INT: Showing your picture. What's the experience the first time you show your picture? What's, let's run 'em down. First time you showed GREASE. Who do you had, who'd you have to show it to?

RK: We previewed GREASE in Hawaii 'cause the studio was, didn't want it to be in the mainland 'cause they didn't want the word to get out about it. They weren't sure what they had. And we all flew to Hawaii: Barry Diller and Michael Eisner and Allan Carr and everybody. And I remember Barry Diller sat in the very front row on the left so he could watch the audience during the show. And they were a little nervous about whether it was gonna work. And when the movie began and the first song began and Travolta [John Travolta] started singing and walking like that down the bleachers everyone laughed. And I thought, oh my god, we have a flop. It's gonna be... But then we, I saw that they were laughing 'cause they liked it. And it, then it took off and it was great. But that was panic time, that moment, ‘cause we, nobody knew what we had. And they were very happy after that, but they were very nervous about whether it was gonna work or not.

INT: Any scenes like on that show [GREASE], this is related to editing and previewing, on the editing room floor, actually whole scenes?

RK: Yes. Well when we first showed it to Michael Eisner, who was running the Studio [Walt Disney Studios], he wanted to know why Rizzo threw the milkshake at Kenickie. He said it, "We have to know why, so write a scene that explains why." And so we wrote a scene where they go outside the malt shop and they have an argument about what they're arguing about--I don't remember what it was about, but we filmed it, put it in and it just stuck out like a sore thumb. Allan Carr called it the Scorsese [Martin Scorsese] scene. And it just was clear that we didn't need it, and we took it back out. But Michael asked for that scene. [INT: Now did it stay or...] No, it went out. It was cut. It was obviously not working. [INT: And Michael got that as well?] Yeah. Oh yeah, he could tell.

INT: On, let's go through a couple, BLUE LAGOON. It's...

RK: Well I was, I think that I was a Producer on that one and Writer... or not Writer, Director and Producer. And I don't remember arguing with anybody about that. We just put it together and it was out. [INT: And did you have, because of the sex and the stuff did you have censorship issues that... I don't even know where like the... was there a chance this was not gonna get a PG, R, or X? Was that an issue?] No because it was all filmed in a certain style. Néstor [Néstor Almendros] was really good in his operating about how he framed things and how he would move the camera across their bodies and stuff, so it was not salacious in any way and-- [INT: But like for example masturbation scene. The kid's, you know, I know we're not seeing him, but you know that's what he's doing.] Yeah. Actually Brooke [Brooke Shields] didn't know what he was doing. She asked me after, "What was he doing on the rock?" And I said, "Go ask your mother." But, no we… you know, at that time, it was 1980 and it just slipped through. I don't know how it got through the ratings system. There's the menstruation scene and masturbation and sex. They didn't ask us to change anything. But it was an R. [INT: And it was an R? But everybody knew that in advance that that was an issue. SUMMER LOVERS?] I don't think we cut anything out of that. I was a Producer again, and so there's no one to argue with. Yeah, I think that just came together.

INT: And in terms of like a distributor... deals that exist, and obviously GREASE was a studio picture. It's got where the... but I don't know whether, you know, SUMMER LOVERS had a distribution deal before it started or IT’S MY PARTY had a distribution deal. What did you do with these?

RK: Well, on SUMMER LOVERS it was done with one company and then just as it was about to come out the company changed hands. And Mike Medavoy took over the picture. And we went to Tempe, Arizona, the University of Tempe [Arizona State University], to show the film and test it. And we had a raucous audience there and we started running the film and they were with it. They were cheering; they were yelling and then it broke. The film broke. We taped it back up. It was in the days where you had tape splices and the projector, the dual projector, you know, sound and picture separate, wouldn't run it. And we kept fixing it and it'd break. Fixing and break. And the audience was cheering, cheering, "No, we want to see it. We want to see it." And we kept trying and trying and it wouldn't go through the projector. And so then we went out to dinner with Mike Medavoy and, you know, we had flown to Tempe to show this movie. The audience loved it. We couldn't get it to go through the projector, and it just sort of like was never supported after that, you know, because it was, you know, when a studio takes, when one studio takes over another one's picture, they don't want it to be a hit because then it looks like the previous regime was, had taste and knew what they were doing. And so they, there's no real motivation to make something work. And the fact that he couldn't see it with an audience and see that it would have played, that's... so they didn't give a big boost to it. [INT: As you think about your experiences is, does that come under the category of some of the worst experiences in...] Definitely. [INT: ...you know, I mean your career?] Definitely. Yes. Not being able to run the projector for an audience that was going crazy over it was one of the worst experiences ever.

