tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg July 12, 2017 10:00pm-11:00pm EDT
♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. host: charlie is traveling. we begin with politics. earlier today, donald trump junior released in a mill he went that suggests into a june 2016 meeting with a kremlin connected lawyer knowing it was part of a russian government effort to eight his father's campaign. he met the attorney after he was told that she had compromising information on hillary clinton. donald trump jr. said that he released the emails and an effort into being transparent.
this latest of the line is a new twist in a month-long investigation into possible collusion between the trump campaign and russia. said these aoregon mill show there is no longer a question of whether this campaign sockesought to collude with a foreign power. joining me from washington is shannon, a correspondent for bloomberg news and ed o'keefe. he is a congressional reporter for "the washington post," and a contributor to cbs news. welcome to both of you. donald trump junior said he released these emails so he could be totally transparent, but it was only because the emails were about to be released by a newspaper. >> that is right. the "new york times" got these and he rushed them out. we appreciate the transparency in putting it out there, but it demonstrates the clearest links yet between officials in the russian government trying to
talk to the trump campaign about potentially damaging information about hillary clinton. in the words of mark warner, all of the denials over the past year or so from trump and his sons, that there was no attempt to talk to rush about any of this are now cast aside by the proof that the president's son tweeted out today and shared with the world. even if nothing came from this meeting and even if he was nice enough to put it out there for everyone to see, it looks now like he may have been attempting to coordinate with the russian government or russian officials were trying to discredit hillary clinton. remember, collusion itself is not the legal issue ihere. that is a political term. it is coordination with a foreign power that could become an issue. some legal experts who spoke with "the post" suggest this is
the kind of evidence that could suggest coordination between the trump campaign and the russian government. host: if these emails are real and the administration says they are, there does seem to be quite a bit of interest on donald trump junior's part in trying to find out whatever it was they were trying to provide. first it was a phone call. then he said, let's meet. >> and if they have damaging information on hillary clinton, as the email implies, he wrote, "i love it." not only actively soliciting it informationto get from the russian officials, who as these emails lay out, this was not coming from a woman who happened to be a lawyer in russia, the email referred to her as a russian government attorney. females lay -- the emails lay out this was on behalf of the russian government effort to assist president trump. so, it knocks the legs out from
under this stool where they have been propping up an argument that is, first of all, we never met with anyone from the russian government or affiliated with the government or acting on behalf of the russian government. also, this cry of a witch hunt that all of this talk about russia trying to assist the president's campaign was a witch hunt, there's nothing there, it was some cockamamie scheme cooked up. this shows they actually knew that the russian government was interested in trying to help the trump campaign. host: by the president says that he still personally had nothing to do with any of this. >> that's right. and today he praised his son's transparency and said otherwise, i refer you to my counsel, his criminal defense lawyer that he has hired. the son and others have said that the president was not aware or involved in this meeting, even out of place one floor
below his trump tower office. the fact that paul manafort and jared kushner, now a senior advisor to the white house, where involved, you might not have been directly involved, but i think there will be a lot of questions about whether any of those three mentioned to him they were meeting with this woman, or had met with her. if that is the extent of it, then fine. there's evidence otherwise that he had been contacted previously, then we are headed into serious and new territory. host: what more are we learning about the russian reporter and what she is doing now? >> there are a lot of questions as to what she was actually doing there. i still think we have the answer to that. we have really only gotten a snapshot into what is a bigger picture as to what she was actually doing there. that we will get more snapshots into. what tookecessarily
place in this meeting, what she said in the meeting. from donaldatement trump junior about his characterization of the meeting. his statements, though, have been, you could say, untruthful at worst, or half truths at best over the last few days. they evolve to one about adoption program to dirt on hillary clinton to, ok, it was about the russian government bringing the opposition research on hillary clinton. there is a credibility question about donald trump junior's characterization of this meeting. this attorney gave an interview where she said she did not talk about the 2016 campaign. there are also credibility questions about her. anduse she has these links, was described in the email as a russian government's attorney. the other two people we know were in the meeting, paul manafort and jared kushner, have not been saying anything about
