therefore I think they still feel more secure with a label, and then they can ascertain whether the woman fits it or not. Labeling is not fair. Women have not been treated or dealt with fairly, therefore the labeling.
Watching this movie got me thinking about how we treat the elderly. I wanted to get your perspective on Hollywood ageism, what is your take on the whole thing?
Shirley MacLaine: Aging people are underserved in this culture. Big time. And I want to stay healthy, so I can serve that community and be a voice. Yes, I want to be the Queen of AARP, and I want to say what they feel. It’s awful that they seem to be made invisible. Maybe that’s one reason why I did this great movie that [writer Stuart Fink] brought to me. I didn't want to be invisible any longer. That’s what I want to do with it.
‘The Last Word’ Director Mark Pellington on Insecurity and Taking Risks
Director of "The Last Word," Mark Pellington, has made a name for himself with thrillers like "Arlington Road" and "The Motorman Prophesies," and popular music videos for some of the industry's most talented artists, including Michael Jackson, U2, Demi Lovato, and Moby.
In his latest work, Pellington takes on an emotionally-packed comedy starring Hollywood legend, Shirley MacLaine. With such a character at the forefront of the film, it’s easy to look past the challenges of insecurity and instead focus on the militant and self-assured lead, but Pellington uses these emotions to expose the same fears and vulnerability familiar to us all.
For our review of "The Last Word," click here.
How did the idea for this story come about? What was the process of getting started?
Stuart Fink—the writer—came to me a few years ago, we were doing a commercial, I want to say about 3 and a half years ago—and he told me he had an idea about a woman who wanted to write her own obituary. He wrote it and we developed the script, and eventually reached out to get Shirley MacLaine in it. In traditional Hollywood terms: idea, develop the script internally, get actor attracted to trigger, financing. Fairly standard.
What was the moment when you realized the script was ready to be shown to other people?
You do versions with a writer and at a certain point, as a director who is also a producer, there’s a certain place where I can’t take it any further. Somebody could say ‘Oh, but you should add this scene...or what about this,’ but everyone reaches their limit. I think I showed it to three or four people that I trusted in the business whose job it is to look at something on a level of like ‘Do you think this can get made’ meaning ‘Do you think it’s ready for actors to read,’ and then I’ll support it. At that point it’s like, alright let’s go, let’s see.
And what was Shirley MacLaine’s reaction when she first read the script?
She liked it. Stuart had written it kind of for her, not specifically every line, but he definitely goes, ‘I wrote this with Shirley in mind.’ To get offered a lead in a movie that’s about you is great. She loved it and the character.
You want to tell the story honestly. You want every day to surprise you a little bit.
What was your main goal throughout the process of making the film?
You want to tell the story honestly. You want every day to surprise you a little bit. You like the script, you see the picture in your head, so you’re imaging it, and through every casting choice and every location choice, you’re kind of like, 'Oh that’s a little different than what I had in my head,’ but it just starts to come together. That’s imagination...that’s imagination becoming real because it’s coming from the page and your brain. As the filmmaker, it’s your job to inspire other people—location people, costume people– and create the world of Bristol, California. So your job is to do that and have fun.
So with that process, having a budget to get things like music—which you mentioned in the press conference—how to you work around that? Because sometimes a lack of money can restrict creativity, especially when making smaller movies.
It can. There are certain scenes where I'm like, ‘It would've been great to see a little wider of the lake at night, but we didn't quite have the lighting budget for that,’ or sometimes the driving stuff, I’m like, ‘Boy it would’ve been nice to have this camera car to go,’ but those are all little picky things. For the most part, with something like music, it kind of forces you to come up with a creative solution. And it’s better to know those creative restrictions—or those financial restrictions—early on so you can design around it or change the script so you can say ‘Well let’s not have the three characters go to this place and try to do this if we don't have the money for it. Let me come up with what is the intention of the scene so can we do that in another way.'
I do low budget music videos where if somebody says ‘Do a video,’ I say ‘What’s the budget?’ and they say ‘Oh it’s $50,000,’ well then don't come up with a $100,000 idea if you have $50,000. You’re a writer, write your dreams, but if you could only use 100 words, what would you do? You would prioritize your words, your whole tone and the way you present your words would be different based on the restrictions you’re given.
From what I interpreted, the actual plot of the film was relatively simple—
Very simple. She lays it out for you. There are the four great things. You know what’s going to happen the rest of the movie.
