Tom O'Connor on The Courier - SpyMaster Interview #74

[00:00:02] Hello and welcome to SpyHards Podcast. I'm Agent Scott.

[00:00:38] And I'm Cam the provocateur, taking my seat at the ballet.

[00:00:42] I just wish you were doing the ballet, Cam. Well that'll be the courier too, and then

[00:00:47] I will be doing the full pirouette and all that sort of stuff.

[00:00:50] Plie, plie. But talking about the courier, speaking of the courier, that's what we're

[00:00:55] talking about this week. A couple days ago we had our fantastic chat about the film itself

[00:01:00] and we promised you two Spy Master interviews and here is the first one, Cam who's joining us.

[00:01:06] We are being joined by screenwriter Tom O'Connor who has the sole credit on the courier

[00:01:12] and also previously wrote the Hitman's Bodyguard films.

[00:01:15] For sure, we love talking to screenwriters and we have loved speaking to Tom O'Connor.

[00:01:20] So without further ado, Cam, roll the interview.

[00:01:25] And joining us now on the show, the writer of this week's film, the courier, it is Mr. Tom

[00:01:31] O'Connor. Hello sir, how are you? I'm doing well thank you. Thanks for having me. How are

[00:01:35] you? Living the dream, all the better having you here on the show, The Talk Courier. But

[00:01:41] I think before we get to that film, what we'd like to do is kind of hear your story of how you got

[00:01:46] to the point of making the film. So you're a screenwriter by trade, you did films before

[00:01:50] the courier, you've done films afterwards. What made you want to get into writing films?

[00:01:56] Getting into writing films, it was a bit of an accident. In college I minored in theater.

[00:02:03] I was a psych major, theater minor and took some playwriting classes and they were

[00:02:07] interesting but writing seemed too hard and too difficult and I didn't want to do it.

[00:02:12] So after college, I wandered into advertising and I was writing TV commercials. I was a

[00:02:17] copywriter and then I got a job at an advertising agency in Los Angeles and in Los Angeles I

[00:02:24] started meeting TV and film writers and I'd never really known anyone who did that for a

[00:02:28] living and it made the job seem much more accessible and more realistic. I never really

[00:02:35] thought of it before. I just thought film and TV were written by magic elves somewhere. I never

[00:02:39] really thought of just people doing it and meeting writers just made it feel like, oh this is something

[00:02:43] that people do and it got me interested in trying to expand what I was doing creatively.

[00:02:47] Writing TV commercials is fun but it's a limited box to play in creatively and so I

[00:02:51] started writing nights and weekends, just writing stage plays first and stage plays,

[00:02:57] it didn't really fit. All those plays were terrible even though theater was my background

[00:03:01] and so I said, oh well I'm in LA let me start writing a screenplay and that language felt much

[00:03:06] more natural to me. Especially coming out of advertising, thinking in images, thinking in

[00:03:11] short, thinking in moment to moment storytelling, that felt like a much more natural fit and then

[00:03:17] I got the bug and I was like, okay I love this, I love screenwriting, I'm so lucky that

[00:03:20] I stumbled into this and I want to try to do it for a living and then just a gradual

[00:03:24] getting better at it, getting good at it, getting to the point where I was able to actually

[00:03:28] make the transition. It was really an accident of having moved to Los Angeles and I hadn't

[00:03:33] gotten a job out here within that agency, I don't know that I ever would have found myself

[00:03:37] compelled to move on that path. Were you a big movie buff when you were younger or was it

[00:03:41] something that became more of the evolution of wanting to create things? It was an evolution,

[00:03:47] I was definitely a movie fan as a kid. I grew up in the 80s and 90s, action movies were

[00:03:53] very much touchstones for me and I always tell people that the golden age of cinema is

[00:03:56] actually the 90s because of those action films. But yeah, I know but in terms of wanting to do it

[00:04:02] as a storyteller, no that didn't come until later. So I was not one of those people who

[00:04:06] knew from birth that I wanted to be a writer or be a filmmaker so it was definitely a bit of a

[00:04:11] later in life thing. Well like running parallel to finding your footing moving to LA, becoming

[00:04:19] a screenwriter and finding it to be like a tangible thing you can apply yourself to,

[00:04:23] we're going to talk about a spy movie in a second. So one thing we'd like to do is check

[00:04:26] out your spy movie credentials. You say you watched films growing up, you loved the 90s,

[00:04:32] there were plenty of good spy movies in the 90s but what was your background with spy movies?