this. asked aboutll be this by congressional investigators. we expect those meetings will be made public. they will have their chance to give their side as well. and it is widely expected, too, there will be questions about this by special counsel robert mueller. so, another chance to find out more about what went on in this meeting. host: how would that work, then? trump junior said he is willing to fully cooperate. does that mean talking to robert mueller, for testifying before the senate intelligence committee? >> it could mean both of those things. that is why he had to hire a lawyer. if it becomes an essential part of the special counsel investigation, you would think he would meet with mueller and his team. though we know the senate intelligence committee investigation is looking into russia's attempts to meddle with the investigation, this seems to
fall into the middle of that. you some members of the ,ommittee today suggest, "aha you have all been exposed to something we may or may not have been aware of, and we want to look into this more." it is important to point out that as quickly as these stories surface, donald trump junior said, i am happy to talk to investigators to clear the air. that undoubtedly will happen. whether it happens in public or behind closed doors, of an washington or in new york, all of that is left to the high-priced attorneys hae has ti hired. host: shannon, jared kushner has rified what meetings taken?taken or not >> we don't know. again, we -- i have asked two of his lawyers, his taken? >> spokesperson, for any statement today. i have gotten nothing from them. one of my colleagues try to to getut to him directly
his side of the story, whether he was involved in this. i think he is the one that has the most at stake here because he is the one in the and who has a security clearance. prior to this most recent story coming out, his spokesperson did say that initially, this meeting was left off of his security clearance application, but he has recently did that application with additional information. the question is also out there, and members of the hill on asking this, should he still have a security clearance? later he met with an agent of a foreign government to try and interfere in election process. that could raise questions there as far as whether he is somebody who should receive a security clearance or not. point,t this natalia veselnitskaya, being referred to as -- is she considered an agent of a foreign
government? >> final think that has been clarified. she denied it in a television interview, but this email suggests she had been sent on behalf of the russian government. that much is not known, or not necessarily clarified just yet. we know she had been speaking out against the magnitsky act. this program that basically sanctions russians who violate human rights, which is something the putin regime has not been supportive of and certainly has been writing and have used adoptions as a way of punishing benighted states were passing it. otherwise, i think everybody's role in this is unknown and the fact that the kremlin and the attorney are denying what many believe may have happened, look, they have been denying certain things for the better part of a year now. it is starting to get proven true. so, one has to take what these russian officials say now with
great skepticism, if only because they're the trickle of information being reported out, a lot of it is being discredited. ist: rob goldstone characterizing her as the representative of the russian government. another, and that's interesting character that we don't know the full story on. rob goldstone, was a publicist, who knew donald trump and donald trump junior through the miss universe pageant in 2013, which was held in moscow. whoseient was a singer father was a very influential businessman who also had connections with the russian government. that is how we again, get through this weird, twisted cast of characters who then lead us to this russian attorney, who wanted to meet with the promise of incriminating information on hillary clinton. host: so, we have publicists,
pop music, politics, and pageants. just to start ed -- >> that was a great alliteration. [laughter] host: a lot of this seems -- how much of this can be traced back to that pageant in 2013? >> it seems like a lot of it is headed in that direction. remember earlier this year when there was that proven to be. given james comey had to take to the president-elect and say, somebody has been circulating this and it has a salacious allegations against you? and somebody is trying to get people to talk about this in washington. that all traces back to the pageant as well. a lot of this might have to do with the miss universe pageant held in russia, and who he met and who he or the family business was working with at the time and how they have made money with russian contacts since. all of it now really seems to be coming into clear focus. and that is really why people at
home might be skeptical -- is this really a big deal? so what? the guy's son was taking meetings of people. any son working for his dad in his capacity probably would but this starts to really fill in some details about this and starts to refute a lot of the things that have been denied by trump or trump associates, and makes it much clearer now that yes, a lot of this does traced back to the business contacts he has had for three or four years. and the russians realizing this is somebody they could probably come to to try to influence not only his campaign, but discredit hillary clinton and possibly meddle with the results of our election. host: shannon, the adjective from the president about all of this is "nonsense." >> well, we have not heard much of the president today. eerilytter feed has been quiet. he was a bit quiet yesterday as well. thesarah huckabee saunders,
