.png)
Indiewood
A Podcast for Indie Filmmakers
In the world of social media, and fast-paced journalism, knowledge is abound. But with all the noise, finding the right information is near impossible. Especially if you’re a creative working in independent film.
Produced by Cinematography For Actors, the Indiewood podcast aims to fix that. This is a podcast about indie filmmakers and the many hats we wear in order to solve problems before, during, and after production.
Every month, award-winning Writer/Director Yaroslav Altunin is joined by a different guest co-host to swap hats, learn about the different aspects of the film industry, and how to implement all you learn into your work.
"We learn from indie filmmakers so we can become better filmmakers. Because we all want to be Hollywood, but first we have to be Indiewood."
Indiewood
Ending Your Film: A Deep Dive into Cinematic Storytelling with Writer/Director Jamie Parslow
Is ambiguity in film endings creative brilliance or just plain frustrating? Is having a clear message better? On this episode of the Indiewood Podcast, we tackle the debate with multi-hyphenate filmmaker Jamie Parslow, who defends the allure of open-ended finales. We kick things off with 2001: A Space Odyssey, exploring how the Cold War shaped its narrative. Jamie praises the thought-provoking nature of unresolved endings, while co-host Yaroslav voices his frustration with the loose ends that leave viewers hanging.
We then dive into the role of clear themes in storytelling, using Macbeth and Blade Runner as examples of balancing interpretation with closure. Through Blade Runner 2049, we explore how answering cryptic questions changes the audience’s experience. Our discussion also touches on Gareth Edwards’ emotional film Monsters, which centers on a photojournalist in alien-invaded Mexico, and the lasting impact of powerful endings like in Inception. Join us for an insightful chat on finding the right way to end your film.
____
A Podcast for Indie Filmmakers
More on:
IG: @indiewoodpod
YT: Cinematography for Actors
In the world of social media, and fast-paced journalism, knowledge is abound. But with all the noise, finding the right information is near impossible. Especially if you’re a creative working in independent film.
Produced by Cinematography For Actors, the Indiewood podcast aims to fix that. This is a podcast about indie filmmakers and the many hats we wear in order to solve problems before, during, and after production.
Every month, award-winning Writer/Director Yaroslav Altunin is joined by a different guest co-host to swap hats, learn about the different aspects of the film industry, and how to implement all you learn into your work.
"We learn from indie filmmakers so we can become better filmmakers. Because we all want to be Hollywood, but first we have to be Indiewood."
welcome back to the anywood podcast. Uh, a podcast about making independent film and the many hats that filmmakers have to wear in order to make those films. Um, my name is yaroslav altunin. I'm a writer, director, cinematographer, editor. I have, I have many, many hats and I've done pretty much everything under the sun, whether I've wanted to or not. With me I have the wonderful, the talented Jimmy Parslow. Hello, a cinematographer, but he's also a producer and he's done a lot of those things quite extensively and won awards for doing those things.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:At a myriad of film festivals, and so I've been really happy to chat with him the last month. We've talked about your short film. Jamie, yes, Black Hole and how it went to festivals and where we met because of that film and because of a festival screening. We talked about getting into a room, a producer's room, to a manager's room, into the metaphorical room of moving your career forward. I think.
Speaker 2:Of your dreams. Yeah, yes.
Speaker 1:And then we talked about film festivals and what you can get from them, and the one thing I wanted to end on, what I wanted to end this series on, is a conversation we had a couple of years ago. I wanted to end this series on is a conversation we had a couple of years ago and it always stuck with me because we fundamentally disagreed on how a film should end.
Speaker 1:I love this and, um, I remember, so I'm going to tell you how I remember this conversation, because we were talking about um, I forget the film we were talking about and we both watched it and I said, man, I don't like the movie because it ended very ambiguously.
Speaker 3:I don't.
Speaker 1:I don't like the movie because it ended very ambiguously. I don't like a movie that is so open-ended, that looks at the audience and goes what do you think happens? And I'm like I don't know. You tell me I'm here to watch a movie and I said this to you and you go. No man, I love that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I love it so much.
Speaker 1:So could you give me a little bit more philosophy.
Speaker 2:Sure of why you like? Uh, that kind of ambiguity in the ending. I think I love, um, I know exactly what movie we were referencing too, and I'm not. I can't say it. It's because I'll get, I'll get burned alive, uh, at the stake.
Speaker 3:Can we bleep it? So what it? What it?
