National Board of Review to Announce Annual Winners on November 27

THE NATIONAL BOARD OF REVIEW
TO ANNOUNCE HONOREES
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2018

 

New York, NY (September 5, 2018) – The National Board of Review announced today that it will release its 2018 honorees on Tuesday, November 27, 2018. The gala to celebrate this year’s group of lauded filmmakers will take place on Tuesday, January 8, 2019.  The celebration will be held at Cipriani 42nd Street in New York City, where it has taken place for over a decade. NBC News’ “Sunday Today” host and MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” co-host, Willie Geist, will return to host the evening.

The National Board of Review’s awards celebrate excellence in filmmaking with categories that include Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor and Actress, Best Original and Adapted Screenplay, Breakthrough Performance, and Directorial Debut as well as signature honors such as Freedom of Expression and Spotlight Award.
This past year’s NBR winners included:  The Post for Best Film of the Year; Greta Gerwig for Best Director of the Year; Jordan Peele for Best Directorial Debut; Tom Hanks for Best Actor of the Year, Meryl Streep as Best Actress of the Year and Timothée Chalamet for Breakthrough Performance.

 

ABOUT THE NATIONAL BOARD OF REVIEW
For 108 years, the National Board of Review has dedicated its efforts to the support of cinema as both art and entertainment. Each year, this select group of film enthusiasts, filmmakers, professionals and academics of varying ages and backgrounds watches over 250 films and participates in illuminating discussions with directors, actors, producers and screenwriters before announcing their selections for the best work of the year in early December prior to an annual ceremony in January. Since first citing year-end cinematic achievements in 1929, NBR has recognized a vast selection of outstanding studio, independent, foreign-language, animated and documentary films, often propelling recipients such as George Miller’s visionary 2015 Best Film winner Mad Max: Fury Road into the larger awards conversation. NBR also stands out as the only film organization that bestows a film history award in honor of former member and film historian William K. Everson. In addition, one of the organization’s core values is identifying new talent and nurturing young filmmakers by awarding promising talent with ‘Directorial Debut’ and ‘Breakthrough Actor’ awards as well as grants to rising film students and by facilitating community outreach through the support of organizations such as The Ghetto Film School, Reel Works Teen Filmmaking, and Educational Video Center. With its continued efforts to assist up-and-coming artists in completing and presenting their work, NBR honors its commitment to not just identifying the best that current cinema has to offer, but also ensuring the quality of films for future generations to come.

Join the conversation @NBRfilm

# # #

 

Press Contacts: SLATE PR
Shawn Purdy / Rachael Trager
(212) 235-6813
shawn@slate-pr.com / rachael@slate-pr.com
Andy Gelb
(310) 461-0111
andy@slate-pr.com

Q&A with Desiree Akhavan, Chloë Grace Moretz, John Gallagher Jr., and Forrest Goodluck

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

How did this project start?
Desiree Akhavan: I was sent the book and I loved it. I really loved it. I gave it to my girlfriend at the time, who read it and loved it. And, she said you should make this into a movie. I thought there’s no way in hell I would be the person who would make this. Eighty percent of my work is just fart jokes. The book was so powerful. The thing about the book that really moved me was the tone of it. It was so funny and honest about what it was to be a teenager. Yet, the stakes were so high, and the drama was so intense. I thought it was beautifully handled, so I was very intimidated by it. I was like one day, maybe. Then, after I made Appropriate Behavior I gave the book to my producing partner, and I said, “One day we should make this.” She read it, and the next day she said we were making it.

“when you came to the camp was your first reaction to be against it… or did you try?”

Chloë, how did you get attached to the film?
Chloë Grace Moretz: I loved Desiree’s other work, and when this script came past me it was at a point in time where I had taken a little bit of a break from the current trajectory my career was on. I have two gay brothers in my family, so I’ve been an advocate for the LGBTQ community since I was a little girl. This chance to be able to take my advocacy and also push it into art and have it be completely symbiotic. It was also incredibly written. It was so naturalistic. It was truly some of the best writing I’ve read. It just flowed, and I think you can really see that on screen. You just were able to say the words and live in the moment. You never had to push too much structure on it in a lot of ways. It felt like an amazing opportunity, and Desi and I hit it off. I signed on very soon after.