spokesperson for the deputy press secretary for the white house, put out a statement from the president, a very brief --tement,, lamenting his son complementing his son, and saying, i admire his transparency. i typically would expect the president is not one who is shy to lean into controversy when he is attacked. he fights back. of all people to be drug over the coals, his own son. family is very important to him. talk toeen tried to people close to him to find out if they have had a conversation with him about it. i have not talk to anybody yet who has spoken to him directly about his feelings. but knowing how importantly he views family in feeling attacked, and i am assuming being very strongly advised not to say anything on twitter about , this is a very difficult
time for him. he has had two days with no public events scheduled and we have not even really seen him. host: talking about donald trump junior's evolvement in the campaign in 2016. >> he did not have a formal kushner, whojared became a much more active advisor, especially in the later stages in the campaign. unlike corey lewandowski or paul manafort, who steer the ship at different times. donald trump jr. was a surrogate, another voice humanizeselped fodder, just as ivanka and eric trump were out there, doing interviews on his behalf, donald trump junior was as well. most notably, with gun owners. he himself is an avid hunter, kn own to enjoy the outdoors and has embraced hunting and gun ownership. that obviously is a very
of the1984" has been one most highly acclaimed books since its publication. it has been seen as a seminal work arguing against authoritarianism and totalitarian regimes. it has been adapted into a play and duncanitan macmillan. adam feldman calls the play in tense in a way he has never seen on broadway. joining me now are the three stars. i am pleased to have them here. i guess the first question is, is this play relevant to the times we live in in 2017? >> and how. it is -- i remember when i read it in eighth grade, it's science fiction and now it feels like a documentary. the play was done in london in response to the edward snowden situation. that was the inspiration for
adapting it. after the election this year, our producer thought this was the perfect time to remind in newdy about "1984" york. host: but decision to do that was before donald trump was elected? >> it was originated in nottingham five years ago. for me is terrifying all of the language, or 95% of it, is taken from orwell's book, which was published in 1949. none of the script has been manipulated or changed since donald trump's election. yet, people watch and feel that we have devised this purely for that purpose. host: does it have more relevance and power because it was written in 1949 and not in 2017? >> absolutely. >> if it were a brand-new play that somebody wrote about a dystopian universe, we would all accuse them of jumping on some weird bandwagon.
but the fact that it is george orwell's words and he is a all of this in 1949 is what is so terrifying. charlie: you have been thinking about coming to theatre, that is something you wanted to do. >> yes. charlie: did this just imperfect for you? >> it did seem perfect for me. i saw the email they were making this and i have the opportunity to audition and i immediately pulled out of the movie i was supposed to shoot, even though i did not have the part. my agents were horrified. they said coming to try to get the part before you pull out. i said, no, i know i'm going to do this. charlie: i know they want me for sure. [laughter] >> no, not that. i knew of the directors and i was excited at the idea of working with them in the material is something i was familiar enough with the understudy role already and they loved their adaptation and i just said, i know what to do here. i felt so passionate about it from the beginning.
it has felt like a way to manifest my daily rage in a convenient kind of way. charlie: your daily rage? >> yes, it is cathartic. charlie: is this what theater should be? >> yes, i think it is exciting. charlie: relevant, explanatory? >> and also involving the audience. theater is an artform, unlike literature, in which the art and the audience are together in a room. this is a play that speaks to our time and therefore, it is really important that we all experience it together. caused a lot of their intense reactions. charlie: is it different for the audience at the same time? >> completely. what scares me is this need for consensus. everyone used to clap at the same time or laugh at the same time. i think it is a dangerous idea. what is exciting about this is that it is a democratic response. some people are afraid,
energized, some people walk out, some people laugh. it is an incredibly democratic reaction from people from all kinds of backgrounds. charlie: before i get ahead of myself, we should explain the "1984." >> >> it is set in 1984 and written in 1949. the main character, winston, is an out of party worker, he's a grunt. seemingly,akes up, suddenly is aware in a way he had never been before about where he is and what is going on. charlie: does julia have anything to do with that? >> well, he meets this julia, who works in the fiction department and she helps with his awakening in the become radicalized. self radicalized. charlie: they first follow love, don't they? outlawed,, but sex is
so by falling in love, they have already broken the law. , who could beien on their side, or who could not be on their side and the trust me. it is part of the great mystery of "1984." is julia a spry, or not a spy? is o'brien a spy, or not? it feeds into the great player paranoia we all feel now. charlie: was there any trepidation to do this after the controversy around julius caesar? >> we were already going, when that happened. what i think is especially nice about our play it is not specifically about donald trump. it is just a cautionary story about what can happen. it is not quite as in your face as julius caesar might have been. charlie: dramatically so.
