tv Charlie Rose PBS October 16, 2015 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with the violence in israel and talk to khaled elgindy and chemi shalev. >> it's been called the iphone, and they're open and see what's going on around and those that take inspiration from i.s.i.s. or other radical groups, they only need an iphone for that. i don't think the israelis have recognized a central control yet. they are accusing the palestinian authority and hamas and islamic jihad in iran of inciting. but there is no accusation this is managed from headquarters anywhere. >> rose: we continue with ann temkin and anne umland and look at the picasso sculpture exhibition at the museum of modern art in new york. >> the general fact is sculpture
is less known and less thought about than painting because it's harder to make a scene. it takes up more space. it's more trouble to transport, more trouble to arrange in a gallery. so, therefore, across the board, sculpture is less well known, but particularly so with picasso. >> rose: we conclude this evening with cary fukunaga, the director of the film "beasts of no nation." >> i remember speaking to a minister of parliament in liberia when we were setting up the movie who was the commander and lord that ousted charles taylor and he said, without any filtering, you know, he said the child soldiers who fought for him were his best soldiers by far. they're the most loyal, the most eager to please and the most fearless. >> rose: violence in israel, picasso's sculpture at moma
and "beasts of no nation" when we continue. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: american express. >> rose: additional funding provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: a recent wave of violence has raised tensions in jerusalem. eight israelis were killed in stabbings over the past month. israeli forces responded by launching a major security operation in the city's arab areas. 31 palestinians have been killed since the violence began. the white house announced secretary of state john kerry will be traveling to the region
soon. joining us from washington khaled elgindy, fellow at the brookings institute and former advisory to the palestinian leadership in ramallah. in new york chemi shalev, u.s. editor of the israeli newspaper. i am please to have had both back on this program. let me begin with you. what's going on? >> there is been an outbreak of violence of a kind that, even though israel and the palestinians have a long history of violence, there is always something new. this is a very personal, very scary, i think, kind of violence that has to do with stabbings and the people who literally have to confront their victim and start hacking away at them, all the while endangering themselves and many of them winding up seriously wounded or dead, and this comes against the background, i think, or the backdrop of several issues, the most immediate of which one probably what i would call
unnecessary israeli provocations on the temple mount and then a wild exaggeration of what was going on in the temple mount on the palestinian side, and the issue of settler vigilantism has sort of excited the palestinians. there is the issue of, you know, i.s.i.s. is all around us and, even though it may not have made many inroads, at least not on the west bank, i think in gaza, it has, it does provide inspiration for teenagers to carry out their own acts of violence and terror and, of course, what everybody mentions is the lack of any progress. i don't think these people, these children or these teenagers who are carrying out these attacks, i don't think they care whether there is a peace process or not, but i think they do feel a sense of frustration, many of them, even those living in jerusalem, are living in poverty, they feel stuck and thi this has all sortf
broken out at once. >> rose: a sense of frustration and grievance. >> yes. >> rose: what do you think, khalid? >> i think it's true. i think there is a great reservoir of frustration and anger but we have to look at the specific instances in jerusalem where the attacks are happening where we saw a similar episode of violence exactly a year ago and this has become episodic and, you know, jerusalem is sort of the one area that has been completely overlooked by the peace process. it is essentially a peace process-free zone. it has not been part of any settlement freezes, it's not been part o of -- the palestinin authority doesn't operate there and, at the same time, it is denied services. i think, you know, jerusalem palestinians have a history of sort separate and unequal treatment.