Forrest, how did you get attached?
Forrest Goodluck: I got the email for the film as an audition. Whenever I see a Native role in my age rage I’m like, “Yep, I’ll get this.” So, I got it, because there are no other Native actors my age! It’s weird whenever you get a rare role like Adam. You don’t have a lot of nuanced Native characters in film, ever. I think the fact that I had the opportunity to audition for him was special. I took that as a win, and it was great that Desiree thought I fit the role.

John, was there a challenge to playing a role that’s so different from you?
John Gallagher Jr.: Preaching or believing in what Reverend Rick does is not something that would ever cross my mind. But, I was a little freaked out when I read it. I think a great thing to feel as an actor is, “Oh god. I don’t know if I can do this.” When I got sent the script and read it, that was my first thought. It’s really delicate, and I don’t want to do it in a way that makes fun of the character. I don’t want to make him a villain, and I want to make sure that it stays as complex and complicated as it was on the page. There was a lot of conflict, and it felt very torn. Sometimes, for me, I love to be convinced that I can do something that I can’t. Desi really convinced me of it. She felt that I was the guy for the part. It was a really organic filming process. We only had twenty three days, and I think was only in a few of those. We filmed really quick, and we only did a few takes of every scene. But, Desi just created a really safe, comfortable place on set where we could all take a bunch of risks. I think it paid off.

Can you talk about researching gay conversion therapy?
DA: So, I started with the book as a blueprint. Emily Danforth, the writer of the book, gave me her materials. She watched these films, read these books, these were the people that influenced certain characters. That was a jumping off point, and I got really into the leaders of Exodus International, which was the umbrella organization in the US. It was a resource for gay conversion therapy, but it’s been defunct for a few years now. But, what’s really sweet is that the two founders of it, the two gay men who founded it, fell in love with each other. So, that happened, and they went back to being gay. Then, you know, looking into the different practices and theories and the psychology behind it. Which is influenced a lot by actual psychology and also just bullshit. One of the things that we learned, my co-writer and I, while we were researching was this “cannibal theory,” which was saying you aren’t attracted to this person you think you’re attracted to. You want to be them. So, if they’re the same sex as you, the thing that you’re attracted to are the traits that you want to take into yourself. That inspired that scene on the grass, and that wasn’t in the book. So, it sort of grew out over the course of the year that we were writing and re-writing the script. Chloë and I met with some ex-ex-gays, so survivors of gay conversion therapy.
CGM: Yeah, we met with some really wonderful people who were powerful enough to be able to share their story with us which was a really big deal. It was really intimate. The questions were, at least for me, when you came to the camp was your first reaction to be against it or did you try? That was something that I really wanted to feel out, and I think that really took shape in the scene where she is sick of being disgusted with herself. I think the most takes we ever did was that scene. We tried to find that turning point for her, and we found that the turning point was that she was going to give in. She’s going to try to be the best in the class and get this right.

Election night happened during production, so the topic becomes even more relevant. What was set like after?
DA: The next day we filmed Chloë singing on top the table in the morning. So, we took a break in the middle of that scene to watch the concession speech, and everyone would go cry in the corner for a while. And, then that afternoon we shot that scene where John breaks down to her. It was a schizophrenic day of highs and lows, and everyone was in mourning together. What I realized and shared with everyone was that, as heartbreaking as it was, I’m very grateful to be American. It was a choice, you know, my family moved here from Iran a few years before I was born. And, I am in a position where I am on set making a film that criticizes the administration that we’re about to get. I don’t take that lightly. I don’t take it lightly that I’m a queer Iranian woman that had the opportunity to make this film. I know that that’s an opportunity that wouldn’t have been there for me elsewhere. And, I’m grateful that, even thought this horrible thing has happened, that I am actively making something in this moment with these people. I would have rather been with them making this movie than home alone feeling out of control.
CGM: In that moment, we were incredibly sad. It was a massive emotional setback. I mean I helped campaign for Hilary Clinton, so it was very close to home in a lot of ways. And, there’s the stark reality that Mike Pence is a massive advocate for conversion therapy. But, in that moment the highest form of activism that we could, the highest form of rebellion that we could do against this administration was get on that table and give my all. I funneled all that sadness and fear and anger and oppression that I felt in that moment through Cameron, because I was feeling one eighteenth of what she would’ve felt at the conversion therapy camps. So, it just a moment of strength, and it was the perfect form of rebellion in art.