Speaker 2:is is there is there, and I have this conversation a lot with other friends. Um, we were talking about a movie and probably a few movies by the same person. Okay, who?
Speaker 1:that's right I remember now yeah, yeah, okay.
Speaker 2:Answers all of the questions that he presents in his films, and I hate. I hate when you ask a question in the movie and then you go what could be the? The answer, it's this answer. I gave you the answer.
Speaker 1:And that irritates me, that irritates me a lot because so, as a viewer, as a fellow creative and as a viewer, what kind of drives this feeling? For, you know, an open ended film.
Speaker 2:I think it really depends on the intent first and foremost. I think that of course you want to. In a mystery movie, you want to answer the questions. You know what I mean. If you want to, you know who's the murderer and why did they kill them. Those questions have to be answered. We don't want this weird open-ended like could have been anyone. You know what I mean, unless you do it in a really intelligent way.
Speaker 1:Well, that's like that was the thing about horror movies in the 90s and early aughts. It was like and they're dead right. And then some in the shadows go like ta-dum. Yeah, it's not really that's like you don't.
Speaker 2:I think the difference that we're talking about is a philosophical ending versus sort of like a schlocky ending. I guess is the best way to put it yeah because, like 2001, space odyssey is my favorite movie of all time, and that was a very ambiguous ending. Yeah, and and I've been watching that movie since I was probably seven or eight years old. I've probably seen something like 30 or 40 times in my in my life and it's a movie I keep going back to and, um, well, here's a question.
Speaker 1:Yeah, go ahead before you get too deep into it do you feel like if that movie was made not in the 60s, as it was right, but like 2034, do you think that ending would have been a bit more on the nose, a bit more, less philosophical?
Speaker 2:It depends. So what they're talking about in 2001, Space Odyssey is you have to understand what's happening at the time, which is the Cold War. You have to understand what's happening at the time which is the Cold War and you've got Cold War aesthetics talking about the concept of. At the time, there was a lot of conversation about technology and where we were going with technology and what was going to happen to us if we went too far. And, as a matter of fact, you get the metaphor almost immediately at the beginning with the apes and the bone and beating the other one up with new technology that they are given to by the, by the aliens.
Speaker 2:Uh spoiler alert if you haven't seen this movie it's been like 50, some odd years, almost 60 actually. Uh, but you, you know, you get this immediate metaphor about um, you know, basically an arms race, literally an arms race. You, basically an arms race, literally an arms race. You've got somebody beating another, an ape beating another ape with a femur, and that right then, and there immediately touches on the note of like, what are we talking about? And we're talking about war, we're talking about technology. We're talking about how technology can bring great joy and and great success, but it can also create, it cause great harm, and we're seeing this right now with ai at, which is a prescient point. And so, and then you, you get the whole process. Uh, you know, they find something on jupiter and they find out that's the alien and they're you know, they've got, you know, they've got the, the spaceship going to jupiter to go find out what's going on.
Speaker 2:And then, um, how is the operating system, the ai, that gets suspicious and tries to survive on its own because it thinks that these two are compromising the mission. And then it goes on to try to kill everybody on the ship, so that it's so that it's one program which is to finalize its mission can do so without them interrupting. Blah, blah, blah, whatever. All the way to the end. You got Dave goes through the portal, the time hole, he gets to the end, he's effectively in a zoo, which is kind of. The idea is that he's being watched by these aliens over time, and then he ends up becoming the space child at the end.
Speaker 2:And the space child of him looking out into space is sort of Arthur C Clarke and Stanley Kubrick's way of saying we must evolve beyond where we are now if we are to sort of rid ourselves of the technology that makes us inhuman or makes us violent or can kill us. So we must become the next step in the evolutionary sort of way, by getting away from technology, at least technology that has the ability to harm. And so that's what the open-ended meaning it's my own interpretation that I've seen people also come to an interpretation of over a long time, that I've seen people also come to an interpretation of over a long time, and so to me it's open-ended, but it's asking you to ask the question about what it's doing, and then, when you come to that conclusion, you go oh, obviously, but yeah, it takes you some time to get there, and I think that's what I love about that yeah.
Speaker 1:So, I can go on another rant about another one. No, I'll have you go and kind of ramble a little bit more. But I wanted to say something about that kind of the interpretation, and it's interesting to see how movies that are open for interpretation can have multiple outcomes. Multiple outcomes, yeah, and I think what really I like about somebody who is a little bit more on the nose with their interpretation?