INT: Movies that didn't get made.

RK: Ha. Boy there's a list of those. I had one that I really wanted to make called THE LAUGHING MAN [THE MAN WHO LAUGHS] based on Victor Hugo's novel, and it was a wonderful, wonderful little story about a boy who was disfigured by the comprachicos who wanted to have them beg in the street and get money, so he cut the boy's face like that, like a smile. And then he grew up and had a love affair. It was just really, really great. And I had done all kinds of research and tried to get it off the ground. Pitched it everywhere. Couldn't get it made. And it was eventually made with Gérard Depardieu in Paris and not the way I would have done it. It's too bad. I always loved that movie. That was the biggest one. I have a couple that are still, I'm still trying to get off the ground after years and years and years and, you know, hopefully someday I'll be able to.

INT: Because you're so technologically, I mean, aware, I mean I know that a new device comes up and you're interested in using it and discovering it. And then you've moved into VR. What's the experience that you've been learning about this particular subject in terms of your relationship as a filmmaker and specifically the differences that a Director needs to be aware of?

RK: Luckily my brother Jeff [Jeffrey Kleiser] is a Visual Effects Supervisor and he's really into all the latest technology and he sees it before anybody does. I mean, you know, he's one of those techie VFX guys. And so most of the developments that I've been able to deal with in my work has been because of him, ‘cause he always says, "Hey, look at this thing," you know. And like five years ago he showed me the Oculus Rift and I walked through a village, I mean a villa in Tuscany wearing the goggles in 3D and went up the steps and looked over and I said, "Wow. This is amazing. This should be done with Actors." And I started developing the series DEFROST… that was my chance to experiment with that. And so everything I've done in that area's because of Jeff, my brother.

INT: And what have you learned about this process, which is newer?

RK: Yeah. I mean, VR? [INT: Yeah.] Well what I find amazing about VR is the sense of presence and immersiveness. When an Actor looks at a camera it looks like an Actor looking at a camera. When an Actor looks at the cameras in VR it feels like they're looking at you if they have eye contact with you and especially when you're using spatial sound, which allows you to specifically place the sound coming right out of the Actor here or there, you know, real specifically. And when you see them in VR and you're in the environment, look around and you're in the set and the Actor's looking at you and this Actor's talking and that Actor's talking, it feels like they're there, they're real people. They're not like Actors. [INT: And do you find that there's something you say differently to your Actors?] It's more like doing a play, you know, because the way we've been shooting it has been without cuts, five minute segments. And the camera usually moves a little bit. But it's mostly like the Actors are all doing a five-minute play each time. And so working with them it's more like directing a play. [INT: And have you done that in terms of theater experience?] I directed one play just before I did my first VR thing, and it was the best experience because I got to learn about how a Director in theater draws the attention of the audience to where you want. It has to be with lighting, with sound, with direction of pointing, you know, like that. And this is stuff that I really hadn't thought of before 'cause you, with a camera you can always just do a close-up and get the audience to look wherever you want. But people have often said, "Well in VR how do you get the people to pay attention to where you want?" And I said, "Well it's like in a play, the audience can look at the exit sign all, the whole time, but they don't because you've drawn their attention somewhere else."

INT: As you see the evolution of this particular media, particularly 'cause you just mentioned the idea of single shots versus cuts, I know that, you know, even as we're talking people who are working with VR are learning how to potentially find editorial methodologies. Dissolves-- [RK: Right. Fade outs.] --lighting changes. [RK: Right.] What are you learning?

RK: I think one of the coolest things that I saw was something, I think Chris Milk did and I don't know what movie it was in, but it was like you're watching here and then some sound... [INT: It's the music one.] Is it? [INT: It's, yeah. And it's one of the music ones and it does shift.] Your attention's pulled over here and then when you look back here the scene has changed, you know? It's such a great way of transitioning because it's not a dissolve; it's not a fade out. It's like a, you know, your attention is drawn somewhere and it's like a magic show, you know, it, your attention is drawn somewhere else and something else happens. So I think stuff like that is… the great thing is that there's, students are experimenting with all this and they don't have to worry about making money or having people show up to see something, so they can experiment all they want and they will come up with the new technology, the new language, and the new way of doing this.