[00:04:38] Did that interest you at all when you were growing up? Yeah very much so. I think I'd

[00:04:42] always had an affinity for spy stories. I think I read a number of spy novels. I think

[00:04:49] I got into spy movies more as a reader than as a viewer but I think the spy movies that I've

[00:04:56] always really enjoyed, I mean this is all off the top of my head. I'm sure we're going to miss

[00:04:59] a bunch that are great but Spy Game, the one with Redford and Brad Pitt, I've always enjoyed

[00:05:07] that. That was a good piece. The American, the George Clooney film. This one isn't strictly

[00:05:14] a spy film. It's more of a special forces film but the Spartan, David Mannet wrote and directed

[00:05:20] with Val Kilmer. I've always enjoyed that one and those I'm trying to think the other, I mean

[00:05:25] obviously of course the Bourne films of course. I think one thing I really enjoyed about the

[00:05:30] Bourne films was that it was such a, the films and I don't know the novels as well,

[00:05:34] I know the films, is that it was such a character driven spy film as opposed to just a

[00:05:39] okay we need some sort of generic person to defuse nuclear bomb. It was such a specific

[00:05:43] character premise. I think that's what I really valued. I think it's why the Bourne films are so

[00:05:47] successful because you just, that character is such a compelling dilemma and then you build

[00:05:54] spy tropes around it but you've got this wonderful beating heart of a person that you

[00:05:58] care about and you understand this horrible existential dilemma that he's got and who am I

[00:06:03] and oh I'm evil but I don't feel evil and so how do I reconcile who I think I am in my

[00:06:10] heart with all the things I've done, the things I know how to do and I think that's what carried

[00:06:15] that franchise across for films and going and is really just that. That was something that was

[00:06:20] really compelling to me and I think that'll bring us into the couriers for finding a character

[00:06:24] based dilemma and character based journey that I think moves, that gets the audience involved

[00:06:29] on a heart level with our protagonist in a way beyond just sort of embracing the fun of

[00:06:35] the cloak and dagger of spy films. Well and what I noticed when you were mentioning the

[00:06:38] films that really jumped out to you, they were all set very much in the real world.

[00:06:42] You weren't really throwing out Moonraker for example. Oh yeah right, yeah sure. I mean of

[00:06:47] course everyone loves the Bonn films. The Bonn films are great but they are sort of,

[00:06:51] they're such a well-known touchstone. They're almost at this point,

[00:06:58] they're so well established that they're almost a thing of, they're their own entity and I

[00:07:02] don't even really think of Bonn films as spy films. I think of Bonn films as Bonn films.

[00:07:06] They're their own genre at this point and they're parodied as their own genre. You look at the,

[00:07:10] in the Austin Powers films very much built around a deep knowledge that we all have of the Bonn

[00:07:16] universe and sort of the Bonn tropes. So it's fine yeah but those movies are great. They're

[00:07:21] just, they're their own thing I think. There's some nice symmetry here as well. You mentioned

[00:07:25] spy game and we've had Michael Frost Beckman who wrote it on the show and he listens in.

[00:07:28] Oh. I think he'll be quite pleased to know that you liked his film. I think that's a

[00:07:33] nice, nice symmetry there. But you mentioned the Courier and I think that's maybe the great

[00:07:38] pivot point here. That's where we take the conversation into the Courier and from what

[00:07:42] I've read about it doing the research online, this feels like it was really your baby bringing

[00:07:48] in the story. So yeah why don't you take us, where did the story come to you and

[00:07:52] what made you interested in telling that story? Yeah I think it was, it did start with me. It

[00:07:58] was a bit of serendipity. I was, I was in a moment in my career, Hitman's Bodyguard had been made

[00:08:06] which of course was a big film for me but I felt like I wanted to try something different. I didn't

[00:08:09] want to write another buddy action movie. I didn't want to write, I didn't want to write

[00:08:13] a comedy. I wanted to write something just, I just was looking for something deeper in the

[00:08:16] head, a bit more texture to it and at the same time I was also reading history books as

[00:08:21] I do. I'm a bit of a history buff and was reading books about, this is also the time

[00:08:26] thinking about after the 2016 election in the states when Russian interference and Russian