Speaker 1:it lets me kind of know what they're thinking about you know and I think, uh, the difference is kind of irrelevant, because I think everybody has a different taste yeah it just shows you that whenever you're writing something or creating a movie, um, that there is uh many different ways that you can have your film end, yeah, or even kind of, you know, live throughout the middle. I guess uh everybody's gonna like something different.
Speaker 2:No, you know, some people are gonna be like oh well, you know, or dislike something, or dislike something different yeah, some people are gonna be, you know, more inherently drawn to something that's a bit more open for interpretation.
Speaker 1:I guess would be the right word to use. And then some people are like no, no, I need give me an answer, give me something to think about where other people are already thinking about things. And they, you know, they want to either validate their own thing or maybe just kind of they want to. They want something to grease the wheels of their, their thought process already.
Speaker 1:And I think that's the difference between you and me as a creative is like somebody adds more opportunities for interpretation into the mix of my creative thought process. I get frustrated because it's like it's all it's muddy. You know what I mean.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:It's too much thinking. Give me something concrete that I can either agree with or disagree with.
Speaker 2:I think, a really great example of that really execute Well. First and foremost, I I'm gonna take a step back here for a second um, I, I. I read a book some years ago that I now take as my personal philosophy when it comes to writing, which is the art of dramatic writing, by lagos igri, or lagos igri um and his I. I like to utilize his platform for how to tell a story as my sort of North Star, and what he goes on to say is he says every movie should have a story, because he talks about plays, he talks about writing. He doesn't talk about movies Like, he touches on it briefly, but he basically says every story has what's called a thematic premise, and we all know what a premise is.
Speaker 2:It's the plot of the movie that goes on, a thematic premise. And we all know what a premise is. Uh, it's the plot of the movie that goes on, but for him he calls the premise, or the thematic premise, the, the thing you're saying in your, in your story. I call it the thesis.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's kind of my thing, yeah thesis.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that could be. That could be one an interpretation as well. I don't like to use theme, because theme is too much. It's like there are too many themes and it's too muddy.
Speaker 2:Uh a word, but thematic premise is one that I always go back to, because it says he uses the example of Macbeth and he says Macbeth yearns for power, but that yearning for the power begets his own demise. And so that's what the story is saying. It is when you yearn for power, you create your own demise, that kind of a thing. Or, like you know, once again we go back to 2001, space Odyssey, where you say when we rely too heavily on technology, we destroy ourselves. Or the other side of that could be you know, when we, until we can evolve beyond technology, we will continue to destroy ourselves. There's that idea there.
Speaker 2:And so that nugget, that thought there, can be interpreted in any way and that sort of leaves you the freedom to leave a question at the end or to answer it. You know what I mean. But when you have a thematic premise that feels like it should be a question asked of everyone else, I'll go back. I'll go to blade runner. Yeah, blade earner is really interesting to me because the original blade runner leaves a question at the end, a philosophical question, a technological question, a moral question, leaves, leaves a lot of questions out there. But the main question that it asks is are you who you say you are? Are you, uh, a product of your own device or are you a product of your environment? You know, I mean, that's a really cool thematic premise to leave at and it ends semi-ambiguously and, depending on which version of the uh of the cut.
Speaker 1:You watch which which, yeah, I like the director's cut.
Speaker 2:I think it's the best version of it for me personally and it's's less ambiguous, but it is still ambiguous. You know, you get the unicorn and the origami and them driving off in the woods and stuff, and you go oh, maybe we've answered it, whether or not you know Deckard is a replicant or not. Then you go to Blade Runner 2049. And this is the movie that I think maybe sparked this conversation, where you have a question which is is k a replicant? Right, and the creative team behind it say, well, who cares? Yes, he is. That's the end of that, like we're going to bring the question up but we're going to immediately answer it at some point in time.
Speaker 2:There will be no interpretation of the question and so that movie at the end, for me, whether it's K is a replicant or not, or if, if robots were able to or you know, replicants were able to to replicate themselves or procreates, or, or if they have value or whatever, all of that is answered by the end of the movie and effectively it's all. Or if they have value, or whatever, all of that is answered by the end of the movie and effectively it's all. Yes, all of the things that you question? Yes, they have been answered. You shouldn't walk away from this with any sort of philosophical questioning.
