October 2, 2025 • 25 mins
Academy Award Winner Marshall Curry Talks NEW YORKER AT 100 & Hamptons International Film Festival on SOUNDS OF FILM
The Sounds of Film welcomes Academy Award–winning filmmaker Marshall Curry for a conversation about his new Netflix documentary The New Yorker at 100.
The film offers unprecedented access inside the offices of The New Yorker during its centennial year, revealing the obsessive craft behind its reporting, fiction, and cartoons. Curry captures editors, writers, and artists at work, while also tracing the magazine’s remarkable history and cultural influence over the past century.
The New Yorker at 100 made its world premiere at the Telluride Film Festival and will be featured at the Hamptons International Film Festival, with screenings scheduled for October 9th and October 12th at 8:00 PM.
For longtime readers and newcomers alike, the film provides an intimate portrait of the publication’s unique editorial process and enduring place in American life.
Marshall Curry is an Academy Award–winning filmmaker whose work spans both documentary and narrative film. His documentaries include Street Fight, Racing Dreams, If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front, and the archival short A Night at the Garden. In 2020, his film The Neighbors’ Window won the Oscar for Best Live Action Short. With The New Yorker at 100, Curry turns his camera on one of America’s most iconic magazines, blending history, journalism, and behind-the-scenes access.
About The Sounds of Film
The Sounds of Film is America’s longest-running film and music radio show. For over 35 years, host Tom Needham has delivered an eclectic mix of music and interviews to audiences across Long Island, parts of Connecticut, and streaming worldwide on WUSB. The program has featured guests such as Alec Baldwin, Billy Joel, William H. Macy, Dionne Warwick, Chuck D, Ernest Dickerson, Hal Hartley, Peter Fonda, and Rory Kennedy.
The Sounds of Film Podcast is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and Amazon Music.
For more information, visit soundsoffilm.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:01):
Hi, this is Tom Needham and you are listening to The Sounds of
Film, the nation's longest running film and music program.
Today we're joined by Academy award-winning director Marshall
Curry to discuss his new Netflixdocumentary The New Yorker at
100. Narrated by Julianne Moore, the
film offers unprecedented accessinside the offices of The New
(00:24):
Yorker. The film will be screening at
the Hamptons International Film Festival on October 9th and 12th
at 8:00 PM. So excited to talk about this
film. Marshall, Thanks for coming on
the program. Thank.
You for having me? Yes, So what?
You get to The New Yorker as a subject for a future
documentary. You know, I guess I was somebody
(00:49):
who, you know, read my parents copies of The New Yorker when I
was little. I probably started out looking
at the cartoons and eventually graduated the articles and when
I became an adult got my own subscription.
So I've always been a a fan of the magazine and I think it this
time in our history, print magazines and fact based
(01:12):
journalism and the magazine business long form, carefully
written, carefully researched articles.
All of that is, is disappearing in the in the ERA of hot takes
and, and, and, you know, social media.
And so when it was turning 100, it just seemed like something
(01:33):
that would be worth exploring. The New Yorker has always been
about words on a page. How, as a film maker, did you
use different cinematic strategies to make the writing
visually compelling? Well, so the film kind of
bounces back and forth as you know, you've seen it between
telling the history of 100 yearsof this incredible magazine and
(01:56):
then watching current day writers and editors and
cartoonists and, you know, graphics cover editors put a
magazine together. And so you're right, one of the
challenges of of making a a filmabout a a magazine is that
watching people look at a computer screen and type isn't
(02:19):
the most cinematic, isn't the most cinematic thing in the
world. So we watched a lot of the
reporters as they were out working and in the field
reporting their stories, whetherit's, you know, Carol Burnett in
California profile written by Rachel Simer, whether it's John
Lee Anderson and Damascus as theAssad regime falls covering
(02:42):
that. Or, you know, Andrew Moran's one
of the political reporters covering Trump's Madison Square
Garden rally during the election.
So we a number of the actual jobs of reporting were visual.
And then we also found ways of, of including the writing that
(03:04):
people are are working on or by just finding, you know,
graphical ways of, of combining graphics and, and the sort of
real time footage that we were shooting.
I remember you once saying that you like to make films about
obsessive people, and I enjoyed seeing all the different editors
(03:25):
and the writers doing what they do.
Do you think this film falls into that category?
Definitely. I mean, The New Yorker is a
magazine of the most incredible collection of obsessive people
that I've ever witnessed. You know, whether it is these
multi hour meetings that they have called closing meetings
(03:46):
when they when, whenever an article is finished, they lay it
out in the format of the magazine and then the writer and
the editor and fact checker and copy editor go into a room and
they go line by line through thearticle.
Sometimes, you know, 20,030 thousand word articles going
line by line just to make sure not only is everything correct,
(04:09):
but is it just written in exactly the best way it could
possibly be written? Is it, is this word a little bit
more colorful or a little bit more precise than that word
would be? These meetings go on for hours
and hours sometimes. And it's just one small example
of, of, of how obsessive The NewYorker staff is.