they get much fewer services for the taxes they pay, something like 75% poverty rate among palestinians in jerusalem, so they're not part of israeli society, and they're cut off from th the west bank by settlements and the wall and checkpoints. so this has been building for probably the last ten, 15 years, where israel has kind of intensified its grip on jerusalem, it's shut down jerusalem institutions. so the sense of despair all palestinians feel is much more intense in jerusalem. >> rose: does this have, as some have suggested, the possibility of becoming another intipada (phonetic)? >> that is salary possibility. i think -- that is certainly a possibility. i think for that to happen, there need to be a couple of pbee it would have to be sustained over time, and that requires
political organization and mobilization and a certain level of discipline among the various palestinian factions, and we just don't see that right now. i mean, the palestinian political scene is very fragmented and in sort of a state of disarray. so previous uprisings succeeded in sustaining themselves mainly because the political -- the established kind of political factions were able to sort of organize and coordinate with each other. that hasn't happened and, as we've seen elsewhere in the region, when you have a sort of mass mobilization that is leaderless, that can't articulate clear, political demands, it doesn't often succeed. >> rose: what are the worst fears here? >> it depends who you're talking about. i think the general worse fear
is there will be increasing radicalization, perhaps an incident will set off the entire territories, and i think everybody is worried about one of the possible collapse of the palestinian authority, at least israel is worried and the americans are worried about the palestinian authority is not popular and it's losing support and there was talk that, in fact, abbas maybe considered dismantling. that's a threat, i don't think it's serious, but there is a fear we could descend into a direct military occupation or even chaos, and i think the specter of i.s.i.s. is all around us. even people in the territories, even israeli arabs, who must also be mentioned because there have been incidents involving them, at least the large majority of people are aware of what's going on around either the violence in syria or the massive refugee camps, and i don't think anybody has any wish to descend into that kind of
situation. so i think, at least from tirlzy point of view, i think -- at least from the israeli point of view, the target is to get things back under control. i think, despite prime minister netanyahu's talk -- he likes to talk loudly and carry a small stick. so there is a lot of talk about troops moving in there. i think what they want to do now is sort of stamp it out, but not in a violent sense, just have enough troops on the ground so nobody can move and then if we have a few days of quiet, we can move on. >> rose: more of a show of force than an actual, aggressive attack. >> yes. and you've heard of a summit that may develop in amman. i know the americans have been in tump with king abdullah. they did the same thing last year when there was trouble in jerusalem. that would not necessarily involve a direct meeting between abbas and netanyahu, but it's
kind of a festive ceremony that might allow people to step down. the question is are these teenagers controllable and how many are there? how many palestinian teenagerser are there that are willing to undertake this very scary kind of operation? i don't know have the answer to that. >> rose: who are they in terms of family and -- >> there have been many types. there have been disaffected, unemployed teenagers, just very young people. there is a famous case of a 13-year-old boy who abbas claimed had been executed and israel today sort of celebrated the fact he was alive in an israeli hospital. so they're just very young people and immature. but if you look at the israeli arabs, some of the people who have been conducting attacks are well-educated people who have perhaps the least to complain about among the palestinians,
and they're also participating. but i think that the core problem is with teenagers somewhere, say, between 17 and 20 who are -- who have been -- the core of -- who have been the core of this campaign and i don't know how many of them there are. >> rose: what you're saying is do you believe that young people who were doing this on the palestinian side are not, in a sense -- it's not about a peace treaty, it's simply about personal grievance? >> it might even be, for some of them, a fashion combined with personal grievance. it's the first series of incidents mainly based on social media. there is a lot of facebook and blogs and secret places that they go to. it's been called in israel the iphone intifada, even though it
hasn't been declared as an intifada. they see what's going on around and those who take inspiration from i.s.i.s. or other radical groups, they only need an iphone for that. i don't think the israelis have recognized a central control yet. they are accusing palestinian authority and hamas and iran and jihad of inciting. but there is no evidence it's coming from headquarters. it's spontaneous. >> rose: coming from social media? >> yes. >> rose: khaled, what do you think? >> i think we have to keep things in perspective. invoking i.s.i.s. and fear of i.s.i.s. is a little exaggerated. i.s.i.s. does not really have a foothold. i.s.i.s. is not a factor in the very large protests that are happening in jerusalem, in the west bank and even among palestinian citizens of israel. i.s.i.s. is a very marginal influence in all of this.