Speaker 1:I agree with that, but also this is, I think, coming back to our conversation of interpretation. I interpret that a little bit differently. Okay, because for me they answer those questions right, but that's what the original movie was about, sure, like and repeating that, I think, question might be a double beat. And so when I'm when, with this answer that I that I'm seeing, you know, is like, yes, he's a replicant and you know, like, in the end it feels like we were tricked into thinking it was a different movie than what we were watching, because it wasn't necessarily at least for my interpretation it wasn't necessarily at least from my interpretation, it wasn't necessarily about Deckard and his child.
Speaker 1:Look, if you haven't seen the movie now, I'm sorry. We're going to spoil it. The movie's like six or seven years old.
Speaker 2:You should have seen it by now.
Speaker 1:I think the cutoff for spoilers should be like five years.
Speaker 2:Anyway, here's what happens in Alien Romulus.
Speaker 1:That's okay, right, so, yeah. So in the end, when you see him kind of sacrifice himself to bring Deckard back together with his daughter, that's the movie we thought we were watching. But the movie I realized I was watching was this replicant who thinks he has more value to society because he thinks he's special.
Speaker 2:I watched Magnolia the other day, okay, and that I re-watched it because criterion's got this whole like paul thomas anderson thing going on right now and uh I, I remember just coming out of magnolia. My wife hated it um but I loved it. It's three hours, it's a three hour film. That is just going. It just keeps going. Amazing. I love.
Speaker 1:it Should have been a miniseries.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, but I think that that one lands on a, on a semi ambiguous ending as well. But I think part of the ending comes down to the question of like are we interconnected and do what's the word I'm looking for? Does happenstance actually happen? You know what I mean. I think that's a really cool. I'm not saying that that's a philosophical way to like end a question. I'm sure there's much more to it than I'm thinking about. I know I'm only really sort of processing it again for the first time in like 15 years, but I think that that ambiguous ending was cool. Another ambiguous ending I think we should give more credit to is Inception Inception's really interesting, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2:Because I think it's ambiguous right, but what's the ending?
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:You know what I mean. Everybody goes, oh, does the thing fall or does it not fall? Do you feel like?
Speaker 1:that's actually philosophical or just a gimmick to get no talking I don't think it's philosophical.
Speaker 2:Uh in like the grand well, it is it is and it isn't. It's not. It's a shallow philosophy.
Speaker 1:You know what I mean but the the question, oh, it's irrelevant if it does or doesn't.
Speaker 2:You know that's right, yeah it's like it's all he wanted to do. All all cob ever wanted to do was just get back to his kids. He didn't care which, which way he did it. He doesn't care if it's real or not. He just wants to get back to his kids in some capacity, and he does, and whatever that reality is is all the reality he needs. He could spend eternity in his own dream with his kids as they grow up, and then he's got to wake up again and then maybe be with his kids again. Who?
Speaker 1:knows.
Speaker 2:Yeah it, but he gets to spend that time with those kids.
Speaker 1:Final, that's a lot to unpack for a character yeah, because you know they're not real. If they are a dream, yeah, I mean. And so like is he. I don't know, that's a conversation for it doesn't matter. Yeah, yeah I, I will, I will kind of give a movie that I really like and we've talked about it on this pod uh on this series um monsters sir, nope, haven't seen it, uh. So I'm gonna spoil it for you and everybody else.
Speaker 2:Nope, haven't seen it, so I'm going to spoil it for you and everybody else If you haven't seen it too bad.
Speaker 1:It's been more than five years. Yeah, it's been more than five years. So it's a movie that Gareth Edwards did about a photographer who is tasked with bringing his boss's daughter home. Okay, and this is in the landscape of an alien invasion, kind of.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Because a satellite with alien bacteria falls into Mexico and that bacteria spreads and it just creates new life Right. Yeah, yeah yeah, so yeah, and so in Mexico between, like, Texas and, I think, mexico City, you have this quarantine zone of alien life. It's not malicious, but it's just, you know, taking over the world.
Speaker 2:It just is yeah.
Speaker 1:It's spreading, yeah, and so people are freaking out. The military's trying to like blow these. You know, alien whales.