(04:30):
And there's something again in today's era of fast takes and
hot takes and, and, and quickly written things, there's
something kind of admirably inefficient about it.
It's it's, you know, at one point I was trying to think of
documentaries that that we coulduse as models.
(04:51):
And one that I kept returning towas Jiro Dreams of Sushi,
because it's somebody, somebody's obsession with making
something completely perfectly. And, and they're they're
cartoonists are like that. The copy editors are like that.
The fact checkers are like that.The reporters are like that.
And it's really fun to just get to watch people obsessed about
(05:17):
their craft in the way that thatthat the people there do.
Now, you were a fan and a reader, you said.
Getting this opportunity to go there and see the process, did
it disappoint or were you just blown away even more in in terms
of what you expected? Yeah, it was pretty amazing to
(05:37):
see it up close. I'll, I'll, I'll be honest.
And yeah, I had read the magazine, but I'd really, I
didn't, I'd never been behind the curtain of it.
And so that was really fun to get to, to get to meet all these
people and, and see them do their work and to also learn the
(06:00):
history of the magazine. You know, this year is its 100th
anniversary. And when it started, there were
all sorts of things that I didn't know about it, including
the fact that when it was started, you would think The New
Yorker magazine, it's this kind of cosmopolitan, Snooty thing.
I bet it was started by some NewYork City native.
But actually it was founded by aguy who dropped out of high
(06:23):
school and moved to New York from rural Colorado, from the
mining town in Colorado. And, and in fact, the magazine
over its 100 years has said 5 editors.
Only one of them is from New York City.
And that was also something thatwas so interesting to me was
just learning the way that the magazine has changed.
(06:44):
When, when it began, it began asthis kind of comic weekly.
It was supposed to just be a, a light humor magazine.
And it wasn't until more or lessthe, the, the writing of John
Hersey's piece on the bombing ofHiroshima that it became a, a, a
more serious magazine that did that did hard hitting
(07:06):
journalism. So there were just lots of
twists and turns that that that that were new to me and and I
think it'll be fun for for viewers to to learn themselves.
I I think you addressed in the film how from the public's point
of view, sometimes it's viewed as being a little snobby or
elitist. And this in particular is
(07:29):
interesting because now we live in a time of equity and, and,
you know, making things accessible to everybody.
At least that's a a major push that's going on in society.
How does The New Yorker balance that current social movement
with keeping their standards, which are so important to the
(07:50):
magazine, very, very high? Well, it is a challenge for the
magazine and, and it was something that I was really
interested in the, the, the movie.
I, I, I'm a fan of The New Yorker, but the movie definitely
has an irreverence about the, you know, sometimes snootiness
that, that, that the magazine can put out.
(08:11):
And they know the sort of vibe that, that, that, that emanates
from it sometimes. And also we looked at at, you
know, points in the magazine's history when it didn't live up
to the standards that it holds itself to today with respect to
race or, or other, you know, other issues, fact checking,
things like that. But this question of, of elitism
(08:33):
was one that that we return to anumber of times in the film
because it was brought up by a number of people and, and
different people have different perspectives on it.
Some, some, some people feel like that vibe of elitism is
something that needs to be knocked down a little bit.
(08:55):
One of the reporters who's a political reporter describes the
way that the style guide for TheNew Yorker requires that you put
a little accent over the E in the word elite.
And and he says that he goes outand he he does these interviews
with people who say, oh, the NewYorker's just a bunch of elitist
so and so's and and they'll put the quote elitists in in the
(09:21):
magazine, but they always have to put that little accent over
the E and elite. And he said, I feel like in some
ways we're we're proving their point that we that that even
when we write the word elitist, we have to put a little slightly
accent over the E. But other people made the
argument that, you know, if elitism has this kind of anti
(09:44):
intellectual vibe to it as well,that needs to be pushed back on.
And that, you know, if elitism means that you write about
complicated things or that you look at nuance or you, you
wrestle with difficult things, then as as this one writer said,
you know, the world needs more elitism if that's how you're
going to define elitist and. Where do you come down with it?
(10:07):
I love The New Yorker. So, you know, I, I think that I
like complexity. I like thoroughness.
I think it's great when a magazine can make itself
relevant and and available to togeneral readers.
And I think definitely The New Yorker tries hard to to make
(10:31):
itself accessible. But at the same time, I think it
shouldn't be competing with Twitter.
It shouldn't be competing with, you know, the, the Buzzfeed's or
the, or the the New York Post or, or the kind of quick and
dirty tabloid stuff. I think it's, I think having a,
(10:53):
a magazine that makes the equivalent of carefully built
hand rolled sushi is fine. And maybe not sushi's not for
everybody there. The New Yorker doesn't try to be
McDonald's. They don't want to make billions
and billions of hamburgers for everybody.
They're going to do the thing that they do carefully.