But even with a simple plot, there’s always one element that makes it stand out and makes it memorable, what do you think that element was in this movie?
You tell me, what do you think it was?
For me, it was the emotion of each of the characters. Their separate experiences are very relatable and reminded me things happening in my own life.
Great, I love that. You personalize it. You watch the movie through your own personal prism. Who did you think about when you were watching the movie, what life experiences did you think about?
And Amanda, did you notice in that press conference? She’s still insecure. I’ve never seen a star so insecure, that will be so open about it.
Myself. With Amanda Seyfried’s character, Anne, her fears are definitely something that reminded me of myself.
Totally. You’re in your 20s, starting your career as a journalist, beautifully coming in saying this is your first interview, it’s so great. And Amanda, did you notice in that press conference? She’s still insecure. I’ve never seen a star so insecure, that will be so open about it. Not in a way that’s like ‘Oh ok it’s her schtick,’ but like she so sincerely pushes herself and it’s so great. That’s what, in a way, makes her a great artist is she doesn't believe it. She still keeps that openness, and she’ll take chances and she’ll go do movies to keep trying.
Yeah, she seems very genuine. I almost feel like I know her even though I’ve never spoken to her.
It’s true. She’s very much like Anne. She said it. She goes: ‘This character is the most like me.’ And she had never really played a character like this. She had never really played someone her own age in a realistic film, that I have seen. She was in "Mama Mia," "Chloe," "Les Mis", never this kind of movie.
And for you—on the same topic of fears—as a filmmaker you're someone who is in this industry that is really hard to break into and there can be a lot of self-doubt. How do you overcome that?
Who said I have? You put it into perspective. I think human beings—everybody wants to be accepted, everybody wants to be appreciated for their work. Everybody’s like a child. Everyone wants their parents to like them, everyone wants some sense of approval. A filmmaker or actor isn't any different. Nobody wants to read shitty reviews, you want to believe ‘It’s all great reviews!’ It’s all temporary. Look at the Oscars, the Golden Globes, everyone has tasted failure, everybody’s read a bad review, everybody’s read a good review. So in a way, you just keep working on it and you hope that people see the movie you're trying to make. If somebody didn't like it, you ask ‘Well why didn't they like it?’ And then you connect to it. It’s all subjective, that’s criticism. Books, art, music... it’s all there to be digested by whoever at any point. So I just keep making them. Just keep going. Do the work. And maybe at the end of your career, you're like ‘Well there's a body of work’ in a lot of different things and done. Check out. That’s my obit.
Everybody’s like a child. Everyone wants their parents to like them, everyone wants some sense of approval. A filmmaker or actor isn't any different.
Speaking of perspective, how did you get the idea for the last scene of the film? It’s different from the rest of the film in that it was very long, there was a lot of emotion to take in, especially since all you see of Harriet is her back, you focus more on the other people in the room.
I don’t really know. It just came about. Half of it was just what we decided not to shoot. Part of it was editing. We shot the front view of Shirley, but at a certain point, it was just not cutting how I expected it to. [So, I decided to] stay on Amanda for that amount of time, which let us fully see her performance. Like what Tommy [Sadoski] was saying, Amanda allowed you to see it. You don’t need to see Shirley, you know what happens. It’s the way Amanda grabbed her, the way she just kept looking at her thinking ‘Oh my God.’ That’s it. Amanda’s performance told me what to do, that was it. You never need to see her face. Never need to see Shirley’s face.
And because you did spend so much time with the movie, during production, then editing, and going through that entire process you must see it a million times, but what’s it like when you finally get to see the finished product, on a big screen?
It’s good. It’s really good to see it after you haven't seen it for a really long time. We showed it at Sundance. We premiered it there, and I hadn’t seen it since July when we did the mix and the final edit and color correction. So I hadn’t seen it in six months. It was nice and you kind of see it fresh. At Sundance it was January and now it’s the beginning of March so I hadn’t seen it [since then]. You discover different things. The further away you get from it the less it becomes, ‘Oh yeah I made that movie and I know every shot’ then you can kind of watch it as maybe the way the audience watches it for the first time. I don’t know. It’s very difficult to remove yourself from it, but if you watch it over again and it still gives you a certain feeling, whatever the movie is, whatever the genre is, then you just have to trust that and live with it. It’s like making a decision in life.
‘The Last Word’ is now playing in select theaters.