what this is really about is about an occupation, is about an israeli occupation with no end in sight that is deepening by the day, and it's particularly intense in jerusalem as, you know, as i said because of the sort of special circumstances that abide there and, so, you have -- you know, you have this generalized an around as we've seen in other protests in the region, it's usually teenagers and folks in their early 20s who are at the forefront of this mass mobilization. part of it is obviously dissatisfaction with their conditions, but it's also dissatisfaction with their political leadership, whether, you know, sort of the established political groups in palestine, whether hamas in gaza or fatah and the p.a. in the
west bank. and, so, they are sort of making the point that this is not driven by factions, unlike past uprisings, and that, you know, as chemi said, there is no central headquarters. there may emerge at a certain point. but we have to distinguish between a couple of different things. i mean, there are, of course, the stabbings, which are abhorrent and, you know, the other attacks on civilians, but the vast majority of the unrest is the standard palestinian protests of stone throwing at israeli troops, at checkpoints and other places we've seen in the past. so that's not new. but, you know, having said that, i agree with chemi that there are some new dimensions to this. obviously, the technology is mobilizing things in a way we haven't seen before. but that's true across the board
in the region and elsewhere in the world. but there is another thing that i think is overlooked and that is the israeli side of this. there is a radicalization and extremism that has taken root in israeli society, and it's sort of become normalized. it's no longer just in the margins. we see really horrific types of violence. just this past summer, before the current clashes, before the latest crisis erupted, we had this family that was burned to death by israeli -- by israeli settlers in the west bank and, so, that is -- you know, if you look at the israeli discourse on social media -- again, social media, these trends apply on both sides. there is quite -- you know, the
commentary you see in the israeli social media arena is quite frightening and blood kurd ling in some -- blood curdling in some cases, outright calls for murder. we've seen videos making their way around social media with palestinian young man who was killed and, you know, various jewish extremists are parading his body with pieces of pig meat cut up on top of him, some really gruesome things. so there is real extremism, there is real radicalization, but it's happening on both sides, and on the israeli side, it's actually influencing, i think, policy choices and, in some ways, limiting them. >> rose: you agree? i agree there is been a radicalization of israeli society on the right wing side of israeli society, and i agree
that some of the things you see on social media are horrendous, and either you wouldn't have seen them 20 or 30 years ago or just because we didn't know about them. there is a vicious circle here. the palestinian violence and the lack of any belief that the palestinians are willing to enter into a peace process on the israeli side and i.s.i.s., and the horrendous things we've seen from i.s.i.s., all these have radicalized the israeli society and has turned the right -- the right wing part of it has turned it perhaps even more violent and has turned public opinion generally has moved, the radical is gone to the right and small wing left. the leader of the labor party finds himself more or less either supporting for the government or calling for the tougher measures.
he still wants to see a two-state solution, but the rhetoric is becoming harsher on both sides. i think abbas is not and has not been helping in the past few weeks. i think this incident of the 13-year-old boy he claims is dead has done him real damage in the israeli public opinion, not the public opinion of the part that didn't want to have anything to do with him in the first place but the portions of the center and left that still believe it's a possibility. so i don't see right now anyone come together save us. things go from bad to worse. palestinians are more violent, israelis harsher, palestinians become more extreme as a result of that. i don't see where's the sunshine that's going to break the darkness. i don't see it yet. >> rose: thank you for coming. pleasure to see you again. thank you very much. back in a moment. stay with us.