They hope people will like it. They hope people will appreciate
(11:14):
it. And, and fortunately, it's one
of the few magazines that seems like it it, it has fun enough of
an audience still that that it that it's going to survive or
that it still is surviving. I guess the future, you know,
always remains to be seen. But, but it, it is a magazine
(11:36):
that that is profitable right now, a little bit profitable.
And, and, and as Time and Life and Newsweek and U.S. news and
World Report and all of these other magazines that I grew up
with have have either disappeared or become very
diminished. It's one of the few that has
it's managed to survive. Well, I, I agree with you and I,
(11:58):
I think it's refreshing and needed in this day and age for
someone to make a film that getsinto some of these ideas.
I, I think there is a need for high quality magazines, films,
music, I mean whatever it is. And it's not something that one
should be ashamed of. And I can't even believe that
(12:18):
that's a thing these days, to behonest with you.
But but I'm glad that you tackled that subject.
Someone who could be not even more popular than you could even
imagine would be Taylor Swift. And you, you don't have a Taylor
Swift song per SE in the movie, but you do have a cover of a
Taylor Swift song, Welcome to New York.
(12:40):
And I thought that was very clever.
Tell us about the use of the song and who did it and and why
you chose it. Yeah, well, we were looking for
a song at the end of the movie that would have have some
emotion and have some have some excitement and and refer to New
York. And I was trying to come up with
a song and Telefasana, who is a a a New Yorker writer who does a
(13:04):
lot of writing about music. I asked him for advice on, on
what what song we might be able to use.
And he said, you know, one of the things that he loves about
The New Yorker is the way that it combines kind of, you know,
different types of culture together.
So, you know, it's got this kindof fancy typeface and, you know,
(13:25):
a guy with a top hat that is hislogo.
But but Kelliford loves writing about boxing and hip hop and
things like that that create a little tension with the with the
magazine. He said he thought that tension
was a big part of what makes TheNew Yorker such a cool magazine.
And so he said, what if you found like a Taylor Swift song
like Welcome to New York and yougot somebody like Matt Berninger
(13:48):
of the of the National, which isa kind of cool indie rock band,
to do a cover of it. And he didn't know it, but I'm
actually friends with Matt. And so I, I asked Matt, hey,
would you be, would you be interested in covering the song?
And he went into the studio a couple days later and, and
recorded this really cool, fun version of that song.
(14:09):
And, and, and Taylor and I wroteTaylor a letter and said we'd
love to, to include this song inin our film.
And she very generously allowed us to, to, to do that.
So yeah, it's a great, it's a great way to to end the movie.
We were really thrilled when that song came together.
Is that song going to be released?
I I looked quickly on Spotify and I couldn't find it.
(14:32):
No, it hasn't been released yet,but yeah, that will the the Matt
Bernie there will be probably releasing at some point after
the film comes out. But but if you're if you're a
huge Taylor Swift fan, the only place to carry it will be at the
end of our movie. And you have to watch the whole
movie to get to the end. So, so we're hoping that that a
lot will attract a big audience that way too.
(14:52):
Even if you're not a Taylor Swift fan, it's just a very cool
song the way it was performed, so great.
Great choice. You have a lot of celebrities in
this movie, and it seems that a lot of people had a real
affection for The New Yorker, kind of like yourself.
Tell us about some of the peoplethat people might be interested
(15:14):
seeing in the movie talking about The New Yorker.
Yeah, it was fun while we were. You know, one of the things that
we're doing as we make the film is watch The New Yorker staff as
they're putting together the 100th anniversary magazine.
And in addition, their film department, they have a sort of
social media and film departmentwas having celebrities come in
(15:37):
to talk about the the magazine, either a, you know, particular
piece that was published in the magazine, a particular cartoon
they loved some part of their life that was connected to The
New Yorker. So they, so we basically
documented their work, bringing in these celebrities and, and,
and doing that and, and, and yeah, it's a really, it's a
(15:57):
really fun group that includes, you know, Jon Hamm and Sarah
Jessica Parker and Jesse Eisenberg and Nate Burgazi and,
and just a whole range of, of folks sharing either a funny
story or an insight or a, a, a, a particular article, a
particular cartoon, something like that, that they, that they,
(16:20):
that they loved. So and it was interesting to see
the range of folks who had some connection to this magazine.
Marshall, you know, you're an acclaimed film maker and it
still must be nerve racking for you to go in and see all these
editors and these writers, theseartists doing what they do at
(16:42):
such a high level and then to have the responsibility to make
the film that's going to represent their 100th
anniversary. Is there anything that you
witnessed in their work that influenced your making of the
film? Yeah.
You know, one of the big challenges of this story was
(17:06):
that it is such an incredible institution that has this
amazing history of having published these famous works
from, you know, Silent Spring, Hiroshima.
I mentioned before James Baldwin's Letter from a Region
in my mind, Truman Capote's In Cold Blood.
And those were just a few. I mean James Thurber and EB
(17:27):
White and Janet Malcolm and Hannah Arendt and there were so
many important pieces and so many important writers that that
came out of The New Yorker. And similarly today, you know,
we were making a 90 minute movie.