INT: Let's talk about ADR. I know that some of your films have had to have it [RK: Yes.] Like BLUE LAGOON had to have it... [RK: Yes, a lot.] …a good deal. [RK: Yes.] It can very challenging for both Actor and Director. What have you learned?

RK: Try to get good sound when you can 'cause ADR can be grueling. If you get the sync right but the performance is no good, usually you'll be forced to use that because you can't have a rubbery soundtrack. You can't in today's moviemaking. So to try to get performance and sync at the same time requires a lot of times over and over and over again, and sometimes it starts to sound mechanical, you know. So it's hard. It's very hard. [INT: And will you, what will you do to get it? I mean 'cause you talked about two takes shooting. I doubt that in ADR...] No, no. [INT: ...you're satisfied in two passes.] No, no, no, no. In ADR I guess trying to create a little bit of the atmosphere around the Actor in the ADR space. You know, getting them the, giving them time to get up to speed on something that's emotional, and then you know, you can't do it over and over again but when they're ready let them decide and then the, get boop, boop, boop and do it, you know. If it's something where they're supposed to be outside and they're talking to somebody far away try to get a partner to be there that they can talk to so that the length is right. And if they're, you know, got a microphone here and they're supposed to be talking to someone there they'll usually talk to the microphone. So you have to get, give some, a partner type thing.

INT: Mix. You know, there's this strange kind of process of, I don't know if anybody's sort of done a bell curve of the intensity of our experience in, you know, as you work on a movie. [RK: Production and mix are very high.] And, but there's this compressed time, may, you may have spent 5, 10 years trying to get the movie made. And then the, you know, the actual movie itself may have taken six months or a year, whatever it is. And now you got--[RK: You got--]--two weeks.

RK: Yeah, yeah. Well, usually there's the Composer and the sound effects people are sitting there, both pushing for their effects and their music to be louder. And you have to decide which way to go and they're whispering in your ear, "Don't you think that the sound's too, the sound effects are too low? That music, you got to..." They're whispering in your ear, you know, you... So that usually is one of the big challenges in a mix. But being real bold is something that I've never really done in a mix, which I think I should try next, which is to go against all convention and make things silent or just play one effect and... That's the kind of cool stuff that some Directors do, and I never really have gotten to that point 'cause I've always been pressure, pressure, pressure to get it done, you know. But to experiment like that would be fun to try to go against the norm and try new things. [INT: You know, one of the things that you said that you like to do when you start the movie is to get the Crew to know that we're gonna make a good movie and set a mood. You walk into that mixing stage...] No time. [INT: ...and what do you do with those Mixers if there are Mixers?] Start working. I mean I wish there was time to try things and ask their opinion and everything, but usually it's just trying to take all these, sometimes hundreds of tracks running at once and figure out which ones to put front and which ones to bury and which ones to throw out. Going through all the tracks at once, going through all the music at once, going through all the effects at once just to see what's there is often, takes time. And then you start to figure out well which one do I put in the front? And it's very, very stressful. [INT: Got it.]

INT: Of the, of all the stages of filmmaking for a Director, for you, which one do you sort of enjoy, if… But is there one that you say I enjoy this? Well obviously you just said mix is stressful so...you're not, I know you're not gonna pick that.

RK: No. But the DI [digital intermediate] process is so exciting, especially if you don't have anyone telling you you have one day to do it. I mean there's so much that can be done in the digital intermediate process to improve the look of the picture and to enhance little details and just make it sparkle and glow and add a whole new layer, you know. I mean when you can take a scene and just isolate an Actor's eyes very subtly and so it doesn't look like Joan Crawford lighting but just to pop the eyes a little bit can change the whole feel of a scene. Or the change the color in one part of a frame and leave it some... do it somewhere else. I mean that's just magical stuff. [INT: But that's relatively, relatively new.] It is new, yeah. [INT: 'Cause you remember when you were doing this on GREASE, for example.] Oh my god. The way we used to do color timing was the Color Timer would sit next to you and the film would be running in real time, and you'd say, "That shot looks a little magenta." And he writes, magenta. Meanwhile five more shots go by and, "That looks a little too green," too green and, and you know, you didn't get specific at all. But in the DI you can get so specific about what's in the frame, each frame. I mean there's a temptation if you had unlimited money to just take months to do that right. [INT: Yeah. It's amazing.] Oh some DPs also, you know, want to be involved in that. And they should. But the great thing is I've found that things you couldn't fix on the set you can fix in the DI. Like, for instance, there was one scene in the, oh, I just remember a scene where an Actor's wearing a white shirt and it was distracting. And in the DI you could take it down to gray, you know. And then you're eye, your attention went to the faces of the Actors instead of the costume, things like that. [INT: Interesting idea about the, where your eye goes in a frame. And this is something that Vorkapich [Slavko Vorkapich] I know wrote about and talked about. Do you remember? 'Cause you just said something like, the white shirt, therefore brightness...] Yes. [INT: ...is one of them I know.] Movement and brightness.