Speaker 1:For the, for the, for the for lack of a better word like out of the sky they kind of float yeah and so this guy, who's a who's a photo journalist, he's like I, I want to take a photo, I want to, you know, I want to want to, uh, journalize this moment. And his boss is like cool, I can do that, you got to get my daughter home. And the daughter is like cool, I can do that, you got to get my daughter home. And the daughter is, like you know, trying to save the world, and so she gets hurt during a whatever, and so he's tasked with bringing her home. There are certain parts where, like, they get on a boat or try to get on a boat, there's no tickets, and it feels very much like a refugee story, you know. And so this whole thing is improv all the way through, and I really want you to see it, but I'm going to ruin it, I'm sorry.
Speaker 2:It's okay. So this whole journey home.
Speaker 1:Right yeah, they have to go through the quarantine zone and they get to Texas and they realize that the wall that's been kind of holding these aliens back has fallen.
Speaker 3:Now.
Speaker 1:Texas is overrun and Gareth Edwards actually shot right after a whole big hurricane took out a couple of towns in texas. So he just went there and shot and it looks amazing because it's, you know, a destroyed town, yeah, after a hurricane. And, um, you know, they get to this gas station and then they call for the for the military, and the military is on their way to pick them up and they see this beautiful moment between two aliens and they realize like, oh, they're not really invading yeah, it's just new life, yeah and uh, you know this, these two characters turn to each other and one of them has to like, go home and get married to this guy she's engaged to.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and she turns to him and goes, I don't want to go home. And then the movie ends because, like the military comes and I'm like, damn, like this whole movie about going home and she just like that. That that moment, for me, I think, is the final, like the best final line of dialogue in any movie I've ever seen, like hits so hard and there's no ambiguity. It's just like sometimes you just don't want to go home, like she doesn't want to go home. Okay, after this immense journey.
Speaker 2:This whole thing yeah.
Speaker 1:And like he understands that, because I think there's like a love thing happening between them and and and I have to re-watch it again. It's such a good movie, but like I love those moments where I don't have to think, I just can feel it you know, and maybe I think that's what I mean by I don't like watching. I like watching movies with a definite ending, with just a moment because I can feel that it like lands at a thing.
Speaker 2:It's an emotional connection, yeah, okay, instead of philosophical. What's a movie you don't like with an ambiguous?
Speaker 1:Man, I have to think about this. What's?
Speaker 2:in your what's in your thinky thoughts? There I'm wondering. I mean, we can.
Speaker 1:We can talk Inception. I feel like it's a great movie.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And then I was like it's a great moment, don't get me wrong. It gets people talking, I understand it, but for me I don't get joy out of it as much as I thought I would now looking back on it, because I've had conversations about it and we've dissected the movie left and right. But I get why, but I just don't like it.
Speaker 2:It makes me frustrated. I think that there's a part of it to me at least, maybe from your perspective, and part of it to me, um, at least, on on, maybe from your perspective, and maybe this is where I well.
Speaker 1:first, and foremost, the movie is basically just paprika anyway, but um, oh, and if, uh, you haven't seen, paprika is an anime great film uh, I forget the director's name, but it's satoshi kon. One more time.
Speaker 2:Satoshi Kon, there we go. He is rest in peace. He is the reason why Fantasia Fest exists.
Speaker 1:No way Okay. So that movie also deals with dreams. Very good film. I mean a lot of moments exist in Inception because of that movie.
Speaker 2:Yeah, no, absolutely. I mean they steal whole scenes out of it. But we'll talk about that.
Speaker 1:That's a different conversation, anyway, so continue.
Speaker 2:But I, that's a different conversation anyway, so continue. But um, the, the, I get what you're talking about, because, because of what we just said, because it doesn't land on its thesis completely, it doesn't land on a true philosophical question at the end it doesn't say something really uh sort of prolific at the end of it and instead I think what it, what it does is?
Speaker 2:it just sort of says, well, that's the end of the story and I think it was a bit gimmicky still, um, it is. You know it's a gimmicky ending. You know this is the top fall, it doesn't matter yeah which I think is a cool way to think about that, because in all reality it doesn't matter. From cobb's philosophy it doesn't matter, but from our, the audience's philosophy it kind of matters a little bit. Um cause.
Speaker 1:We want to know, we want the answer.
Speaker 2:It's not even the answer. We want your, your thesis. Yeah, we want your, your final, whether you can keep it vague, that's where I, that's, that's where I, that's, that's where I'm I'm at. It's like you can keep it vague, but I need the thesis. Once again, we go back to blade runner. The thesis is there. You know what I mean? We. We say it at the end. The question is about you, the.