>> rose: picasso was perhaps the most dominant and innovative artist of the 20th century. his ground breaking work as a painter changed the course of modern art and continues to influence greatly artists today. he was also a devoted sculptor throughout his lifetime. a new exhibition in new york's museum of modern art focuses on his work in three dimensions. picasso's sculptures spans the years 1902 to 1964. the "new york times" calls it a once in a lifetime event. joining me are the exhibition curators ann temkin and anne umland. i am pleased to have them both at this table. what wonderful titles. >> we're proud of them. >> rose: you should be. why now?
everybody is raving about this. picasso attracts a crowd for his brilliance and the diversity of his work and the constantly changing work that he did. and this realization that sculpture is such an important part of his work. >> right. >> rose: and it hadn't been here how many years? >> 50. and i think the general fact is that sculpture is less known and less thought about than painting because it's harder to make a scene. it takes up more space, more trouble to transport, more trouble to arrange in a gallery and, so, therefore, across the board sculpture is less well known, but particularly with picasso. >> rose: how good was picasso as a sculptor? (laughter) >> as good as he was at everything else, i think. i mean, i think that's one of the revelations of the show. >> rose: that's exactly what
someone said to me. i had no idea he was as good a sculptor as he was a painter. >> that's the fun part. >> rose: did he sculpt until the end of his life? >> no, the last decade, he didn't, except for the fact that, during that last decade, mid-late '60s, early '70s, a lot of his last works, sheet metal sculptures from '60, '61, were converted into public monuments, and although he was sitting at home, he watched as in chicago, new york, jerusalem, rotterdam, there were 20, 30 40rbgs 50-foot sculptures arriving from his designs. >> rose: how do you define his greatness? i've done lots of television programs of all kinds.
the thing that impresses me most about his genius is how passionate and obsessive and how hard he worked at it. >> yeah, i guess i would say the endless invention, right? just endless, unstoppable, there is no idea or thing not worth doing something to or thinking about or remaking. >> rose: people told me he would even excuse himself from dinner parties to go paint. >> i can believe that. the one exception to that, however, with sculpture in particular is carving marble. you think about the traditional image of the sculpture like michelangelo or brankuzi patiently working away at carving stones, that picasso had no interest in, too slow. >> rose: how did he work? much more improvisationally,
spontaneously, quick. he didn't even date his paintings and drawings with the year, he would put the day he made the thing. >> rose: it is said his sculptures are characterized primarily by the sheer pleasure of invention and experimentation. >> mm-hmm. i think that comes through in the show. you just go from gallery to gallery and, each time, a new set of materials, a new set of subject matter, a new way of making. and it's just hard to believe, in some cases, it all comes from one artist, there is that much range. >> rose: i think someone writing in the "new york times" said that the exhibition rate is the question of whether picasso was a better sculptor or painter. we've already touched on that. he was great at each, just so
many people know so little about him as a sculptor. >> well, and i think the important point is he was trained as a painter. >> rose: yes. he went to school for years to learn to paint. his father was a painter. he had no schooling in sculpture, no training whatsoever. so when he approached it right from the start, it was as a self-taught artist borrowing materials, using friends' studios or equipment and he kept that spirit his whole life. there was nothing to unlearn. so the freedom that came to him was all the more strong. >> rose: and it was deeply personal for him. >> yes, that is right. i think he thought about his sculptors as companions. whereas he sent his paymentings to shows, dealers, collectors' homes, didn't do that with the sculptures. >> rose: did the sculptures have any relationship to the various movements he defined in his paintings? >> yes, i think you can see a constant back and forth dialogue
between the pictorial and the sculpture. >> rose: a dilog. i think it's a dialogue. picasso would never want to stay in one category or another, so you see literally him applying paint to his sculptures from almost day one, and then some of the same subjects, motifs, are there. >> rose: and the sculptures form the painting in some case snls. >> i think dialogue, conversation, is a good word. i don't think he ever worked from his sculptures like you might from a model but i think there is an interchange between the two. >> rose: how did his sculpture influence other sculptors who followed him? >> from the start. it's amazing if you look through the exhibition, even watching visitors in the show, people will be dropping names. oh, calder, jack metti, david smith, on and on. >> rose: you can see the
influence. >> yeah, from one work that spawned what seems to be an rose: and does his earlyr work have some relationship to greek sculpture? >> not his early work. really, that's something he came to later in life. >> rose: ah... and from his very earliest moment, when he was painting what we think of aves the chapters of the -- think of as the chapters of the blue period, rose period, he was looking at the most famous sculptor of the moment in paris, but didn't think about classisms until a few decades later. >> rose: he studied them. informally. owned a lot of african work. that was the biggest impact on his sculpture. >> rose: what was the impact? tremendous admiration. in african masks, you might have shells and nails and all sort of other heterogenus materials,