[00:08:32] spycraft and sort of this revitalization of sort of the Russian-American spy game was

[00:08:37] sort of becoming very much sort of top of mind for me as a citizen. And I started reading books

[00:08:43] about the history of American and Russian spycraft and sort of the spy wars back and forth

[00:08:50] and I was reading a book about, and I don't remember that, I don't even remember the book

[00:08:54] because it is a few different ones, but one of the things they were talking about,

[00:08:58] the Oleg Penkovsky, the real life, the Russian in the film who Marab plays and

[00:09:07] obviously he's known in terms of spy circles as sort of the most valuable source that the West

[00:09:13] has ever gotten from the Soviet Union. It's not even really arguable. Penkovsky was just

[00:09:18] turned over a plethora of material and I was reading the book and the book I read had just

[00:09:22] sort of one sentence about it that said, oh and Penkovsky's main contact was a British civilian,

[00:09:30] traveling salesman who came from London and brought materials back to the West. I was like,

[00:09:35] I'm sorry what? His contact was a civilian? Again we're talking about character-based premises

[00:09:42] and I think that was something that for me is like, well that's interesting. I mean

[00:09:46] because we think about, I mean that is sort of the one of the classic story genres,

[00:09:51] an ordinary man asked to do an extraordinary task and that's something that's a touchstone in every

[00:09:57] kind of storytelling, not just spy films. It was immediately compelling because I was like, well

[00:10:01] my god, I mean it puts you in that position of what would I do as an ordinary person if I was

[00:10:05] asked to take on this responsibility? So I immediately dove into the research and found

[00:10:10] everything I could about Greville Wynn and about Wynn and Penkovsky, their working

[00:10:14] relationship and there were a whole variety of different spy books that touched on them.

[00:10:18] They were a chapter in maybe eight or nine different spy books and that's what got me.

[00:10:24] Then I thought, okay well surely someone's already made this movie. This is such an

[00:10:27] obvious film. So I ran onto the internet and I was waiting for my heart to be broken.

[00:10:32] I was waiting to see, okay here's this film it's already been made and it was shocking

[00:10:36] me. I was like, my god no one's done this movie yet and I was almost angry at the British

[00:10:41] screenwriting community. I was like, guys you have this incredible spy hero. He's English,

[00:10:48] come on what are you doing? How have you guys not done this story? I was like, why does it

[00:10:51] take an American to do this? But it's also interesting too because it's a very, even though

[00:10:56] Greville Wynn is English, it's a very American kind of story. It's a very sort of the

[00:11:02] unlikely hero. It's an American trope and so it's interesting that I always wanted to

[00:11:07] grab onto it. So I wrote a script on spec as the term is known meaning that no one paid me

[00:11:16] to write it. I didn't pitch it anywhere. It was something I hadn't done before and I thought,

[00:11:19] if I try to pitch this people are gonna say, oh it's the writer of Hitman's Bodyguard. They're

[00:11:22] gonna want splashy comedy. I was like, no this is a drama. It's a human drama and I wanted

[00:11:29] to write the spec and then once I wrote the spec then my agents gravitated towards it and

[00:11:35] then we sort of found collaborators and the script found its way to Dominic Cook and then

[00:11:39] once Dominic got involved and Dominic liked the script and wanted to direct it,

[00:11:43] everything moved from there and that was how the movie sort of became. But it started off with me

[00:11:47] and then became a collaboration between me and Dominic who was wonderful and fantastic to work

[00:11:51] with. I was gonna ask if there was any sort of pushback when you were shopping the script

[00:11:56] around where they're going, well we like the Hitman's Bodyguard because we saw the box office

[00:12:01] on that. We don't, we're not as confident necessarily in this story but that wasn't really

[00:12:06] the case? No no, well it is the case in a sense. Where those conversations happen is

[00:12:11] they happen in relation to what the production budget's gonna be. Everyone's like, look it's,

[00:12:16] this is a movie that would be appealing to people. It's like, look the Courier was like,

[00:12:19] okay this is a, you know, it's a spy story. It's a genre people like. It's a Cold War.