‘The Last Word’ Review: Shirley MacLaine Sticks To Strong Female Stereotypes
What it lacks in uniqueness and spark, it makes up for through a kind reminder of living life to its greatest capacity.
Anyone who hears the name Shirley MacLaine will recognize it as Hollywood royalty, having starred in over 50 feature films and earning her dozens of nominations and awards. In each of these films, the role has had a common theme: that of a strong-willed woman who won’t be silenced. This latest project, The Last Word, which premiered at the 2017 Sundance Film Festival, is no different. For our interview with MacLaine, Amanda Seyfried, and an exclusive talk with director Mark Pellington, visit www.cinemacy.com.
At its core, The Last Word is a simple film. There are no tricks, no convoluted plot lines. The story is very easily laid out within the first 15 minutes: Harriet Lauler (MacLaine) wants her obituary to be written to perfection before she dies. She has taken control of every aspect of her life—leaving nothing to chance— and her obituary will be no exception. It is, after all, a memorialization of her life.
The film begins with a montage of Harriet’s past—as a young, successful and simultaneously feared businesswoman—before bringing us to the reality of the present day: a largely forgotten, 80-year-old woman living alone in her lavish home in the town of Bristol, California. At the sudden realization of her own mortality and a potentially lackluster obituary to remember her by, Harriet is determined to break out of the mold she has trapped herself in. She enlists the help of a young and very reluctant local newspaper’s obituary writer, Anne Sherman, played by Amanda Seyfried. At the behest of her editor (who is just hoping that when Harriet finally does die, she’ll leave a share of her fortune to his newspaper), Anne humors the cynical senior citizen. With the guidance of “four essential components of any good obituary”: family, work, community service, and a “wild card,” she attempts to rewrite Harriet’s life as someone who will actually be missed at the time of her passing.
Each character—as clichéd as they may be— is genuine in the struggles they face, and they are broad enough to be reminiscent of any of the seemingly trivial identity crises we might have faced in our own lives.
Attempting to perform the obligatory ‘good deeds’ for her perfect obituary, Harriet develops a maternal relationship with Brenda (Ann’Jewel Lee), a foul-mouthed 9-year-old from a local community center, who serves as her charity case. Harriet also starts deejaying at a cool indie radio station and makes amends with the many people she has wronged over the years. It’s only when she has accomplished everything on her checklist, that Harriet, along with Anne and Brenda, comes to realize how much they have all helped fill the void in each others’ lives.
The Last Word is the definition of a “feel-good” movie. It’s a predictable film with predictable characters and a storyline we’ve seen time and time again, making the first half-hour a bit of a tedious watch. The witty lines and cool soundtrack keep our attention, if only superficially, during the start of the movie, but before you decide that The Last Word is nothing more than skin deep, something happens that is actually worth paying attention to. Nearing the climax of the story, the film manages to evoke true emotion, a tinge of melancholy onto an unsuspecting audience in the simplest of ways.
Each character—as clichéd as they may be— is genuine in the struggles they face and each is broad enough to evoke a reminiscence of any of the seemingly trivial identity crises we might have faced in our own lives. Whether it’s a fear of taking risks, a crippling lack of confidence, or our desire to be accepted and liked, The Last Word helps us believe in our own potential to become better versions of ourselves. What it lacks in uniqueness and spark, it makes up for through a kind reminder of living life to its greatest capacity. The Last Word cleverly sprinkles tiny nuggets of wisdom throughout its nearly two-hour run time, and it is left up to the audience to take them or leave them.
‘The Last Word’ is rated R. Directed by Mark Pellington. 108 minutes. Now playing at ArcLight Hollywood and the Landmark Theatre.
‘Barry’ Review: A Deep Dive Into the Past Of The Man Before The Presidency
Feeling invisible, but painfully visible all at the same time, Barry searches for an answer on what to make out of his half-black, half-white descent, and an upbringing in Honolulu, Jakarta, and California.
This isn't the first time we’re seeing a young Obama making it onto the big screen. In the summer, we saw a 28-year-old Barack charm his way into the heart of his future First Lady in Southside With You. Now, director Vikram Gandhi tells the story of an Obama eight years earlier, before becoming the composed and charismatic politician we see in press conferences and public events today in the biopic Barry.