Forest, how does it feel playing a character that was also told to hate their ethnicity and culture?
FG: Thank you for saying that. That’s actually one of my favorite points in the script is that head shave moment. For Native people everywhere the hair is the connection to your culture, and having that severed is like having a limb severed. I think for me it was an interesting ride, because this film for me is a metaphor for the boarding school and residential school systems that took place in this country. Western religious influence has tried to sever other Native people from their culture. It was dealing with a lot of complexity I think. For me, I’m Navajo, and half of all Navajos are actually Mormon. I never grew up religious, but it was so interesting to understand and try to feel that side of Native people who have been so torn and hurt. They’ve been so tormented by this country that the only tree that they can lean on is this religion that isn’t theirs. I think that is a scary place to sit, and I sat in that place for a long time. Right after I finished this film I went to another film called “Indian Horse” which dealt with the residential school system. I had to play a rape victim who is constantly tormented by the memory of his past in a residential school. After these two films, I needed to take a break. It’s hard to go home and wipe that off. It’s complicated, and I think we still live with that. I don’t think this film is only in the 90s. We’re still coming out of that. I think that’s why you don’t see a lot of prevalent Native directors or artists, because we’re still trying to get out of that glue that’s holding us. It’s cool that we’re giving a voice to that.

Q&A with Glenn Close, Jonathan Pryce, Annie Starke, and Björn Runge

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

Why did such a good script take so long to come to the screen?
Glenn Close: Have you heard of something called the “#Metoo” movement? Well, first of all, my definition of an indie film is a film that almost doesn’t get made. So, this definitely fits in that category. But, also it was based on a novel written by a woman with a screenplay written by a woman, and it was called “The Wife.” I think that was one of the reasons why it really was difficult to get made.
Jonathan Pryce: It’s not unusual, whatever sex is behind the project. Carrington, written and directed by Christopher Hampton, sat there for twenty-five years trying to get made.

Mr. Runge, when did you get involved with the film?
Björn Runge: I read the script in 2014. So, I was very attached to the script, and it was easy for me to tell the producer that I would be a part of this. After that I had a very successful meeting with Glenn here in New York. Now, we are here. But, I was very attached to the script from the beginning. It was a script that got into my heart.

“For me it was very important to find the right light for the actors, especially for Glenn’s face.”

You all took a week in Glasgow, where the film was shot, to work together on the story. How did that help?
BR: We all have a base in the theater, including Christian Slater who isn’t here. So, in the theater world you talk a lot about the characters and the dialogue. That week up in Glasgow was very important, because everyone could breathe their dance. I shouldn’t talk for them, but for me it was so interesting just to hear the actors speaking the dialogue and to observe them. So, for me it was a time for observation for the next step: the shooting.

Ms. Starke, you’re playing Joan Castleman at college age. How do you explore that?
Annie Starke: Well, we really took the time to collaborate on this character. I think it would’ve been impossible to play her well independently. I could never do that. So, it was a lot of time sitting at a table discussing every single detail of Joan Castleman.
GC: Annie really establishes the character. So, we talked about what are the characteristics that we want to be evident forty years from when we first see her. I think we talked about her shyness and her passion to write. For me, it was that she wants to write. She doesn’t necessarily have to be in public. She is kind of an introverted, in her head kind of person.
AS: I agree, she’s an introvert. She’s a very keen observer of the human condition. That personal trait paired with the times of the 1950’s certainly resulted in Joan.

Jonathan, did you work with your counterpart?
JP: No. I can’t remember why we didn’t. I think neither of us were available to get together. But, I’ve known Harry Lloyd over the years. We were in Wolf Hall together. But, I know Harry watched a lot of film and studied speech patterns. I think whats great about it when I see it is that he suggests the character rather than try to impersonate. It’s written in such a way that there’s a development and progression between the two characters. I was very happy with what he did.

Can you talk about the visual execution of the film?
BR: For me it was very important to find the right light for the actors, especially for Glenn’s face. Because Joseph Castleman has so many more lines in the beginning of the film, and Joan is much more of an observer. We have to feel that Joan is the gravity of the scenes even if Joseph is doing the talking. So, for us it was very important to find that light where we could do that, and understand the communication through her thoughts to the audience. So, we were searching for different lights, and we found a very soft light and a very shade-less light where you could see whatever happens in Joan’s face. You have to communicate what’s in the script and not lose the part that doesn’t talk so much for a long time. Light was the key for us.