So we only had so much time, butwe did profiles of other
(17:47):
writers, Adam Gotnik and Jill Lepore and folks like that that
didn't, you know, we just couldn't include and many, many
other incredible writers who whowe didn't even get to film with
that when when I started, one ofmy friends told me that making a
film about The New Yorker is like trying to make a film about
(18:08):
America, sort of, OK, it's goingto be a it's going to, it's
going to be impossible to be a completist.
And so we took the approach of making it sort of like a tasting
menu or like a chocolate samplerwhere you get to see different
types of things. But, but we don't even attempt
to, to, to try to be completist about it.
(18:31):
And you mentioned that challengeof, you know, making a film
about people who are so accomplished. 1 funny thing is
that David Remnick, who's of course the editor of the
magazine and, and one of our main characters, has written so
many profiles himself. And, and, and so, as he said, it
was a little unnerving to allow a film crew to make a profile of
(18:55):
his magazine when he's used to being on the other side of, of,
of, of that experience. And at one point I was
interviewing him and we had a, there's a kind of a trick that
that film makers develop when you're interviewing somebody,
which is when you ask a questionand the person finishes talking
(19:18):
you, you have to bite your tongue not to say something
else. You have to leave a kind of
awkward space with the hope thatpeople will feel a little
uncomfortable by that awkward space and they'll add a little
bit more. And frequently the thing that
they add is, is insightful. And so I was sitting with David
and I was interviewing him at one point.
And I, he answered a question and I was quiet and I waited and
(19:42):
I waited and he looked at me andhe waited and he waited and I
looked at him. And finally, after about 30
seconds, he said, you know, I know that trick also.
I thought, oh, this is going to be a different kind of movie
where you're trying to profile people who are experts at
profiles. But it was great.
(20:02):
Just, I mean, I, I frequently would ask the writers, if you
were making a film about The NewYorker, how would you approach
it? Or I would ask David, if you
were writing a profile of David Remnick, what would you ask?
How, where would you dig? How would you, how would you
approach it? And I found that that a lot of
times people had insights because they were both on the
inside but had the experience ofcrafting stories that that that
(20:27):
that helped me put this thing together.
That's really interesting. So like we talked about earlier
in in the film you, you show people who are obsessing about
commas or accent marks, you know, really specific details.
Are you like that at all with your movies?
Like is there anything like thatwith you?
Like what is it? That you.
(20:48):
Really, really concentrate on inyour movies.
Yeah, no, I, I, I'm pretty obsessive, I'm afraid it
probably drives the team crazy. But yes, I, you know, the
difference between something that's, you know, 4-4 seconds
and 6 frames and something that's 4 seconds and seven
frames, you know, is you feel the difference.
(21:10):
And so we fortunately had a really terrific team, you know,
cinematographers, editors, producers, researchers working
with us. But yeah, I when we're looking
at an archival photo and you think, OK, this is good, but is
there one that would be even better?
And, you know, is there something hidden in in our raw
(21:34):
footage that would pop a little bit more than what we have?
And, you know, if we worked on this music cue a little bit
more, we pushed maybe, you know,on this bridge for this part of
the music, could we make it a little better?
And, you know, each of those individual things, probably if
(21:57):
you left one out, it wouldn't matter.
Nobody's going to notice. But when they start to
accumulate, they really make thedifference between a movie that
that pops and it's funny and is surprising and, and one that
that's good but not great. And so, yeah, I was really lucky
(22:19):
to have a A-Team at Netflix who were super supportive and, and,
and a team working with me on this project all the way that
everybody wanted to, to, to pushit beyond being good and, and,
and, and make everything great. Well, you mentioned Netflix.
The New Yorker may be an elitistmagazine.
Maybe not. But Netflix is the big, big
(22:42):
streaming service and lots of people are going to have the
opportunity to see this film, which is exciting.
What is the number one thing that you hope people that kind
of stumble across this film takeaway from your movie?
I think that we are at a difficult time for journalism.
(23:04):
Journalists are not beloved there.
Journalists are on, you know, the media is unpopular from the
left and the right, and, you know, we're at a point where the
idea of telling the truth or being accurate feels optional.
And. And I, when I was growing up,
(23:30):
all the president's men had comeout and there were these movies
and stories of journalists and journalism that were inspiring.
And, and a lot of that's gone away.
And I think that's a problem because I think that that having
journalists who are asking hard questions, who are writing,
(23:54):
writing carefully researched, carefully written work, and also
who are writing about, about artand are writing about science
and are writing about international relations, that's
really, really, really importantto a culture.
And, and I think it's under threat right now.
(24:16):
And so we've had some screeningswhere particularly some, some of
our early test screenings, but the, the film was recently
premiered at at Telluride Film Festival.
And we had some young people those screenings and who came up
and said, no, I've never thoughtof being a journalist, but after
watching the film, it makes me think maybe I should be a
(24:36):
journalist. And that is great.