>> i would say our play is wildly three article -- is wildly theatrical. one of the things about the play is that there is a theatrical element and a stagecraft that you have never seen before. charlie: how do you settle on the look of the character? >> they had obviously done productions in london before and had an idea of what he should look like, but what was in port and for us was for it to feel timeless, for it to seem like this could be people under a 1940's fascist regime, or set in the future, in 2084. that is what we tried to find, t o unsettled the audience and make them not quite know where they were, or what time. charlie: why does julia think she can trust winston? >> well, she sees in his eyes that he is different. she understands that there is something kind of extraordinary
about him and brave about him. whether or not she takes advantage of that and is a spy and drgaags him to his death isp for debate. but he is certainly unlike anyone else. i think once they meet and they do live together for the first time, but really interact together for the first time, she know she has fallen in love with him and there is something deeply moving about him and his dedication to the cause. the radicalized as her further. charlie: deeply risky. >> deeply risky. charlie: and then there is the torture. >> and then there is the torture. >> what can i tell you? [laughter] >> there is torture. there is torture in the book. there is torture in the play. i think seeing torture performed live on stage is very different than reading about it. charlie: i would imagine, but how is it different? >> well, i think it is inescapable. as we have talked about, you cannot make torture palatable.
that is the opposite of what torture is, the very idea of showing the torture is to wake the audience up to what goes on. and we torture and everybody tortures. and i think it is just an idea to most of us and to actually see it performed -- and it is a play, we do it eight times a week. so, everybody is ok. but the suggestion is deeply upsetting and rightly so. charlie: and how does reed justify it? >> it is an awesome part. [laughter] >> that is all i needed to know. i am very proud to be a part of it, for its timing and for the theatricality of it. rob ike and duncan macmillan are geniuses. it's thrilling to be in their company and it is a very good story to tell right now. charlie: because? i know the obvious answer, but
tell me. >> well, because it could happen. charlie: you think we are in a society that is leading towards authoritarianism? >> i think when we have people on the news talk about alternative facts -- charlie: kellyanne conway. >> kellyanne conway. orwell writes, words matter, facts matter. >> when james comey says, facts matter, it's very close. we are there charlie: when you loose truth, you lose a most everything. >> you lose the ability to have an argument. the whole point of taking words away and diminishing language is so people cannot have constructive conversations that can create idealistic evolution. that is the deep, deep danger. the moment you don't know what is real, how can i tell you what to think. >> i think you don't even know
where you are if you don't have truth. >> there is also the pervasive paranoia, the anxiety that society takes on that allows for -- the loss of all of our values. i mean, what surveillance has done to us and what we are willing to sacrifice in the name of security is a big part about it, too. a distrust for our fellow man. charlie: privacy. >> the idea of, they are watching us -- charlie: watching at all times. >> and we are watching each other. the amazing thing is that orwell wrote about the telescreen, and was a complete science fiction at the time, but now we carry it around at all times. charlie: telling everybody where we are. >> recording us at all times of course. that is something that i imagine that orwell would say right now.
i think even he would be surprised with how right he was. charlie: is it all that you had hoped it would be? >> and more. i am in awe of theater actors and the incredible strength and appearance of errands -- and perseverance they have to do the shows. the experience of gathering and rehearsing for this play was so powerful because we were able to connect with what this is really about and the reason this had to be told now. every night, it feels like we are gathering to work through these same issues. it is extraordinary and to stand in front of people and see them connecting to this story and to meet then afterwards. and to see some many young people experiencing it for the first time. charlie: what do they say to you? they see you after the performance. >> they say that they are shaken by it, that they are disturbed, that they feel awake, but feel
thrilled but shaken. >> surprised as well. this notion of 1984 as a conversationalist period piece. power play is also a thrilling story. it is a young man who is galvanized by a brilliant woman fighting a terrorist, and fighting the people who are brutalizing his friends and family. it goes a long way. >> there is also a mixed media element of the show that people finding interesting. three of the scenes take place in a set behind the stage and they are simulcast finding intea huge screen find the stage -- screen behind the stage. >> people are so grateful for having had an authentic emotional experience in the theater. a lot of times broadway, as fun
as it is -- people sit back and it washes over you and you go to dinner. to actually feel something in the theater in a profound way is very unusual and people are happy to. charlie: you guys were injured in this, weren't you? >> rehearsals, we explored lots of ways of expressing love in a loveless world. when you do not know what sex is, intimacy is, tenderness is, you have to approach things differently. andfirst time that winston julia come together is an unusual experience. it is violent, physical. as we talk about torture, it was really important to us that we -- for the audience to believe early on that we were really going through things. we really spent at each other. -- spent at each other. we really hit each other. she hits me in the face as hard as she can. >> people are not used to seeing that on stage.