that he imitated. but also that sculpture had a magical presence and force or power within itself that was virtually animate that he wanted for his sculptures. >> rose: did the sculptures change change during the war? was it a different mood? >> yes, i think during world war ii he famously decided to stay in occupied paris and he made some of his most somber, i think, mood works at that point. >> rose: you can see that in the paintings. >> you can. there is a sculpture of man with lamb, or statement that's when he made one of his sort of most iconic assemblages, taking the bicycle seat and handle bars and upending them and transforming them into a -- >> rose: don't some people say
after the war the sculptor had a more child, like, feeling? >> that's true. after the war he moved to the south of france where he remained almost the next 30 years of his life. he was down in the sun on the beach, and you feel that so strongly. also, he became the father, again, of two little kids, and there's a playfulness and a joy in that later work that is himself discovering his own childhood again. >> rose: so let's take a look at some of these images. so what's there? describe this. tell me about this. >> so this is a sculpture, called a glass of absence from 1914. it is one of a group of six cast in fronds but typically -- cast in bronze. picasso does everything you would normally think about a bronze edition, you have six identical things. you can see with this one and five companions, decorated surface, covered with paint,
added an absent spoon, and each on these glasses are different. the funny thing with picasso is this whole idea of taking a transparent glass as a subject for sculpture and not only making something opaque that is transparent, but, of course, the contents of such a glass would be liquid that he renders into solid forms. he likes to play with how you make things to be the opposite of what you think it should be. >> rose: this is guitar. what was that about? >> certainly picasso the spaniard. >> rose: yes. very much thinking about that, although he was living in paris for more than 20 years at this point. but i think here you have a great example of how painting a sculpture were in many ways back and forth in his work and this
is because the guitar hangs on the wall and yet it comes in and out and there is solid and void in there, sprayed and wrinkle -- straight and wrinkled forms, wires to be the strings. and it's this playful object done as an absolutely serious sculpture. >> rose: how many of the pieces are part of the permanent collection? >> in the show there are 11 from the permanent collection of the museum of modern art. >> rose: the next one is woman in garden from 1929 and 1930. >> right. this was the last of a number of works that picasso made as proposals for a graveside marker for his dear friend the poet and critic theona polamer. and picasso received a commission to design a graveside marker and it's one of the great chapters in 20th century art history in terms of all the
things rejected by the committee up to and including this one. >> rose: this one was rejected by the committee as well? >> they all were. i think what a joyous object to have on a tomb. but that wasn't a conventional motion of a graveside marker at that point and it's one of the things he made in collaboration with julio gonzalez who was a sculptor who taught him to well. >> rose: does this reflect his admiration for african and oceanic figures? >> absolutely. i think all the works of this moment -- i think anne said almost more african than the african objects themselves. >> rose: this is from 1933, the warrior motif. >> this is one of the works in moma's permanent collections given to us as a gift by his widow after he died. he made this in the first studio
he had for sculpture in his chateau he bought when he was 50. he worked with plaster and found objects within the plaster. one of the things we love, you see the eyeball next to the large nose? >> yes. we x-rayed, underneath is a tennis ball. he had a tennis court on the property. >> rose: the next one is a vase, a woman 1848. there it is. >> it's one of the ways picasso reinvents himself in his sculpture practice after the war is he learns how to make ceramics. sort of apprentices himself to a craftsman and, of course, again, with picasso, he learns how to throw pots and to throw forms and proceeds to do everything to them that you shouldent, and i think the owner of the ceramics
workshop where he worked famously said if he had been his real apprentice, he would have been fired. >> rose: because he lacked what? >> because h he was irreverent. because he took a nice form of the vase as in this lady and squished it to make a body. >> rose: yes. what does it say about his depiction of women? >> traditional (laughter) in how he could make a figure out of just about anything. >> rose: this is she goat, from 1950. >> very well-known. it's been in moma's sculpture garden since we acquired it in 1959. one of the things picasso said about this very proudly, she's more real than a real goat, don't you think? >> rose: he said that? yes. and there is an incredible amount of life likeness even though what it's composed of in its original plaster form a basket for the remember cage and ceramic form for the utters.