I, I feel like the film is a, isa celebration of doing hard
work. Sometimes it's inefficient,
sometimes it's not profit maximizing, but is, is careful
and is thorough and is beautiful.
(24:57):
And it's a celebration of, of, of, of doing that work.
That, that, that, that that's soimportant.
Well, this film, The New Yorker at 100 will be eventually on
Netflix, but it's going to be screening at the Hamptons
International Film Festival on October 9th and 12th at 8:00 PMI
(25:18):
want to recommend everybody go out and support this film.
It's very entertaining. It's it's amazing.
And it's such a privilege for meto be able to speak with you.
Marshall, thanks for coming on the Sounds of Film.
Thanks so much. It's really, it's really fun
getting to talk to you and, and I'll be at that screening on the
9th. So, so if folks want to come, I,
I assume we'll have a, a Q&A afterward and, and I'd love to,
(25:40):
to talk more about it. Sounds good.
Thanks again. Thank you.
Hi, this is Tom Needham and you are listening to The Sounds of
Film, the nation's longest running film and music program.
Today we're joined by Academy award-winning director Marshall
Curry to discuss his new Netflixdocumentary The New Yorker at
100. Narrated by Julianne Moore, the
film offers unprecedented accessinside the offices of The New
(00:24):
Yorker. The film will be screening at
the Hamptons International Film Festival on October 9th and 12th
at 8:00 PM. So excited to talk about this
film. Marshall, Thanks for coming on
the program. Thank.
You for having me? Yes, So what?
You get to The New Yorker as a subject for a future
documentary. You know, I guess I was somebody
(00:49):
who, you know, read my parents copies of The New Yorker when I
was little. I probably started out looking
at the cartoons and eventually graduated the articles and when
I became an adult got my own subscription.
So I've always been a a fan of the magazine and I think it this
time in our history, print magazines and fact based
(01:12):
journalism and the magazine business long form, carefully
written, carefully researched articles.
All of that is, is disappearing in the in the ERA of hot takes
and, and, and, you know, social media.
And so when it was turning 100, it just seemed like something
(01:33):
that would be worth exploring. The New Yorker has always been
about words on a page. How, as a film maker, did you
use different cinematic strategies to make the writing
visually compelling? Well, so the film kind of
bounces back and forth as you know, you've seen it between
telling the history of 100 yearsof this incredible magazine and
(01:56):
then watching current day writers and editors and
cartoonists and, you know, graphics cover editors put a
magazine together. And so you're right, one of the
challenges of of making a a filmabout a a magazine is that
watching people look at a computer screen and type isn't
(02:19):
the most cinematic, isn't the most cinematic thing in the
world. So we watched a lot of the
reporters as they were out working and in the field
reporting their stories, whetherit's, you know, Carol Burnett in
California profile written by Rachel Simer, whether it's John
Lee Anderson and Damascus as theAssad regime falls covering
(02:42):
that. Or, you know, Andrew Moran's one
of the political reporters covering Trump's Madison Square
Garden rally during the election.
So we a number of the actual jobs of reporting were visual.
And then we also found ways of, of including the writing that
(03:04):
people are are working on or by just finding, you know,
graphical ways of, of combining graphics and, and the sort of
real time footage that we were shooting.
I remember you once saying that you like to make films about
obsessive people, and I enjoyed seeing all the different editors
(03:25):
and the writers doing what they do.
Do you think this film falls into that category?
Definitely. I mean, The New Yorker is a
magazine of the most incredible collection of obsessive people
that I've ever witnessed. You know, whether it is these
multi hour meetings that they have called closing meetings
(03:46):
when they when, whenever an article is finished, they lay it
out in the format of the magazine and then the writer and
the editor and fact checker and copy editor go into a room and
they go line by line through thearticle.
Sometimes, you know, 20,030 thousand word articles going
line by line just to make sure not only is everything correct,
(04:09):
but is it just written in exactly the best way it could
possibly be written? Is it, is this word a little bit
more colorful or a little bit more precise than that word
would be? These meetings go on for hours
and hours sometimes. And it's just one small example
of, of, of how obsessive The NewYorker staff is.
(04:30):
And there's something again in today's era of fast takes and
hot takes and, and, and quickly written things, there's
something kind of admirably inefficient about it.
It's it's, you know, at one point I was trying to think of
documentaries that that we coulduse as models.
(04:51):
And one that I kept returning towas Jiro Dreams of Sushi,
because it's somebody, somebody's obsession with making
something completely perfectly. And, and they're they're
cartoonists are like that. The copy editors are like that.
The fact checkers are like that.The reporters are like that.
And it's really fun to just get to watch people obsessed about
(05:17):
their craft in the way that thatthat the people there do.
Now, you were a fan and a reader, you said.
Getting this opportunity to go there and see the process, did
it disappoint or were you just blown away even more in in terms
of what you expected? Yeah, it was pretty amazing to
(05:37):
see it up close. I'll, I'll, I'll be honest.