Glenn and Jonathan can you talk about shooting the pivotal fight scene in the film?
GC: That, to me, is actor’s gold. When you have a scene like that in that you get into a really devastating fight about a lot of the issues that are certainly coming to the surface. But, in the middle of it the phone rings and you find out you have a grandson. And, everything comes back to being together. I have to say that very quickly we knew that we could trust Björn and Ulf Brantås, the cinematographer, to be where they needed to be to record what we were doing. That doesn’t happen all the time. Not only to light a face, but to light the eyes. And, the way they staged it I can’t remember where the camera was during that. It seemed seamless to me. It seemed that we were literally on a stage. Ulf and Björn’s partnership was like a ballet. They certainly had a language between each other… Swedish! But, as actors it was very freeing to be given the stage, if you will.
JP: You also have to credit the person who can often be your enemy, but in this case she was our friend. The editor. She chose those moments that had been so skillfully photographed. The shot eventually always seemed to be in the right place, not necessarily on the person who was talking but on the person who was listening. That was very gratifying to see.

Q&A with Christopher McQuarrie

The following questions and answers are excerpted from a conversation that followed the NBR screening of Mission: Impossible – Fallout.

It’s not your first time directing a Mission: Impossible film, and you’re the first director to come back. I hear you were kind of hesitant about that. Why?
Christopher McQuarrie: I had worked on Ghost Protocol. I came in midway through and was working on that movie. I saw Brad Bird going through what could only be described as a meat grinder. So, when Tom Cruise asked me to do Rogue Nation, I was very reluctant to do it. We were working on Edge of Tomorrow, and in the midst of a script session he said, “You know you should direct the next Mission Impossible!” A chill went down my spine. He picked up the phone, walked out of the room and called Brad Grey of Paramount Pictures. About ten minutes later he came back in and said, “You’re directing Mission Impossible.” So, I never formally accepted the job. It just happened. When I finished shooting Rogue Nation, I turned to Robert Elswit, the cinematographer, and I said, “I really feel sorry for the next son of a bitch who directs one of these movies cause I don’t know what’s left.” Then of course the joke was on me, because I was the next son of a bitch. The fans of the franchise have come to expect a different director every time. That’s a precedent. Tom said that precedents are made to be broken. So, I said if I was going to do it I have to come back as a different director. I want to achieve a new aesthetic. Tom asked how I was going to do that, and first and foremost I replaced my entire crew no matter how comfortable of a relationship I had with somebody. I think with the exception of our stunt coordinator and our editor, we replaced everyone. And, in many cases replaced them with people who had never done a movie of this scale before. The other thing was that I was going to go against the grain of Rogue Nation, which had obeyed the template of Ghost Protocol. Ghost Protocol really felt like the series had finally figured out what it was. So, just as we had decided what Mission: Impossible was, I was going to break what didn’t need fixing.

“They asked me what I would do to grow the audience. I said, ‘I’d make a more grown up film.’ “

Do you think that Mission: Impossible plays differently in the modern world?
CM: What the process teaches you is that you’re making these movies for four separate demographics that want four separate things from movies. And, at a certain budget you’re always trying to make a “four quadrant” movie. On Rogue Nation I went to marketing and said that I had really clashed with marketing on Jack Reacher. I had the luck or curse depending on how you look at it of making three movies with the same studio. So, I was able to learn the personality of that studio over time. So, with Rogue Nation I went to marketing and said, “Tell me how to make a Mission: Impossible movie. What do you guys need so that I’m not fighting with you a year from now on how to sell this?” They were so stunned. No director had ever come to them before. They brought out all these trailers and showed me how they sold movies. They’d point to shots and say, “this is the only moment we have with a woman in the movie. This is the only line of a dialogue we have that tells this part of the story.” We had the same conversation again and again at the beginning of this film. And this time they showed me this demographic breakdown of Mission: Impossible from the first movie all the way to the fifth movie. The thing that I noticed was that the under 25 audience peaked at Mission: Impossible II, and they have been steadily dropping film over film. The movie was growing with the audience, and younger audiences were coming less and less. Until Rogue Nation when the audience was less than 20% for under 25. So, I said why am I making a movie for these people? If you take the under 25 and separate everybody who is under 13 and can’t come to this movie, it’s even less than 20%. Screw those guys. Let’s read the feedback cards. They’re the ones who, when it’s emotional, say it’s corny. And, when it’s funny, they say it’s cheesy. They’re coming with this cynical attitude, and they’re not really reaching for what you’re offering. They asked me what I would do to grow the audience. I said, “I’d make a more grown up film.”