he had a pet goat he tethered to this with a leash. >> rose: great story. the next one is a baboon and young. this is from 1951. >> so this is a work made when -- remember, picasso is a father of a young boy named clawed, and this work is one that he famously pilfered two of claude's toy cars and put them together to make this baboon's head. there are any number of photographs of picasso at this moment holding his young son to his chest just in the way this baboon has always been identified as a female baboon in the past but actually reads in a certain sense like a self portrait. >> rose: reads like a self portrait. also an example to his commitment of naturalism? >> a very excellent self portrait, yes. >> rose: the next one is the
floury watering can -- flowery watering can. paris 1952. >> pi case to puts in a real watering can to use as a vas and things like real nails. there was a jung heap between his studio and the pottery workshop and his home and he would go walking there -- >> rose: pick up objects and bring them home. >> the biggest hoarder, back rat. >> rose: the next one is 1958. this is another work from moma's collections that was given to us by jacqueline picasso. you see here picasso going back to working with wood, something that happened early on, with these very flat planer forms. it's so picasso to make
something that has a pecktorial sparkle to it but using these very prosaic tools, utilitarian things. and the branches that you see making the horizontal and diagonal lines are from the palm trees in his backyard. >> rose: the next slide, what's that? >> picasso's last campaign of sculpture was in 1960, '61. he began making works in sheet metal. this is an example, taking cardboard, folding it, cutting it. >> rose: ankerlyly frank gary. yes. he would give them to his collaborator who made them into sheet metal works in a day, bring them back to picasso, picasso would approve, diapprove, and in a year and a half made over 120 sheet metal sculptures. >> rose: how hard was it to bring them together?
>> we relied on the kindness and generosity of people. >> rose: including family. picasso in paris was our real partner in the project. 50 sculptures come from them out of 141. and picasso famously kept his sculptures with him for most of his life then, after his death when they settled the estate, those works became the core of the music. >> rose: and why did he keep them with him until his death? obviously, he would say he loved them. >> one could sort of speculate endlessly. i think he liked living with them. i think he clearly, from photographs, arranged them around his face. i do believe they had personalities and were company for him, and there are all sorts of wonderful letters in our archives from alfred bar to picasso asking him -- >> rose: the director of
moma. >> yes, asked him would he part with sculpture x, y and z and by and large the answer was no. >> no and no and no. >> rose: thank you for coming. thank you for having us. >> rose: extraordinary. it really is. it will be there till february. it's something you don't want to miss. extraordinary, happens every 50 years, a collection of picasso's sculptures. thank you for joining us. back in a moment. stay with us. >> rose: cary fukunaga is here, director and screen writer of feature film @netflix. "beasts of no nation" is a story about a young forren to become a child soldier. here's the trailer for the film.