Gandhi’s Barry takes us back to 1981, when a young Obama was just transferring to Columbia University—cigarette in hand and suitcase packed with questions. Barry’s (Devon Terrell) first night in noisy New York City is just as eventful as one might expect for a confused 20-year-old moving across the country. He arrives at his apartment, only to find out his roommate, Will (Ellar Coltrane), isn't home. Unsure of where to go next, he spends the night admiring the Columbia campus that he is now a part of, only to get stopped by an officer questioning his legitimacy as a Columbia student—reminiscent of the racial profiling we see in the country today. Young Barry calmly complies with the officer’s commands to leave and eventually makes his way to his dark-humored, cocaine using friend’s (Avi Nash) apartment to spend the rest of the night.
As he begins his junior year as a political science major, Barry finds himself stuck between two worlds: one of his white, Ivy League classmates and one of his new home, Harlem, a neighborhood ingrained with African-American culture. Feeling invisible, but painfully visible all at the same time, Barry searches for an answer on what to make out of his half-black, half-white descent, and an upbringing in Honolulu, Jakarta, and California.
As Obama takes his final moments in the limelight, this film is a sensitive and engaging story, demonstrating what it truly means to be a part of the melting pot that is America: now and in the years to come.
While Barry struggles to find his niche continues, he meets Charlotte (Anya Taylor- Joy), a witty and intellectual student created out of a compilation of Obama’s previous, real-life girlfriends. But their budding romance is cut short when Barry is unable to see past her whiteness. It is only when Barry encounters a civil rights activist and “coincidentally” interracial couple, who tell him his entangled cultural background is what makes him an American—and that he never has to choose a side—that Barry is able to accept both of his backgrounds equally. In the final scene, after finally discovering the meaning behind his complicated identity Barry says, “I’m from a lot of places, but I’m here now.”
Even though Adam Mansbach’s script teases the audience with a few subtle lines foreshadowing the man we know today, this is not a story of the man who would one day become President—one who has it all figured out. Barry is an ordinary film about an ordinary guy (at the time), which makes it all the more charming. It's about a man learning how to navigate a new and exciting, but all the while confusing, chapter of his life. Something we can all relate to. With lead actor, Devon Terrell, perfectly embodying the cool, yet slightly awkward ambiance that makes up a 20-year-old Obama, we watch Barry grow into someone we can see as a leader. Anya Taylor-Joy portrays a sympathetic, albeit clueless (when it comes to being a minority looking to fit in) character we see all too often, adding to the film’s relevance in the time period of 1981 and 2016.
Without being mundane or trite, we are reminded of the race-based issues taking place around us every day, but also of the humanity in all of us. As Obama takes his final moments in the limelight, this film is a sensitive and engaging story, demonstrating what it truly means to be a part of the melting pot that is America: now and in the years to come. Barry will stick with us for a while.
‘Barry’ is not rated. 104 minutes. Now available on Netflix.
Vikram Gandhi on Obama's self-identity struggles as a young adult in 'Barry'
With approval rates reaching a 7-year high and little over a month left in office, the “Obama nostalgia” is kicking in. Earlier this year, we saw Obama woo future First Lady, Michelle, on a sunny 1989 Chicago day in the film, “Southside With You.” And now another film turns back the clock even further, focusing on a more awkward 20-year-old Obama. We see the man before the “Change We Can Believe In,” when he was struggling to forge his own identity—when he was simply Barry.
In his new biopic “Barry,” Director Vikram Gandhi looks to capture the essence of the man before the presidency. Starring Australian newcomer, Devon Terrell, we see the portrayal of a young man we can all relate to, having ever been in a position of self-doubt and uncertainty.
How did you come across this project, was there anything specific that made you decide that you wanted to do this movie?
Yeah, I was reading Dreams from My Father, Barack Obama’s memoir and I was like, “Holy shit Barack Obama went to Columbia University in 1981 and he lived in this building next to where I lived when I went to Columbia.” Right when I read that, I started imagining what that block looked like in ’81– the walk he took to class, what the West End Bar would have looked like back then, Tom’s Diner, where everybody went to have breakfast. All those things I had experienced when I went to Columbia too, so immediately I had this image playing in my head, and then I started developing what the story could be from all the public information that was out there during that time. I ended up approaching our producer Dana O’Keefe and finding Adam Mansbach, who also went to Columbia, and that's how the movie came to be.
Having that personal connection with the story, how do you think that affected you as a filmmaker?
This film is an attempt to understand who a kid named Barry was in 1981. So for myself, my screenwriter, everybody who was influenced by this, there was a level of projection of who that kid was, but there is also something completely, incredibly communal about the experience of being a 20-year-old kid in New York City. We did our best to recreate through understanding the environment he was in—his background and who he would become—to tell that story.