Can you speak about the handmade and “real” stunt nature of Mission: Impossible in the modern day, when people are so hard to impress in terms of visuals?
CM: I don’t think about it. I don’t think about it in terms of impressing. I think about it in terms of engaging. I remember on Rogue Nation he kept saying to me that he wasn’t hooked in. All we’re really trying to do is tell stories in the most elegant way imaginable and the most analog way imaginable. That’s why it’s the book and the tape recorder. We’ve gone back to the original TV show, and we nod towards that through the majority of the technology of this movie. We’re shooting as much of this we can on film. There’s two sequences shot digitally: the HALO jump and the helicopter sequence. Both of which are only shot digitally because there is no practical way that a film camera could be there to do those things. There were a lot of technical reasons why we did it. So, that’s why I think you feel that texture. Rob Hardy, the cinematographer, is someone that understands that and goes for a very gritty, realistic look. I hear people saying I’ve got this kind of ’70’s vibe to my movies. That’s not a conscious thing. I’m not sitting there sort of picking through and trying to make it more ’70’s. That’s what I grew up watching, and I hate technology in movies. I hate the internet in movies. I hate cellphones in movies. They get between characters and their struggle, and that’s what I’m always looking for. That’s why I like pay phones and not cell phones. All of that feels very “throwback,” but it’s not me trying to be ’70’s. It’s trying to create something that feels more connected and more textured and analog. So, I think that’s what you’re feeling.

How do you get Tom Cruise to stay so good looking, year after year?
CM: The quote that has come up out of this press tour is that I am the portrait and he is Dorian Gray. I had dark hair when I met Tom Cruise, and I have turned into his grandfather. He’s aged two years in the twelve that I’ve known him. He’s just a genetically pure specimen, but he also takes incredible care of himself. I wish there was a pill that he took. The truth of the matter is you’re looking at somebody that has only become more and more disciplined in terms of his training and his diet. For everything that he does to take care of himself, it is his instrument. And, he loves making movies. Everything that goes into that guy’s body and into developing himself is about preserving this for as long as he can, because he loves making movies. It’s just the thing he likes to do. He’s already onto the next movie. I just want to go on vacation. I want to lie on the couch with my dogs and read for three months. When we were at the Paris premiere, it was the first time we had watched the movie together. The movie ends, and the title comes on the screen. The audience is applauding, and Tom nudges me and goes, “Eh… We can do better.” That’s Tom.

Q&A with Daveed Diggs and Rafael Casal

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

Can you talk about the collaboration between the two of you in terms of writing, producing, and performing this?
Rafael Casal: Yeah, Diggs, can you?
Daveed Diggs: I mean we’ve been working on this for ten years at this point with our two producing partners the whole time, Jess and Keith Calder. Jess Calder approached Rafael, because she found some of his poems on YouTube and asked him if he would be interested in writing a film. We were already working together a bunch at the time, so eventually we tricked them into working with both of us. What they were interested in was a film that used sort of heightened language and this type of poetic verse that we had been doing a lot of work in. For us it was important to tell a story about the Bay Area and a story that starred us because we didn’t think anyone else would ever do that. We both came to the table with the things that we wanted, and we decided that those made sense for a movie. Right around the same time Oscar Grant was murdered at the Fruitvale BART station. So, the conversation about when you tell an Oakland story, that’s what the conversation was about. At that point, the early drafts of the film had so much more to do with the community response to the shootings. We always wanted to show Oakland. We had never seen Oakland represented as the city we know it to be on screen, so that was part of the point. So, we wrote this film that was mostly about community response to a shooting, and how it was starting to differently affect Colin and Miles. Over the course of time the way that discussion happens has changed so much. So, one of the major updates to the film is that Colin is the only one particularly affected by it, because he witnessed it. Chicago is on fire right now, because of this shooting. This is part of the hype, right? These things continue to be publicized and continue to be spoken about, and we used to protest and riot about them routinely. There’s a kind of fatigue associated with that. I just read a post from a friend of mine where he was showing his bruises from going out to the protest last night from getting beat up by the police. He was saying that not only is it dangerous to be black, but it is dangerous to love a black person. It’s dangerous to care about a black person enough to show your support for them and their family.