And yeah, I had read the magazine, but I'd really, I
didn't, I'd never been behind the curtain of it.
And so that was really fun to get to, to get to meet all these
people and, and see them do their work and to also learn the
(06:00):
history of the magazine. You know, this year is its 100th
anniversary. And when it started, there were
all sorts of things that I didn't know about it, including
the fact that when it was started, you would think The New
Yorker magazine, it's this kind of cosmopolitan, Snooty thing.
I bet it was started by some NewYork City native.
But actually it was founded by aguy who dropped out of high
(06:23):
school and moved to New York from rural Colorado, from the
mining town in Colorado. And, and in fact, the magazine
over its 100 years has said 5 editors.
Only one of them is from New York City.
And that was also something thatwas so interesting to me was
just learning the way that the magazine has changed.
(06:44):
When, when it began, it began asthis kind of comic weekly.
It was supposed to just be a, a light humor magazine.
And it wasn't until more or lessthe, the, the writing of John
Hersey's piece on the bombing ofHiroshima that it became a, a, a
more serious magazine that did that did hard hitting
(07:06):
journalism. So there were just lots of
twists and turns that that that that were new to me and and I
think it'll be fun for for viewers to to learn themselves.
I I think you addressed in the film how from the public's point
of view, sometimes it's viewed as being a little snobby or
elitist. And this in particular is
(07:29):
interesting because now we live in a time of equity and, and,
you know, making things accessible to everybody.
At least that's a a major push that's going on in society.
How does The New Yorker balance that current social movement
with keeping their standards, which are so important to the
(07:50):
magazine, very, very high? Well, it is a challenge for the
magazine and, and it was something that I was really
interested in the, the, the movie.
I, I, I'm a fan of The New Yorker, but the movie definitely
has an irreverence about the, you know, sometimes snootiness
that, that, that the magazine can put out.
(08:11):
And they know the sort of vibe that, that, that, that emanates
from it sometimes. And also we looked at at, you
know, points in the magazine's history when it didn't live up
to the standards that it holds itself to today with respect to
race or, or other, you know, other issues, fact checking,
things like that. But this question of, of elitism
(08:33):
was one that that we return to anumber of times in the film
because it was brought up by a number of people and, and
different people have different perspectives on it.
Some, some, some people feel like that vibe of elitism is
something that needs to be knocked down a little bit.
(08:55):
One of the reporters who's a political reporter describes the
way that the style guide for TheNew Yorker requires that you put
a little accent over the E in the word elite.
And and he says that he goes outand he he does these interviews
with people who say, oh, the NewYorker's just a bunch of elitist
so and so's and and they'll put the quote elitists in in the
(09:21):
magazine, but they always have to put that little accent over
the E and elite. And he said, I feel like in some
ways we're we're proving their point that we that that even
when we write the word elitist, we have to put a little slightly
accent over the E. But other people made the
argument that, you know, if elitism has this kind of anti
(09:44):
intellectual vibe to it as well,that needs to be pushed back on.
And that, you know, if elitism means that you write about
complicated things or that you look at nuance or you, you
wrestle with difficult things, then as as this one writer said,
you know, the world needs more elitism if that's how you're
going to define elitist and. Where do you come down with it?
(10:07):
I love The New Yorker. So, you know, I, I think that I
like complexity. I like thoroughness.
I think it's great when a magazine can make itself
relevant and and available to togeneral readers.
And I think definitely The New Yorker tries hard to to make
(10:31):
itself accessible. But at the same time, I think it
shouldn't be competing with Twitter.
It shouldn't be competing with, you know, the, the Buzzfeed's or
the, or the the New York Post or, or the kind of quick and
dirty tabloid stuff. I think it's, I think having a,
(10:53):
a magazine that makes the equivalent of carefully built
hand rolled sushi is fine. And maybe not sushi's not for
everybody there. The New Yorker doesn't try to be
McDonald's. They don't want to make billions
and billions of hamburgers for everybody.
They're going to do the thing that they do carefully.
They hope people will like it. They hope people will appreciate
(11:14):
it. And, and fortunately, it's one
of the few magazines that seems like it it, it has fun enough of
an audience still that that it that it's going to survive or
that it still is surviving. I guess the future, you know,
always remains to be seen. But, but it, it is a magazine
(11:36):
that that is profitable right now, a little bit profitable.
And, and, and as Time and Life and Newsweek and U.S. news and
World Report and all of these other magazines that I grew up
with have have either disappeared or become very
diminished. It's one of the few that has
it's managed to survive. Well, I, I agree with you and I,
(11:58):
I think it's refreshing and needed in this day and age for
someone to make a film that getsinto some of these ideas.
I, I think there is a need for high quality magazines, films,
music, I mean whatever it is. And it's not something that one
should be ashamed of. And I can't even believe that
(12:18):
that's a thing these days, to behonest with you.
But but I'm glad that you tackled that subject.
Someone who could be not even more popular than you could even
imagine would be Taylor Swift. And you, you don't have a Taylor
Swift song per SE in the movie, but you do have a cover of a
Taylor Swift song, Welcome to New York.