As far as research, because you did have some background on the topic already, what else went into it? Were there any obstacles that you encountered while trying to find information from that specific time frame in Obama's life?
Yeah, I mean there’s only like a chapter in his book about that period of time and the trickiest thing is that he was living kind of like a monk. There wasn't that much information about him, not that many pictures, and not that many memories of other classmates. He was like, a solo guy and he was on his own journey. That definitely made it tricky to piece everything together that happened, but at its essence, it was really trying to find what emotionally was going on during that period of time in his late teens-early twenties. There’s a lot of imagining what that kid could have been experiencing. A mixed-race kid from Hawaii—who never knew his father—moved to New York in 1981 and is exposed to this huge world of possibility and identities and has to find his way, so there’s a lot there. It’s a pretty juicy subject already. In a superficial way, you could see how that would be complicated off the bat for anybody—not just him. But otherwise, there’s some great articles and a lot of stuff that he’s written, things he’s said in podcasts about what was going on in his mind during that time. Those are really the things that I drew from the most– what he’s said and what other people have said about his experience.
“A mixed-race kid from Hawaii—who never knew his father— moved New York in 1981 and is exposed to this huge world of possibility and identities and has to find his way...”
While you were going through that process, did you find yourself learning anything new or just seeing a part of him that you didn’t expect?
Part of the reason I wanted to make this movie is because I was kind of already obsessed with New York in the 80s. So it was more of just this wild idea that Barack Obama lived in New York during that time. I mean, already you can just imagine any normal college kid’s life at that time in New York’s history. As far as anything I discovered, my attraction to the story was not about how extraordinary his experience was but perhaps more about how extraordinary his circumstances were and how relatable his story is. I wouldn't say that there were any huge discoveries, but more of a journey to understand what a person with his background would have experienced during that time. I think it’s more about how relatable the story is, how American it is and how it being so unique and odd in a lot of ways; that makes it so relatable to everyone.
So would you say that was your goal throughout the process of making the movie? Having your central character someone who people can relate to and understand even though now he seems like such a far-away person?
I think that there’s—even if you look at my first movie "Kumare"—I don't know if you’ve seen it, but it’s a story about how these people who are put on pedestals are actually regular people. To me, that’s what this story is. It’s about the sort of regular-ness of his struggles, which is just to fit in during this period of time. I really like the idea of taking this person who is the most documented person on Earth and one of the most powerful people in the world and show the humanity in him. That was my goal. Also, I think that his background, in his upbringing and what he would become, you tell a story about the American Dream that is new and more up to date than we’ve seen. There are very rarely characters of mixed race that are in Hollywood. You know, casting is like “Well, we need a black person...we need a white person.” Our President is someone who embodies so many different cultures and has a diverse makeup, and I think it’s important to recognize that because that’s what the next generation of Americans are going to be and what it already is.
“I think that his background, in his upbringing and what he would become, you tell a story about the American Dream that is new and more up to date than we’ve seen.”
And as far as casting goes, how did you decide on your main actor, Devon Terrell? Was there anything that stood out to you that made you think “this is the guy that I want to play him”?
I mean the kid is complete charisma. He speaks from his heart and he’s just an amazing person. I looked at his audition and just said, “I could watch this kid for 2 hours,” that’s the first thing. But to be honest, I learned a lot about Barry from Devon. Devon is half African-American, half Anglo-Indian. He grew up in Perth, Australia. He idolized Barack Obama like many kids did, but a lot of it was because his background was so similar—just in the fact that he also struggled to figure out where he belonged. He used basketball as an outlet, he struggled to have a deeper relationship with his father who lived in the U.S., you have all of these things that made him such a perfect person to represent this story, so it was a natural thing for me. Then the accent was something we just worked on when we got to New York, thankfully he was able to embody a young Barack Obama really well, but that was never really the thing that I was drawn to.
In the movie, there are a lot of race-based issues and obviously the struggle for an identity, even though it takes place 35 years ago. How do you think that translates to what we’re seeing today in our country? What would you want your audience to take away from the message that you’re trying to put out?