[00:12:23] It's history. We're not going to give you 50 million dollars to make this film and that's

[00:12:27] where those conversations happen. I think the Courier was probably a 12 million dollar budget

[00:12:32] which you know kind of that so you can make a movie for that money but it's you can see in

[00:12:36] the Courier, I mean I'm sure I don't know if Dominic talked to you about this but of course

[00:12:39] like any film you always would shoot more money and more resources and I know there are specific

[00:12:42] scenes Dominic is like, oh I wish I could have had you know 20 more extras here. I wish I could

[00:12:46] have had this or that but that's where those conversations happen. It's really, you can make

[00:12:50] the movie if you make it for a number. Right well it looks very good. Like it is a

[00:12:54] really beautiful looking movie so 12 million or not like it looks fantastic. Thank you.

[00:13:00] Dominic and his team did a fantastic job of and I think you know Dominic coming out

[00:13:04] of the theatre primarily as someone he's got such a gift with actors and such a great eye

[00:13:09] and an understanding of how to do things economically and I think it makes things

[00:13:14] look beautiful economically and yeah that was we were very very fortunate that Dominic came on

[00:13:19] and sort of made his next film and it was a real privilege to work with him.

[00:13:24] And so you mentioned like stumbling across this story that hadn't been told and finding

[00:13:28] that no one's made that film which is great to hear because you know you mentioned you

[00:13:32] know British screenwriters letting you down. We've made so many adaptations of the Kim

[00:13:36] Philby story it's ridiculous. I've talked about these films there are a lot of them out there

[00:13:42] in TV shows and this is bizarre in a way that this is the first time we're hearing this story

[00:13:46] or a mainstream audience is hearing this story. I'm sure people who are fans of Spies would

[00:13:50] know more about this. Right. What I'm curious about is part of that research process. You

[00:13:55] say you were a reader, you're putting the spec script together. Did you do making sort

[00:14:00] of overtures to speak to your family or relations of the people involved or anything like that?

[00:14:07] I didn't. I didn't. I mean Greville Wynn at this point had already passed away. His son

[00:14:15] still alive but I think frankly from my research I'd gotten a sense that Wynn

[00:14:22] in real life was a bit of a tragic figure. We didn't really touch on it in the film but

[00:14:26] the experience of being held prisoner in Ljubljana I think was like 18 months he spent was very

[00:14:32] traumatic for him. He was not trained for this. He was an ordinary man and to be held

[00:14:37] under those conditions kind of broke him. He came back to London. I believe he descended into

[00:14:42] alcoholism. I believe he ended up leaving his wife. I think it was a very difficult

[00:14:46] fraught relationship between him and his son. He just again Greville sort of paid this

[00:14:51] ultimate sacrifice. He came back as a broken man and so I felt to that degree it wasn't sure

[00:14:57] there was something that the son would want to discuss. I think in fact even once Dominic came

[00:15:01] on board and it became a real film, I don't believe that we were able to make contact

[00:15:06] with Greville's son. It wasn't something he seemed to want to engage and have a

[00:15:09] conversation about. So those are the only people who were alive. I think Penkovsky's

[00:15:15] daughter was alive and is still alive but his daughter interestingly joined the KGB.

[00:15:25] After Penkovsky's downfall and execution, his widow reverted back to her maiden name

[00:15:32] and as sort of a public statement of I'm disavowing my late husband.

[00:15:36] I believe that she was from an intelligence family or she was from a well-known family.

[00:15:43] I could be wrong but in Soviet circles her name meant something and her daughter I believe

[00:15:48] has joined the intelligence services herself. It's very much a repudiation of her late husband

[00:15:54] as someone who had been a traitor to the Soviet Union. We figured okay well

[00:15:58] she's not going to want to talk. The daughter is definitely not going to want to talk to us.

[00:16:01] So it's interesting too, I will say just as an aside, I know that Don MacKie even had a bit

[00:16:06] of trouble casting the film to cast Russian actors because Penkovsky is so to this day

[00:16:12] is reviled as this epic traitor to the motherland and his name is really,

[00:16:18] there's still a black mark against Penkovsky. I think in the states would probably be Bennett

[00:16:23] Arnold would be the best comparison and maybe in the UK it would be Ken Philby.

[00:16:28] It was something that there was, it was interesting casting the movie was actually a bit of a

[00:16:32] challenge in terms of getting Russian actors to play in the film.