(12:40):
And I thought that was very clever.
Tell us about the use of the song and who did it and and why
you chose it. Yeah, well, we were looking for
a song at the end of the movie that would have have some
emotion and have some have some excitement and and refer to New
York. And I was trying to come up with
a song and Telefasana, who is a a a New Yorker writer who does a
(13:04):
lot of writing about music. I asked him for advice on, on
what what song we might be able to use.
And he said, you know, one of the things that he loves about
The New Yorker is the way that it combines kind of, you know,
different types of culture together.
So, you know, it's got this kindof fancy typeface and, you know,
(13:25):
a guy with a top hat that is hislogo.
But but Kelliford loves writing about boxing and hip hop and
things like that that create a little tension with the with the
magazine. He said he thought that tension
was a big part of what makes TheNew Yorker such a cool magazine.
And so he said, what if you found like a Taylor Swift song
like Welcome to New York and yougot somebody like Matt Berninger
(13:48):
of the of the National, which isa kind of cool indie rock band,
to do a cover of it. And he didn't know it, but I'm
actually friends with Matt. And so I, I asked Matt, hey,
would you be, would you be interested in covering the song?
And he went into the studio a couple days later and, and
recorded this really cool, fun version of that song.
(14:09):
And, and, and Taylor and I wroteTaylor a letter and said we'd
love to, to include this song inin our film.
And she very generously allowed us to, to, to do that.
So yeah, it's a great, it's a great way to to end the movie.
We were really thrilled when that song came together.
Is that song going to be released?
I I looked quickly on Spotify and I couldn't find it.
(14:32):
No, it hasn't been released yet,but yeah, that will the the Matt
Bernie there will be probably releasing at some point after
the film comes out. But but if you're if you're a
huge Taylor Swift fan, the only place to carry it will be at the
end of our movie. And you have to watch the whole
movie to get to the end. So, so we're hoping that that a
lot will attract a big audience that way too.
(14:52):
Even if you're not a Taylor Swift fan, it's just a very cool
song the way it was performed, so great.
Great choice. You have a lot of celebrities in
this movie, and it seems that a lot of people had a real
affection for The New Yorker, kind of like yourself.
Tell us about some of the peoplethat people might be interested
(15:14):
seeing in the movie talking about The New Yorker.
Yeah, it was fun while we were. You know, one of the things that
we're doing as we make the film is watch The New Yorker staff as
they're putting together the 100th anniversary magazine.
And in addition, their film department, they have a sort of
social media and film departmentwas having celebrities come in
(15:37):
to talk about the the magazine, either a, you know, particular
piece that was published in the magazine, a particular cartoon
they loved some part of their life that was connected to The
New Yorker. So they, so we basically
documented their work, bringing in these celebrities and, and,
and doing that and, and, and yeah, it's a really, it's a
(15:57):
really fun group that includes, you know, Jon Hamm and Sarah
Jessica Parker and Jesse Eisenberg and Nate Burgazi and,
and just a whole range of, of folks sharing either a funny
story or an insight or a, a, a, a particular article, a
particular cartoon, something like that, that they, that they,
(16:20):
that they loved. So and it was interesting to see
the range of folks who had some connection to this magazine.
Marshall, you know, you're an acclaimed film maker and it
still must be nerve racking for you to go in and see all these
editors and these writers, theseartists doing what they do at
(16:42):
such a high level and then to have the responsibility to make
the film that's going to represent their 100th
anniversary. Is there anything that you
witnessed in their work that influenced your making of the
film? Yeah.
You know, one of the big challenges of this story was
(17:06):
that it is such an incredible institution that has this
amazing history of having published these famous works
from, you know, Silent Spring, Hiroshima.
I mentioned before James Baldwin's Letter from a Region
in my mind, Truman Capote's In Cold Blood.
And those were just a few. I mean James Thurber and EB
(17:27):
White and Janet Malcolm and Hannah Arendt and there were so
many important pieces and so many important writers that that
came out of The New Yorker. And similarly today, you know,
we were making a 90 minute movie.
So we only had so much time, butwe did profiles of other
(17:47):
writers, Adam Gotnik and Jill Lepore and folks like that that
didn't, you know, we just couldn't include and many, many
other incredible writers who whowe didn't even get to film with
that when when I started, one ofmy friends told me that making a
film about The New Yorker is like trying to make a film about
(18:08):
America, sort of, OK, it's goingto be a it's going to, it's
going to be impossible to be a completist.
And so we took the approach of making it sort of like a tasting
menu or like a chocolate samplerwhere you get to see different
types of things. But, but we don't even attempt
to, to, to try to be completist about it.