I just wanted to tell a story that allowed us to empathize with a different protagonist and see the inner of a man that would one day become President, but I never really thought of it as political. In fact, I thought “this is an extremely non-political movie about a very political person” but in the backdrop of a President-Elect Trump, set against the backdrop of the rhetoric that has been put out—isolationist rhetoric, one of anti-immigrant rhetoric and one that’s demeaning to people of color—all of a sudden these sort of personal things in Barack Obama’s life become political issues. So, when I watched the movie on November 9th, as opposed to before the election, I see this movie as incredibly political. All the things that define an American that are put forward in this movie are the ones that I have grown up with, and I think most of us have grown up with: one that embraces a melting pot of cultures, one that is a nation of immigrants, one that shows a country that’s constantly changing and being dynamic in incorporating new people and the greatness of that as being the American spirit. Now, when you hear about an America that is closing its borders, one that allows white supremacists to be in the forefront and part of the administration, all of a sudden these ideas become troubling. Maybe the America that we are all striving for, somebody is trying to stop from moving forward. I think a lot of the things in this movie are important to look at and say: “the America that’s represented in this film is still the America we live in, it hasn't changed just because Trump has been elected.”
“[Set] against the backdrop of the rhetoric that has been put out—isolationist rhetoric, one of anti-immigrant rhetoric and one that’s demeaning to people of color—all of a sudden these sort of personal things in Barack Obama’s life become political issues.”
How has the reception of the movie been so far?
People seem to like it. People seem to get it. The movie opens up tomorrow [on Netflix], so I’m sure I will hear much more when it comes out from the general public, but I think the critics have liked it so far. I usually only get to hear the really good things, so apparently, it's fucking great.
Good! And anything from the Obama Administration yet, or is that something you’re still waiting for?
No, I hope he watches it and digs it.
'Barry' is now available to stream on Netflix.
‘Magicians: Life in the Impossible’ Review: The Curtain Is Pulled Back on the life of Illusionists
If you’re looking to uncover the secrets behind a magician’s illusions and tricks, this might not be the film for you. With magicians already being placed under a glamorous lens within movie franchises like 'Now You See Me' and 'Harry Potter,' this documentary looks to make the experience of viewers less about the actual tricks and more about the characters behind the white rabbit and disappearing acts. 'Magicians: Life in the Impossible' takes an intimate approach into the life of magicians we aren’t used to seeing on the silver screen.
Filmed over the course of four years, 'Magicians: Life in the Impossible' presents the journeys of four professional magicians: Jon Armstrong, Brian Gillis, David Minkin, and Jan Rouven and his partner, Frank Alfter. Each come from a different walk of life, but can all relate to each other through the passion they have for their craft. The film opens with Brian Gillis in his alluring, castle-like home on a throne, but quickly switches gears to the reality of what is playing out in the lives of each individual. As the four men tell their story of how they started their careers and what they hope to achieve in the future, we are also let in on the struggles each face in pursuit of their dreams.
Behind the illusions, each professional faces personal obstacles they must overcome before putting on a show for an unsuspecting crowd. Brian Gillis, who was once a regularly featured guest on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, downsized from his national recognition and palace of a home to perform at dinner tables and live in a cramped studio apartment. In contrast, we are introduced to Jan Rouven, living in a luxurious Vegas mansion while having his own show on the Las Vegas strip at the Tropicana. Yet, in the face of what others might deem the ultimate success story, Rouven is still left wanting more, not knowing what to achieve next and enduring cutthroat competition from better-known illusionists like Criss Angel and David Copperfield. From small road gigs to performances on some of Las Vegas’s biggest stages, each magician shows us the devotion it takes to evoke feelings of wonder and mystery and make a living out of it.
From beginning to end, directors Marcie Hume and Christoph Baaden preserve the power of magic as a gift to the audience. We see it in the eyes of the audience, as the camera pans to their reaction of the performers latest illusion. We see it in the first scene with David Minkin effortlessly levitating his ring in a messy bathroom, and by the time we reach the end, we see it one last time as Minkin stuns us with another trick we can’t find the explanation to. The stories of each magician may not necessarily be unique or heartbreaking in any noteworthy way, yet we still manage to care for each as if we have gotten to know them personally. Their different personalities are charming enough for the viewer to stick around and they slowly weave us through the rewarding and often times exhausting world of a magician. With no over-the-top cinematography or mind-altering revelations distracting us from the film, 'Magicians: Life in the Impossible' simply shows us that the actual trick isn’t so much of what makes a performance special, but the mastery of storytelling coupled with it.
‘Magicians: Life in the Impossible’ is not rated. 87 minutes. Now released nation-
wide, as well as VOD and digital platforms.