INT: And oftentimes that movement of Background Artists can get distracting. [RK: Oh yeah.] Are you aware of this? [RK: Yes.] And what do you do about it?

RK: Well, if you have video playback you can see it. Or if you're watching the video during the shoot you can usually tell if an Actor, if a Background Person's distracting. But just tone 'em down or stop it. I haven't really had much problem there.

INT: Talk about the whole evolution of the video village, video playback and where you put yourself. Where you put yourself before that as a Director and…before you dealt with it and where you put yourself now.

RK: Okay. Well always beside the camera before video playback. I would be just beside the camera. And now I pretty much try to stay there too and during performance scenes. But during a big master shot or something, I will stay by video village to see the framing. You know, to make sure that the moves are right and that nothing's cut off or there's not too much information or the, how the operator's [Director of Photography] framing. Some operators frame like this and others frame like that, you know. I like it like this, ‘cause this is something that... [INT: Yeah. This new short sighting. Do you have a feeling about it?] I find it distracting. Although on shows like MR. ROBOT it's kind of a style. And, you know, I worked with that operator on two movies and he kept short sighting and I said, "No. I want it like this." And I had to do it practically every time 'cause he kept trying to do it. And I, when I saw MR. ROBOT I was, "Wonder who the operator is?" And it was him, Craig Haagensen. [INT: What about...] It's developed into a style. It's big. [INT: ...multiple cameras?] Multiple? Great if you have kids or action. It's okay for regular dialogue. I don't know. I prefer one camera where you can really focus on what you're doing and really study it. But if there's a lot going on there's no reason why not to have two. [INT: Got it.]

INT: Let's talk about the DGA. Do you know who signed your DGA application? Do you remember why you joined it?

RK: Well I joined the DGA because I was doing MARCUS WELBY [MARCUS WELBY, M.D.] and I had to join it. But I was very excited about that idea. I know that it could have been Robert Wise and George Cukor who signed mine. I know they did it for the Academy. I don't know if they did it for the DGA. But it was exciting to join the DGA because I'd always, you know, come to screenings as a student. And Robert Wise was always very welcoming to students. And I remember when I was... when I made one of my films I... he came down to a lecture at USC and I went up to him and I asked if he would look at one of my films and he said, "Sure." And in those days, of course, there was no DVD or online streaming or anything like that. So he had to rent a screening room at Universal and have me bring my film and sit with him, look at it, and he took me to lunch and talked to me about it. And I couldn't believe that he took that time and effort to me. I was just a, I wasn't like anyone special; I was just a student that came up and talked to him. And that was very inspirational to me. And then when I joined the DGA and he was head of Special Projects, I was very excited to join Special Projects with you and meet him and be part of that.

INT: Who were the first Directors that you met [at the DGA]? I mean Wise [Robert Wise] was one. RK: André De Toth was another one. The old timers are the ones that I thought were so cool to me. Delbert Mann... [INT: And Cukor [George Cukor] you met?] Cukor, yes. I used to, I spent a lot of time with Cukor. He came to the set of GREASE. I gave him a plaque at USC honoring him and... [INT: And if you were to say something that you've learned either from Wise or from Cukor could you articulate something?] Wise was talking quite a bit about the importance of preproduction, having a lot of time for preproduction, which I didn't have on GREASE. And he told me I shouldn't do GREASE because I didn't have enough prep time. He terrified me but I still went ahead. With Cukor I think he... just the way he dealt with people I think. He would have people for dinner parties and make everyone very relaxed and he put people together in interesting ways. And I felt that that's how he worked on the set too. I never--oh I did see him work once 'cause I was on, I was an extra in RICH AND FAMOUS, just for fun. There's a party scene, and Nina Foch and I were extras in it just to watch Cukor do his last movie. And it was fun to be on the set and see him work. But in terms of other Directors, Mark Rydell was a cool guy and... [INT: Did you meet Mark through the Guild or...?] Yes, through the Guild.