(18:31):
And you mentioned that challengeof, you know, making a film
about people who are so accomplished. 1 funny thing is
that David Remnick, who's of course the editor of the
magazine and, and one of our main characters, has written so
many profiles himself. And, and, and so, as he said, it
was a little unnerving to allow a film crew to make a profile of
(18:55):
his magazine when he's used to being on the other side of, of,
of, of that experience. And at one point I was
interviewing him and we had a, there's a kind of a trick that
that film makers develop when you're interviewing somebody,
which is when you ask a questionand the person finishes talking
(19:18):
you, you have to bite your tongue not to say something
else. You have to leave a kind of
awkward space with the hope thatpeople will feel a little
uncomfortable by that awkward space and they'll add a little
bit more. And frequently the thing that
they add is, is insightful. And so I was sitting with David
and I was interviewing him at one point.
And I, he answered a question and I was quiet and I waited and
(19:42):
I waited and he looked at me andhe waited and he waited and I
looked at him. And finally, after about 30
seconds, he said, you know, I know that trick also.
I thought, oh, this is going to be a different kind of movie
where you're trying to profile people who are experts at
profiles. But it was great.
(20:02):
Just, I mean, I, I frequently would ask the writers, if you
were making a film about The NewYorker, how would you approach
it? Or I would ask David, if you
were writing a profile of David Remnick, what would you ask?
How, where would you dig? How would you, how would you
approach it? And I found that that a lot of
times people had insights because they were both on the
inside but had the experience ofcrafting stories that that that
(20:27):
that helped me put this thing together.
That's really interesting. So like we talked about earlier
in in the film you, you show people who are obsessing about
commas or accent marks, you know, really specific details.
Are you like that at all with your movies?
Like is there anything like thatwith you?
Like what is it? That you.
(20:48):
Really, really concentrate on inyour movies.
Yeah, no, I, I, I'm pretty obsessive, I'm afraid it
probably drives the team crazy. But yes, I, you know, the
difference between something that's, you know, 4-4 seconds
and 6 frames and something that's 4 seconds and seven
frames, you know, is you feel the difference.
(21:10):
And so we fortunately had a really terrific team, you know,
cinematographers, editors, producers, researchers working
with us. But yeah, I when we're looking
at an archival photo and you think, OK, this is good, but is
there one that would be even better?
And, you know, is there something hidden in in our raw
(21:34):
footage that would pop a little bit more than what we have?
And, you know, if we worked on this music cue a little bit
more, we pushed maybe, you know,on this bridge for this part of
the music, could we make it a little better?
And, you know, each of those individual things, probably if
(21:57):
you left one out, it wouldn't matter.
Nobody's going to notice. But when they start to
accumulate, they really make thedifference between a movie that
that pops and it's funny and is surprising and, and one that
that's good but not great. And so, yeah, I was really lucky
(22:19):
to have a A-Team at Netflix who were super supportive and, and,
and a team working with me on this project all the way that
everybody wanted to, to, to pushit beyond being good and, and,
and, and make everything great. Well, you mentioned Netflix.
The New Yorker may be an elitistmagazine.
Maybe not. But Netflix is the big, big
(22:42):
streaming service and lots of people are going to have the
opportunity to see this film, which is exciting.
What is the number one thing that you hope people that kind
of stumble across this film takeaway from your movie?
I think that we are at a difficult time for journalism.
(23:04):
Journalists are not beloved there.
Journalists are on, you know, the media is unpopular from the
left and the right, and, you know, we're at a point where the
idea of telling the truth or being accurate feels optional.
And. And I, when I was growing up,
(23:30):
all the president's men had comeout and there were these movies
and stories of journalists and journalism that were inspiring.
And, and a lot of that's gone away.
And I think that's a problem because I think that that having
journalists who are asking hard questions, who are writing,
(23:54):
writing carefully researched, carefully written work, and also
who are writing about, about artand are writing about science
and are writing about international relations, that's
really, really, really importantto a culture.
And, and I think it's under threat right now.
(24:16):
And so we've had some screeningswhere particularly some, some of
our early test screenings, but the, the film was recently
premiered at at Telluride Film Festival.
And we had some young people those screenings and who came up
and said, no, I've never thoughtof being a journalist, but after
watching the film, it makes me think maybe I should be a
(24:36):
journalist. And that is great.
I, I feel like the film is a, isa celebration of doing hard
work. Sometimes it's inefficient,
sometimes it's not profit maximizing, but is, is careful
and is thorough and is beautiful.
(24:57):
And it's a celebration of, of, of, of doing that work.
That, that, that, that that's soimportant.
Well, this film, The New Yorker at 100 will be eventually on
Netflix, but it's going to be screening at the Hamptons
International Film Festival on October 9th and 12th at 8:00 PMI
(25:18):
want to recommend everybody go out and support this film.
It's very entertaining. It's it's amazing.
And it's such a privilege for meto be able to speak with you.
Marshall, thanks for coming on the Sounds of Film.
Thanks so much. It's really, it's really fun
getting to talk to you and, and I'll be at that screening on the
9th. So, so if folks want to come, I,
I assume we'll have a, a Q&A afterward and, and I'd love to,
(25:40):
to talk more about it. Sounds good.
Thanks again. Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!