“Our goal was to finish this goddamn movie.”

Can you talk about bringing in the director?
RC: Yeah, we both worked with Carlos in a few different capacities over the last few years. He directed music videos for Daveed’s band, which is how I met him. And, then he directs the sort of final film project for our program called BARS that we started at the Public Theater here in New York. It’s a theater and verse program. The through-line of all of our collaborations with him is trying to figure out how to do narrative work with verse. Whether that be a song or a theatrical production. Sometimes, that leap is where a lot of the potency of the language is lost. We hadn’t seen it done the way that we envisioned it. We felt like Carlos was the best ally that we had, because we had sort of been in the trenches with him trying to chip away at this. We were fortunate enough to be working with the same producers, who first asked if I wanted to direct it. I said, “Noooooo.” We were two months away from shooting it, and we had to do a page one rewrite. Diggs was going to be on planes that whole time. So, it felt like that was a tall order. But, Carlos is so uniquely qualified for the task. He’s such a gentle, sensitive human in all the best ways. Sensitive to the subject material, sensitive to taking something and not making it his own before fully understanding it. We’re essentially asking to capture a hometown that he doesn’t know that we hold very dear. So, for us that meant we had to have a shorthand with the director. We had to have open, constant communication. So much of the process of making this film was the three of us, or the five of us with our producers, huddling up before a scene and reminding each other what was important about it. He was so gracious in keeping the process open and collaborative while giving it a very stylized, heightened look that is his signature aesthetic. We’re also advocates for working with your friends and putting on your friends when you have the opportunity to. Carlos, like us getting to make this movie, whether you’re ready or not, it might be a decade before you get to do the thing that you want to do. So, we had this opportunity to give a first feature to someone. So, he graciously came aboard and moved to LA with me two days later to rewrite the script.

Have you thought about any kind of educational component to go along with this film?
DD: People ask us that a lot. For high school it’s tricky, because of the R rating.
RC: I said ‘fuck’ too much. I said ‘fuck’ too much, and now we can’t show it to high school kids.
DD: It’s very gratifying that people see it and feel like it might be useful for them in some way. I think our biggest goal was to create a thing that people liked. And, not even that. Our goal was to finish this goddamn movie. And, then we did that. Then, we thought it would be cool if people saw this thing. So, we sort of hoped for a Netflix release or a straight to streaming thing. Then, Lionsgate came along and was like, “we can put this in movie theaters.” So, that’s where we are now.
RC: I remember asking at Lionsgate if there would be a poster.
DD: That was the question: would there be a poster. Then they came in and showed us fifty posters. So, I think as far as we had thought ahead was that we made something that we’re really proud of. Hopefully people get to see it. It’s very gratifying that people see it and want to do something else with it. But, I don’t think we are ever particularly prescriptive of what that thing is. I think the audience is smarter at that than we are. We’re sort of too close to it to decide what it’s good at. I think everybody else through seeing it can decide what kind of tool it is.

Since making the film how has your relationship changed?
RC: It’s over. Can’t stand each other.
DD: This press tour is the victory lap, and then we’re done.
RC: We’ve worked on so many projects together. Albums and albums of music, and we’ve had different iterations of bands together. We’ve done web series together. I found this picture the other day. We shot this sci-fi web series probably like six years ago. It was a space thing and there was a puppet. But, we had to drive up to the desert to shoot it, and there was only four of us there. Someone had to hold the camera. Me and another actor were in the shot, and then Diggs had to do sound and run the puppet. His hand had to go through the puppet and shake my hand in the shot. So, there’s a picture of Diggs with his hand up the ass of this puppet covered in slime. He’s operating it in this hand, and the boom is under his arm pointed at our mouths. That’s what we come from. So, this is the cool part. Now, people are like do you have any other stuff you want to work on. And, I’m like, “Yeah! All this stuff! Open that door, go to the left, that pile!” So, now we get the opportunity to do things with this thing that we learned about recently called a budget. I don’t know if any of you have heard of this term. It’s when they give you money to make a thing.
DD: Before you make it!
RC: Before you make it! So, we’re looking forward to that.
DD: Our working relationship has stayed remarkably similar for two people have been working together for so long. Rafael usually has an idea that he’s super excited about. I poke holes in it for about three days, and then if it’s still a good idea we do it.