INT: Do you remember your first Guild meetings?

RK: Not really. I think I was really pulled into the, into the Guild by Gene Reynolds, who asked me to come to some events and I started coming. And he's the one who pulled me in. Up until then I just went to screenings or went to events put on, you know, Q&As and stuff. [INT: Had you met Gene separately?] I guess I… oh, yeah. I was an extra in one of Gene's TV shows when he was doing LOVE ON A ROOFTOP. And when I first joined the Guild I said, "Hey, I worked with you before. I was an extra in this show you directed." And so that's how I got to talk to him.

INT: When did you decide to sort of become more active in the Guild? And you've been active in the Guild obviously in Special Projects but you've had offices both in, as a Western Council [Western Directors Council] as well as on the National Board. When did you decide to do that?

RK: I think it was basically from out of Special Projects. You know, I saw the great presentations that Special Projects was putting on, and that's the stuff that was like film school, you know. It was like when we would go to film school and they'd bring a Director in who would show his new movie and have Q&A afterwards. It felt like an extension of film school, the Special Projects Committee. And then I just started getting involved with the people and ran for the Board and for the Council and being... [INT: Now were you encouraged to do that or did you decide on your own?] I think I just did it on my own. I wanted to be part of this group. And sitting in the boardroom upstairs here with the amazing talent sitting around the table, and I'd look around and think of all the movies that all these giants had made all sitting in one spot. The thing that impressed me the most about going to all these board meetings and council meetings was how classy everybody in the Directors Guild is. I never saw any fighting. I never saw any conflicts. I never saw competition. It's very unusual, ‘cause from what I hear the other Guilds are a mess when they have these meetings. Everyone's fighting and trying to get attention and there's factions and all that. But none of that here. None. I mean everybody here works together.

INT: When you started to become active, did the Guild ever come to your aid in terms of any of the filmmaking you've been in or were you aware of other Directors who, where you saw, oh wow, the Guild did this?

RK: I just was aware of my rights from the Guild, the 10 weeks of cutting. And I think sometimes people would try to get it down to four weeks and I'd say, "No, no, no. I get 10 weeks." And sometimes we'd negotiate with the Producer and they'd say, "Okay. If you give us your Director's cut in six weeks we will let you be involved to the end and we'll listen to what you have to say even when we do our final cut." So that's the kind of negotiations I was doing. Thanks to the Guild I was able to do that. Otherwise they'd just say, "Get lost kid." Yeah.

INT: Did, talk about Special Projects and how, what it was like with Robert Wise.

RK: Well, he was very inspirational because he was really interested in the history of film, the history of the Guild, and was a gentleman, one of the few gentlemen... Well, I think there's a lot of gentlemen in the Guild, but I think Gil Cates and Robert Wise were role models, Mark Rydell. There's been a lot of classy guys here. And so just as a role model I thought it was really cool.

RK: And I got involved with Digital Day like at least 12 years ago. [INT: And how did that start?] I think I was on the committee and they needed somebody to sort of host it or get, help program it and I just fell into that and I've been doing it for like 12 years now. [INT: It was, my memory is, this is my memory, which of course I could be making up, is that we were talking about, you know, technological stuff in one of the meetings. And I thought it was you who spoke to this about, 'cause you, obviously with your brother, you and your brother...] Yeah. [INT: ...have been doing this...] I'd love to take that credit, but I think it was, the first year it was William Gibson, I think, was the speaker. And I was so fascinated by it and I got, that's what pulled me in and I think then, from then on I was very involved. And because of Jeff [Jeffrey Kleiser], my brother, I was always seeing all this new stuff coming along so I was able to, over each year, go and experience it and program it into the...

INT: Talk about, because some people who are gonna look at this are not gonna necessarily know what Digital Day is and how it functions and how it's changed, so could you speak more specifically about it?