Speaker 2:I think that's god's what I love about blade runners, that the mirror is turned right back at you. That's so good when movies can do that. That's when you're like oh, okay, I get you. Like, like I said, 2001, space odyssey even kubrick just did it a lot. But, um, what was the? Uh, a clockwork orange? Yeah, you know he's, he's laying in the bed and I people are like that's a completely different ending from the, from the book. But he's laying in bed and he's totally cured, he's, he's, you know he's, he's back to the old alex and he's's like oh, you know, I've been deprogrammed. And he lays down and he looks up and he sees the dreamscape and he sees all those people in their fancy clothes clapping as two naked women mud wrestle in the middle of heaven or wherever it is.
Speaker 2:And and the, the thesis being, in my opinion, the thesis being that we are still the animals that you know from from the get go. We are still. We crave, even as a polite society. We crave violence and we crave, uh, pornography. We, we crave the immoral, because the immoral is what separates us from, you know, from civilization, if you will, and that kind of. If we can find that, that sort of through line, that cross, that, that cross thread, there, then we can, we can say oh, we're so good, so, um, we're, we're great, we're, you know, we're better than somebody else, so that's where that comes from yeah, I like, and kind of bringing it back to the craft, I think, writing.
Speaker 1:You know, it doesn't necessarily have to be a kind of a logical ending that's philosophical, that we can kind of think about, or even an emotional ending. It doesn't have to be both, it could be, it could be one or the other, and I think it really shows what kind of filmmaker you want to be.
Speaker 1:Whichever you pick to be, whichever you pick, whichever you feel comfortable with you know, and some people want to be heady, some people want to think, some people want to react, some people want to feel and I feel, like you know some people just want to make some really fun dumb jokes.
Speaker 2:Yeah, some people just want to laugh. That's cool too.
Speaker 1:Yeah you don't necessarily have to follow these kind of set rules. You should know what they are yeah set rules. You should know what they are, yeah. But as you kind of have experience in them, uh, and you're able to bend them a little bit, you can kind of find your own path, and I think that's what makes successful creatives and filmmakers and directors and writers is when you find your kind of like comfort zone, your voice and you thrive in that, yeah your voice is actually a good, a good uh label for it, but maybe you know it could be just your, your creative outlet, your creative yeah.
Speaker 2:It's like you can. You can make all kinds of types, but the the thing that makes something hit home is whether or not you believe in it. Um and I think that that's that can be the uh. The defining factor about whether something is good or not is that you have found a way to um, you found a way to complete your voice, or you've found a way to complete your thesis, one way or the other, as long as it doesn't land in a false note.
Speaker 2:I don't know how to explain that. It's a weird way to put that I think from what you're.
Speaker 1:let me try to kind of interpret that, because when I hear you say that to me it means I'm not faking my outcome for an opportunity to make a movie. I'm believing in the outcome, because I feel like that's what the story needs.
Speaker 2:Exactly when you find the truth of the story. Regardless of whichever way it goes, that's all that matters. I like that.
Speaker 1:When you find the truth of the story, that's when that's all that matters. I like that. When you find the truth of the story, uh, that's that's when kind of things start to flourish, and I think that's a good place to end this series with Jamie Parslow.
Speaker 3:Oh, thank you.
Speaker 1:Thank you for coming onto the pod and sharing your stories, your experience, your multi hyphenates.
Speaker 2:This has been a dream. This has been really great, very cool.
Speaker 3:Well, I'm glad I could Likewise, yeah, likewise.
Speaker 1:I've wanted to chat with you in length often and we hang out every now and then and we never get a chance to like, really dive into film.
Speaker 2:I honestly could do this for many more hours. We'll have you back on, not here to do this.
Speaker 1:After your next film. You finish your next film, you finish your next film. We'll have you back on yeah, we'll chat some more? That'd be great. Thank you, jamie, for coming on the pod. Thank you, thank you everyone for listening and we'll see you in the next series. Thank you for joining us at the CFA studio for another series of the Inwood podcast.
Speaker 3:You can find the podcast wherever you find your podcasts or on YouTube at the Cinematography for Actors is bridging the gap through education and community building. Find out about us and listen to our other podcast at cinematographyforactorscom. Cinematography for Actors Institute is a 501c3 nonprofit. For more information on fiscal sponsorship donations because we're tax exempt now, so it's a tax write-off and upcoming education you can email us at contact at cinematography for actorscom. Thanks,