[00:16:37] And I'm curious when you're putting the script together you have multiple years to track,

[00:16:42] you have a lot of events. What were the biggest challenges in condensing this into

[00:16:46] basically a two-hour story? Great question. The volume of material that Penkovsky and Winn

[00:16:55] went over was just so daunting. That was a big problem, just figuring out how to make this

[00:17:02] condensed understandable for an audience because also even the complexities of the cold of the

[00:17:08] Cuban Missile Crisis, we had to leave all that off screen because none of our main characters

[00:17:14] were involved in the new show, The Missile Crisis. There's a whole subplot in the real

[00:17:17] life about Robert F. Kennedy and the Soviet ambassador back channeling all throughout the

[00:17:24] Cuban Missile Crisis, which was fascinating but none of it belonged on screen because none of it

[00:17:28] had to do with Bandy's character or Marab's character. And so it was learning to tell a

[00:17:33] lot of that story off screen and rely on the audience's understanding of it,

[00:17:37] being efficient with that. The other thing that was difficult was that

[00:17:42] Greville and Marab don't interact a lot on screen without needing to be careful because

[00:17:49] their interactions are almost all in the Soviet Union other than that one trip that

[00:17:52] Pankowski takes to London. And they have to be careful because they have to assume they're

[00:17:57] under surveillance. And so you had to build this relationship between these two men in these

[00:18:01] subtle small conversations and close moments. And it was very much about looks across the table

[00:18:08] and coded messages and coded looks. And these men had a foxhole romance, but you had to do

[00:18:13] it in a way that you had to limit their interactions. They couldn't speak openly in

[00:18:18] Moscow. And that was an interesting challenge. It's a great challenge for Dominic and for his

[00:18:22] actors because they had to tell this love story between these two men in a very limited way

[00:18:29] because they couldn't speak freely with each other.

[00:18:32] Well, that was something I noted was you really communicate this friendship in like 45 minutes,

[00:18:38] maybe less. And that has to carry through that entire second hour. I think it's done

[00:18:43] incredibly well. And I can only imagine that would have been incredibly challenging to put

[00:18:46] together. 100%. I mean, and that's partly pressure on me as the writer,

[00:18:52] but enormous pressure on Dominic and Merab and Benedict. And they had to sell that friendship

[00:18:56] to the audience. And they really close friendship and they had to do it quickly. And it was about

[00:19:00] chemistry, you know, that first lunch they have together where they're joking about,

[00:19:03] you know, the caviar and about, you know, can Benedict, can Greville hold his liquor?

[00:19:08] And that you have to get the warmth that those jokes have to land and that warmth has to

[00:19:12] land and you have to buy this instant connection between these two men. And we were very fortunate

[00:19:16] that Dominic's direction and the Merab and Benedict's performance sold that.

[00:19:23] Speaking of the relationship between the two, one thing I think the film does really well is

[00:19:28] give them both time to develop as characters and for you to actually care about them as an

[00:19:31] audience. Because at least until like the second hour, as Cam says, it becomes more

[00:19:36] Benedict's film at that point, because he's the one you're sort of focusing on in prison.

[00:19:40] But you're giving everyone equal time, which I think is great. You're seeing like both of

[00:19:44] their home lives, even their houses look the same, which I think is a Dominic Cook touch

[00:19:48] there, which I think is a great touch. Very much.

[00:19:52] Lovely parallel like a mirror thing going on they've got. But for you,

[00:19:55] like giving ample and equal time in the screenplay, how did that process go for you?

[00:20:00] Was it hard to sort of make sure everyone gets the appropriate amount of time?

[00:20:04] Very difficult. And by the way, that was such a wonderful catch about the visual

[00:20:07] parallel between their houses. That was very much Dominic's idea. It was a wonderful

[00:20:11] touch that Dominic put in. It's well observed. Yeah, I think it's in the

[00:20:16] screenwriting is all about efficiency. Can you do things quickly? And we had to get

[00:20:21] to know both of these men because we had to care about both of them, because they're both,

[00:20:25] even though it's Benedict's film in the end, it's, you know, Merab's character is so crucial

[00:20:30] because Benedict's love, you know, friend, his deep friendship with this man had to,

[00:20:36] we had to care about him too. We had to care about Merab. We had to care about

[00:20:38] Pankowski and so doing it efficiently. And it was things like, I mean, the scene where we meet

[00:20:44] one of the early scenes with Pankowski when he just comes home and his daughter has earned her,

[00:20:49] I don't remember the name of it, but it's some award they give to young girls. It's an order of

[00:20:55] Lenin kind of thing, the button she has. He's like, no, no, no, place it close to your heart.