RK: Well Digital Day is an annual event we have here at the DGA where it's one day where the 500 Directors who show up are exposed to the new things that have happened technologically over the year. So anything that's different from the year before, a new cutting edge piece of equipment or a style or a technique with demos and panels and, or the physical equipment in the lobby so that they can see what the new tools are to use as a Director. [INT: And what kind of things have emerged from it in terms of the, over the years?] Well I think the whole thing of the LightStage, where you can take and Actor and scan them and then use their digital equivalent to be used in a movie. There's all kinds of sound breakthroughs, digital intermediates, all the things that we use today were all... All the new, the technology that is used today was sort of shown to the members about a year before they started using it. [INT: What kind of things do you remember yourself learning over, that you didn't know about so...] Oh. [INT: ...even today?] So much. I mean it's, everything that I've learned through Digital Day is stuff that we use every day, so I can't think specifically about what things there were. I mean a lot of stuff about digital sets, virtual production, shooting on a green screen with a moving camera and having the computer-generated set move in a way that looks like it's all one shot and it's not separate, a lot of virtual sets, the set extensions, a whole way people make movies now, take it for granted, even on television came out of this technology that we first showed here.

INT: And as you sort of think about it technologically 'cause you're so aware of this, what do you see in the future in terms of shifts? 'Cause one of the major shifts, as you just said, is the amount of CGI work that now becomes very available on all kinds of productions, from small productions to gigantic ones. What other things are you sort of seeing?

RK: Like the light-field work is amazing where you can film a scene and later decide where you wanted the focus to be. If you film the scene and you want the person in the foreground to be sharp you can do that afterwards or make the background sharp or shift focus and this is after you've shot. Up until that it was impossible. If you got a shot out of focus you were dead. You had to go back and reshoot. With this upcoming technology, you'll be able to fix that in post. And the other advantage with light-field technology is being able to select a distance from the camera and take everything out of that and add something else without a green screen, which is astounding, yeah. You just say, "Okay, 10 feet from here I want to have a seascape." And you can have, be in a warehouse and add a seascape behind it without having any green screen and move the camera. [INT: So do you think it, in a way, less on location more in these sort of neutral spaces?] Yes. Yes. That's, because it's cheaper and faster. You don't have to worry about weather. It's like going back to the old days in the '40s [1940s] with the rear screen projectors you know. The way they, when they wanted to shoot Paris they'd just have Actors in front of a movie screen. And now they have 'em in front of, or not even in front of but using some upcoming technology that allows them to place them anywhere. [INT: One of the things I've heard, and I've not used this, over the years, maybe this is five, maybe more years old, where people, because of the 4K and even larger, they're regarding, at least if they're gonna do a proscenium shooting situation, they don't bother going for the close-up.] Right. You can just blow it up. That seems weird to me, but I mean I can see doing it a little bit, but I wouldn't want to do a whole movie that way just shoot it wide and then blow it up later. [INT: Yeah well that also requires, it's almost going back to theater, literally.] Yeah. [INT: In that sense.] Yeah. [INT: Let me see if there's...] Allowing the audience to run up on the stage and come back. [INT: Right.]

INT: Let's talk about the PAC. Talk about what that is. And you've been active in that, yes?

RK: Yes. The DGA PAC or Political Action Committee brings in congressmen and senators to the Guild to talk about what we need or what we want out of the government to help us with runaway production or piracy issues. And that's been really, really helpful because some of these people in Washington have actually taken bills and pushed them through. And by sitting with us and hearing our problems or our concerns they get a personal feeling about it and it makes it easier for them to push the things through. I mean when they hear about how a Director has to move to Canada to keep working and has to be away from his family and, or how a whole Crew of people couldn't, had to lose their jobs because stuff went to Canada. I mean they hear these personal stories and it helps for them when they go to Congress.

INT: What about the issue of the Guild's relationship that you're aware of, particularly the PAC, and the missions of theft?

RK: Wow. What astounds me is the streaming sites that are still up and running and you can go to any, you see any movie that just came out and stream it the day it comes out. And I don't know how that can be stopped or what the techniques are in place for that because they keep popping up. You stop one and another pops up. And if this continues, how are people gonna make movies, they, if they're being pirated all the time? So I think it's worse for smaller films. Big films, it's bad enough but they usually have such a momentum going in the theaters that yeah, a lot of it's taken up. But it's really bad for the smaller, midsize film to be pirated 'cause then they don't have a chance.

INT: Do you sense a change… anybody can make anything now. You know, you get a movie like TANGERINE...made on an iPhone a couple years ago. Wonderful movie, fabulous performance, it's a really good story. So anybody can make anything. But getting it seen is a whole other...

RK: And there's more material out there than ever before. I mean the number of series that are streaming. I keep seeing names I've never heard of and they're whole series. It's amazing the barrage of media right now. And you're right. How do you get seen? Well I guess cream rises to the top. That's how you get seen. [INT: Some of it.]