>> rose: cary fukunaga also directed the first season of the acclaimed hbo series "true detective" for which he received an emmy. i am pleased to have him at this table for the first time. welcome. what is it you want us to understand about child soldiers and "beasts of no nation"? >> i don't want it to be a didactic film. it's not meant to be a document ri. it's more of a departure for people living everyday life and transporting them to another part of the world and becoming emotionally connected to a kid who otherwise would just be a headline in the news. there is something indelible about emotional memory and change texas way we look at the world. >> rose: where did you find abraham? >> he was street casted. >> rose: street casted means? meaning we didn't have traditional auditions.
we tried and people didn't come. so we literally had to go out into the streets and try to find kids who might be interested in acting in a film. abraham was playing football on a pitch in the afternoon after school, and harrison, our casting director, approached him and harrison -- or abraham thought he was being scouted for a football team and he was pretty excited at first. (laughter) turns out it was only for a movie. >> rose: when you read "beasts of no nation," did you know you had to make it into a film? did it affect you ahat way? took how many years, nine? >> almost ten years. i read the book in 2005 and i had already been working ton subject for at least five years before that. it's been something that's been near and dear to me for over 15 years. >> rose: why? i studied history, political science in college. it was there i first learned about the wars in sierra leon,
liberia, and the images of children holding weapons and the violence inflected on them and they're inflicting on others was sort of too hard to fathom. >> rose: so you saw firsthand refugee camps? >> yeah. you know, i learned about -- at least in more details about the tbhar sierra leone. i stayed with a and an an attac. i got firsthand accounts of the war. when i read the novel, i felt like it wasn't specific to any one nation, it's more -- it tries not to go into any country's history. it's more of a human story than a political story. >> rose: are you more interested in children or the
militia leaders who use the children? >> sometimes the children become militia leaders. >> rose: yes, of course. i think i'm interested in everything about it, you know, thousand the whole cycle works, why the war takes place, why these children decide to join forces and even the leaders of these sort of charismatic military types, what would their life have been like had they grown up in a different country and applied that charisma and -- >> rose: and leadership skills. >> to something more productive. >> rose: your father was born in an internment camp? >> yes. >> rose: your graduate was a deputy? >> born on a plantation. >> rose: did that influence any of this career in movies and this desire to tell this snore. >> yes. it's funny, growing up, i think i probably grove my grandparents crazy asking them questions about our family history, their lives, my dad's life. i think they always sort of felt there was nothing interesting or
important about their life. >> rose: and you convinced them otherwise? >> i don't think i ever convinced them when i was trying to interview them. by the time i got to college, i was already taping the interviews. i think there is something about the mystery of it that i found intriguing, and i don't know where my interest in storytelling really came from. i would gladly spend the day in the multi-plex watching every movie there. i suppose the travails of my family have definitely influenced and affected me and driven me as well in terms of knowing how much they sacrificed for me. >> rose: are you somehow in the back of your mind constantly making the defining movie about the internment process and the impact? >> i would love to tell the
story. i'm not sure -- we can talk about how the system is changing but in the current system i'm not sure how i can ever get that movie financed based on the scale you would need to show these camps. so on the budget you would need to make the movie and then the algorithms they use, who will go see the movie. >> rose: you were the director of the first season of "true detective" which i loved, by the way. you had wonderful actors. you had the experience of the land. it was -- >> yeah, it was a fun -- >> rose: what was it for you? in hindsight, a lot of fun. in the moment, it was a really difficult project. part of what was i stumbled into this sort of naive idea that it would be much easier and quicker to do than it actually was. and i don't think i really registered what a 450-page-plus script meant in terms of what it was going to require for me in
endurance and stamina. >> rose: but you got two great actors? >> yeah. the whole thing rested on their shoulders. >> rose: and then you get to work with a huge, powerful vice president and word actor. why was he the instant choice? >> he was pretty much the only choice. i was still shooting true detective and one of the producers on that show, we were sitting in the chair, talking, waiting for it to get done and i told him i was going to do beasts next. he said we should get him to do it. i didn't think we would get someone of his stature. the general public was becoming