>> when you get to the torture at the end what we are not in any way -- we use the audience's imagination. we are not gratuitous. we do not show them everything. >> we suggest it early on. >> when they are presented with things that they don't see, they think that it is really happening. charlie: you said to me that you would never consider yourself a real actor until you had been in theater. >> yes. charlie: do you feel like a real actor? >> i now feel like i have earned my keep. there is something about the title of actor that you feel like you have to earn. i now feel comfortable putting that on my resume. >> for somebody who doesn't think she has done a lot of plays, she is a natural. charlie: you said, they came to me and i needed a way to manifest my daily outrage and i wanted to talk beyond my own
choir. the great thing about broadway is that it is seen by so many different types of people. the great thing about this play is that we have to get beyond groupthink and start thinking for ourselves. >> it should accomplish that. we have been seen by all types of audiences. we have been reviewed by every type of publication. we got a great review in breitbart, which was bizarre for me. that a t it was strange play that i am feeling from a specific perspective is perceived through a different prism. i think that is unusual. i have found to be the most fascinating thing. theew that the book was , text had been co-opted by both sides of the aisle. it is well-written and well produced, it is perceived in different ways. charlie: our big brother and
emmanuel actual people? >> that is one of the great debates within the play. i have my own feelings. that thet is important audience comes not knowing what we believe. charlie: you would rather they do not know. >> because towards the end of the play, we invite the audience into the production. we put them on the spot and i think it is important therefore for us all to be the same, for us actors to not be pushing anything on them. the political relevance of this play comes because the audience brings this into the room with them. we do not carry it. we don't present it. in ours no trumpism play. the audience brings it in. that is why it is their play. that is what is amazing about
this. you can take ownership of it. >> when they hear o'brien's line, "the individual is dead," it makes people wonder if they are taking advantage of the the individual. it says they won't look up from their screens long enough to see what is happening. it is a recognition of our own failings and that we are a part of that. by being less literal, we have actually broadened the ability of the material to hit home. charlie: you are looking for values that speak to you and you are wading into deep water and do not know where it might go. >> we are just telling more will's -- telling orwell's story. >> most of the people who have read the book have not read the appendix, which orwell was adamant about including.
it is about looking on the future and suggests that the party had fallen or maybe not. in our show, that allows for using pieces of the text that people haven't read. orwell uses the declaration of independence as an example of a piece of text that would be difficult to be translated into newspeak. many people think we added that to be more relevant, but it was in orwells text. charlie: when you think about adapting it can? >> it would be irresistible. the only thing we ever mentioned is the genius of roberts and the co-creators. they are great theater makers. there is a notion of a family setting rather table talking about how sad their son is. you get three hours of that.
what robert and duncan have done, they have used every ounce of originality that you can get into a stage production and used it. we have mixed-media. we have incredible sound design. it is 101 minutes long, and it is fast and it is wry and it is terrifying. it is inherently theatrical and uses all of the great power and magic of the artform. charlie: thank you. "1984" at the henry hudson theater will be there until october 8. go se it. we will be back in a moment. ♪
charlie: cu male non-gianni is a standup comedian, actor, and writer. his new film which she wrote with his wife is a sum of a agar ail -- is semi-autobiographical telling of the beginning of their relationship when emily was in a medically-induced coma. his family wanted to set him up with an arranged marriage with a pakistani woman. ae new york times calls it heart stealer and a superb story of culture clash. with that, here is the trailer. >> this is fun. >> i am just not that type of girl. i only have sex once on the first date. i'm just going to call an uber.
watch and learn. i have been dating this girl. she is white. >> a white girl? >> who could that be? >> i am guessing it is a young single pakistani woman. >> the x-files are your favorite show? the truth is out there. [laughter] are you judging pakistan's top model? >> are you judging the next top >> do you know how we have arranged marriage in my culture? >> do you imagine a world where we end up together? >> i don't know. >> i am looking for emily gardner. she was checked into night. >> we put her into a medically-induced coma.