for aware of him. for a lot of people, almost unattainable. i was able to get him on the phone and he read the script and signed on in the same phone call. >> rose: signed on on the phone call? >> on the phone call. yeah, got him on board. >> rose: had he read commandant? >> commandant -- i made him a much more central figure and having him come on board changed the theme of the story and pushed it more toward the father-son dynamic. >> rose: is that the dynamic of the movie? >> i think so. i think there is many dynamics taking place -- >> rose: but that's a crucial one? >> sort of the patriarch system. >> rose: what does the kid
mean to him, the commandant? what does he see? >> at one point in the story he says you remind me of me when i was younger. i don't think he was lying. he sees something in the child. but these children, i remember speaking to the minister of parliament in liberia when we were setting up the movie who was commander and lord who ousted charles taylor, and he said without any filtering, as if i was a journal or not, he didn't care, he said the child soldiers were his best soldiers by far -- they're the most loyal, the most eager to please and the most fearless. i think it's the exact same thing. he has all the young adults and there is politics that inevitably end up happening when you're involved in a movement, but the kids just do his bidding
and there is a lot of power in that. >> rose: but do they see such gruesome things that it somehow changes their soul, their psyche? >> i don't think anyone -- >> rose: violence. -- who takes part in violence, they're altered permanently. i know their brain chemistry is absolutely altered from those experiences. in abraham's case, that's what it gets to by the end of the story, the heart of the story when he's speaking to the aid worker. sorry about the spoiler, but it's really what he says to her about his experiences so far and how he understands his place in the world and although the future is phot certain, his optimism about it, he knows he'll always carry that shadow with him. >> rose: here's a scene between the commandant and agu.
>> everybody has the commandant. how does the commandant look? all right, sir! mmm, what are they calling you? you must say it like you're proud. >> agu. one more time. agu. , that's what i will be calling you then, huh? leave this one under my charge. i will be training him to be a warrior. >> rose: there you go. i was remembering that day.
>> rose: what were you remembering? >> that's the first day they worked together. i know abraham was having a pretty hard time that day. we just made him walk through that entire sort of valley, although we beat the bush for snakes, he absolutely hates snakes, terrified of them, so he was already on edge from that and that scene we just kept shooting it over and over again. it was an oppressively hot day, just ran the day before. you felt like you were in a saw nay. everyone's brains might as well have been on drugs. he really got emotional. it's the first time i saw when we were shooting this kid could really do it. i wasn't certain before that. we were shooting chronologically. >> rose: this convinced you he could? >> convinced me. for a long time in the edit, we let the camera take run on him because he was so good. eventually, of course, we cut
back. >> rose: what you were doing with netflix, do you think this is where they're going? >> i don't pretend to see the future. i see from the writer/director's perspective the amazing potential. i feel we're back in the 1960s and shaking up the whole system in terms of hollywood and how movies are made. >> rose: why is that? what is it you have? >> you have the subscription service getting involved which means their serbscription service is the brand. the box office this movie makes is not the most critical factor to remaining in the cinemas. >> rose: because you have all the people paying $8 a month. >> exactly. this is what i was saying earlier is you ever make a movie about japanese internment camps.
>> rose: do you have a script? not yet but i should start writing one. >> rose: you've thought about it. you said before of true detectives, one of my priorities as director was to defend craft despite the constraints on my time and budget. how do you defend craft? >> i hope that doesn't come off as a slight for television but i think what it meant was i was anticipating that on the compressed time in which we had to film, we were shooting four to five script pages a day versus two to three, like on a moderate budget future film, that we were going to have to fall back on for formulaic scens and construction of sequences and i didn't want to do that. i wanted to retain some sort of feeling of purposefulness in terms of execution of the filming. that takes planning and
sometimes trust on the part of the pay masters that, you know, you can try these things, such as the one we did. >> rose: this premieres object 16 on -- on netflix? >> and cinemas across the country. >> rose: thank you for joins jog us. for more on this and other ep codes, individual visit us onlit pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org