>> you should call her family. >> we will handle things from here. >> i think i am just going to wait. >> you guys broke up. i don't know why you are here. ♪ is that lady still looking at me? >> so, 9/11. i always wanted to have a conversation with -- >> you never talked to people about 9/11? ♪ can't rhyme it, you have to find a word that nobody can rhyme. >> stonehenge. >> you win. >> i think i screwed up with your daughter. >> yes, you did. >> let me give you some advice kumail.
love isn't easy. that is why they call it love. >> i don't really get that. >> i know, i thought i could just start saying something and something smart would come out. charlie: i am pleased to have nanjiani at the table. you came to iowa? kumail: i came from karachi, pakistan. i went there for college. charlie: and you stayed. kumail: i did four years of college and then moved to chicago. charlie: wanting all the time to be an entertainer? kumail: it wasn't until my last college -- i was studying computer science and philosophy and one i was not good at and one i could not make any money at. charlie: that is a problem. kumail: it is.
[laughter] philosophy, i knew i didn't want to be a professor or anything. and with computer science, i feel like i missed some class and i never caught up. it never made sense. charlie: i hear it is great for romance. kumail: [laughter] charlie: they just love it. kumail: and my last year, i didn't know what i wanted to do. i fell in love with standup comedy at that point. i thought i will see if this takes me anywhere. comedians iot of know who have been at this table whaty love comedy, and they want to do is make movies. kumail: that is right. for me it is true because i grew up watching movies more than standup. i didn't want standup until i was about 20 years old. charlie: the exhibit for me is
jordan peele. 20 was 13 he wanted to be a comedian not a filmmaker. kumail: i love horror and sci-fi movies. that was my first big thing. it is tough to get to make movies. it is easier to make stand up. charlie: it costs a lot of money. you have to find somebody to give you that. kumail: that is always the trick. with standup, you can put your name on a list in a bar, and you are already doing it. you can decide to be a comedian and be a comedian in six hours. if you want to be a filmmaker, you have to convince a lot of people. charlie: and find actors, and find backing, and find an editor, then get a script. kumail: yeah, there is a lot more skill involved. with standup you can figure it out as you go. charlie: having said that, so many that are good at stand up,
take jerry feingold, they never want to be too far away from. where is he now? he's doing all of these projects. ray romano is in our movie, and he likes doing standup. jay leno does it all the time. charlie: she loved it. that is a perfect example. he would do it even when "the tonight show" was at its top. kumail: he was doing like 300 shows a year while doing "the tonight show." that is a lot. charlie: who is your hero? kumail: jerry seinfeld. i love jerry seinfeld and i standup fromllen's the 1970's. i listened to that a lot. i think it would be considered
groundbreaking. it is different and weird. charlie: the thing and timing was -- pacing and timing was so good. kumail: i know that his persona is that he is not confident, he is nerdy and neurotic, but on stage he would tell these stories that were so idiosyncratic and strange. they would be these eight minute long stories where one minute in, you would be like, if this doesn't work, i have seven more awful minutes coming up. he did it. i admired him. charlie: what has judd apatow meant to you? kumail: judd has been a great mentor. he taught me to trust myself. because it can be very easy to doubt yourself. that in a movie, you can express whatever you want to express, and you don't have to figure it out or tie is
up in any way. , or when ithe movie was writing the script, i wouldn't write anything about religion. i was raised very religious and judd was like, why aren't you talking about religion? i didn't really know what to say about it. said, justust -- he say that, but it is complicated and you don't know how to feel about it. his whole philosophy is just show people's struggles. you have to show them overcoming those struggles. you don't have to show them understanding those struggles. you just have to show them having those struggles. the question is important, the answer is not. charlie: that is a theory we have here. kumail: [laughter] charlie: is running for standup different from writing a script or a movie?
or is it a series of one-liners strung together? kumail: no, it is very different. with standup there are kind of no rules. i can do a bit that is one minute long and that is it. i can write a story that is eight minutes long and that is all it has to be. -- and it is also easy for me to write standup for myself, because i know my voice. when you are writing a movie, you are writing all these other characters. you have to write in their voices. not just about, you have to figure out all of their different points of view. but in every point of the movie, everybody's perspective is clear and defined and they sound like themselves and they are doing what they would do. can you also have to show in some way some journey for some of those characters. you have to show them struggling. you have to show some change in their struggle. all of that stuff is tricky.
if i do stand up, i can veer off a story, and if it is funny, it doesn't matter. with a movie, you have to be pretty focused on the story. charlie: is it hard to write for a female character as it is, say, for yourself? kumail: yes, because i don't have the perspective of being a female. which is great that i was able to write with my wife, emily gordon. she was very smart. charlie: she wrote all of the female characters. kumail: yeah. she brought a lot to it. i don't think a woman would do this -- i don't think it would be like this. it is very easy -- so many movies are made by a bunch of dudes guessing what a woman would do. here is a trick -- get a woman in there. talk to them. charlie: exactly right. kumail: they will get the character down.
plays emily in the movie, and holly hunter, who were veryly's mom helpful in making sure that the female characters of the movie felt real. charlie: do you already have an idea for another movie? kumail: no. [laughter] i am barely getting done with this one. charlie: really? kumail: we come out really soon. the good thing with judd has been he really puts you in charge of the process. he oversees it, but you can be as involved as you want to be. we were in editing all throughout. charlie: you are learning on the job. kumail: you really are. you know what i have realized? you watch so many movies, there are patterns and language is of movies that are part of your neural pathways. even if you have not thought them, part of you
understands them. you can watch a movie and think, why is that weird? oh, because they them, part of u understands crossed the line, they are looking the wrong way. people have an understanding of language. when you are editing you suddenly realize you know a lot more than you think you do. i loved editing -- charlie: you took the words out of my mouth. kumail: you pause a little bit longer, and suddenly something is funny. you take air out, something is funny. somebody says something, you say, i don't believe them. it is really brilliant. and seeing people like holly hunter, seeing all of her takes and watching how she works, and how every take is different, a totally different performance. it is really exciting. charlie: when you describe how editing works -- i was very young in journalism, and they would always say, when you write
a close for a story, it is often best to take off whenever the last sentence was. kumail: that is great. that is really great advice. it really is. if you are doing a movie -- this is what my acting teacher taught me. like,scene should be -- you get a plate of dumplings, she said it should be one fewer dumpling than you want. it keeps you going to the next scene. writing this movie, my instinct was you do a big laugh at the end. so at the end of every scene i was doing a big left. said itshowalter
shouldn't feel like that. every scene should feel incomplete until the end of the movie. every sheen should end before you want it to end. kumail: wait, we have not had sex again yet. >> i only have sex on the first date. you don't get that because you made fun of me. kumail: what is happening? i have seen everything. do you remember we were just having sex? listen, i had a great time. thank you very much. i'm going to call an uber, go home. i hope-- >> [ringing] charlie: where do you think your core skill is? is it the words? is it script? you certainly can add actor to this. kumail: i think it is. i always consider myself primarily a writer.
when i was first doing standup, i was like, i am a writer. the easiest way to get my writing out there is to go on stage and just say my writing to people. it was the most efficient way to get my writing out there. what is my core skill? i don't know. -- i am an over thinker. i think about everything way too much. the advantage of that is, when said itsays something to me,ldn't feel like are they being nice? do they want me to leave? i should go. you know what? i am going to stay just to spite them. it all moves like that. that can translate to stand up. it can translate to other
alisa: i'm alisa parenti in washington, and you are watching "bloomberg technology." let's start with a check of your first word news. president trump says russian president vladimir putin would rather have had hillary clinton in the white house. he spoke in an interview set to air tomorrow. trump also says his meeting with putin at the g20 went well and that he would be very angry if the senate does not pass a health bill. pick for fbimp's director says efforts to interfere with u.s. elections should be reported to the bureau. christopher wray made the commons under question today by senator lindsey graham. wray does not consider the investigation into russian meddling a witchhunt. senate majority leader