[00:20:59] And it's about, we get the sense of this is a very patriotic family. He loves his daughter.

[00:21:03] We get that moment. But it's all about efficiency. You understand too that he's about

[00:21:07] to betray this thing that they all care about so deeply. And you're trying to,

[00:21:11] um, you've got to give everyone equal time. You got to give everyone room to love these characters

[00:21:16] and you've got to do it quickly. And that's, that's the challenge of screenwriting.

[00:21:19] And one aspect too, I thought was really well handled was the marriage between Benedict

[00:21:24] Cumberbatch's character and Jesse Buckley. And Scott and I have watched no shortage of

[00:21:30] historical spy films based on real events where you have the wife at home character who,

[00:21:36] not a lot there. And I thought this film did a much better job than many I could name

[00:21:42] at delving into the marriage. It felt like it, while the, you know,

[00:21:46] the relationship between the two men is the focal point that marriage is incredibly important

[00:21:50] and Jesse Buckley, who's, you know, fantastic actress gets a lot to do.

[00:21:56] Yeah. And we were very fortunate to get Jesse in that part. I mean, she's such a wonderful,

[00:22:00] she's so wonderful. Yeah, it was important. I think there's something too, I think Dominic

[00:22:05] wanted to work on when he came on the film is deepening that marriage. And I think I want to

[00:22:10] say that the idea, I believe it was Dominic's idea to really lean into the notion of Jesse's

[00:22:17] character suspecting that Rebel was having an affair because she knew there was a deception

[00:22:22] happening. The idea of really going into that and sort of the complexities of a marriage.

[00:22:27] I think it was specifically, I think Dominic had the idea that Greville had strayed before.

[00:22:32] He had actually strayed before and there was that and that was known between the two of them.

[00:22:36] There had been a Fisher. It's a small part of the film in terms of dialogue,

[00:22:39] but it informed a lot of the performance of Greville had cheated on his wife before. And

[00:22:45] she knew that and there was something that they'd worked through in the marriage. And

[00:22:48] so this idea that it could be happening again, there was already a fault line there.

[00:22:51] And that became something really pressure point. And then I think one of my favorite scenes,

[00:22:56] I have to say is a scene that's actually doesn't involve the men at all. It's the scene

[00:23:01] when Rachel Brosnahan comes to the house to inform Jesse of what's happening. And

[00:23:07] she has to tell her their husband was a spy, but she tells her without telling her. She

[00:23:11] can't actually say it. I think the line that we gave her was there are things I can't say

[00:23:14] to you. And it's the moment when Jesse's character realizes, oh, my husband has been

[00:23:19] lying to me, but it wasn't an affair. It was this incredible service to Western intelligence,

[00:23:24] but also it was a betrayal because he couldn't tell me what he was doing. And also you put

[00:23:27] our family in it's so complex, but also her husband's a hero and it's there's so much going

[00:23:32] on that moment. I thought Jesse played that so beautifully. And I think that was it's why it's

[00:23:36] one of my favorite scenes because there's just it's so understated and so much going on

[00:23:39] beneath the dialogue. I want to touch on Dormick's sort of work on the film, what he

[00:23:46] added to when he came along. But one question I had more about when you were doing your first

[00:23:50] script, your version of it. Are there any sort of spy films or non spy films you're looking at as

[00:23:55] touchstones to influence how you're putting this together? I'm trying to think. Gosh,

[00:24:05] it's tough because I think the danger is you sort of think of your favorite spy films,

[00:24:09] then you're trying to imitate them and then suddenly you're doing a pale version of somebody

[00:24:12] else's film. And I think I would say I was probably trying not to overtly write towards any movie

[00:24:20] or I mean, I'll give you an awesome example too. For instance, someone asked me like,

[00:24:24] was I writing the character of Grebel Franklin specifically? And I was of course, Benedict

[00:24:30] Cumberbatch is absolutely the number one choice for that role for obvious reasons. I mean,

[00:24:33] he's exact same age. He looks a lot like him. He's Benedict Cumberbatch. He's an amazing

[00:24:37] actor. But I was trying very hard not to write for Benedict just because I didn't want

[00:24:40] to create, I didn't want to just sort of imitate other roles that Benedict had played. It's

[00:24:46] actually interesting. One thing too that was I think was appealing to Benedict about the character

[00:24:50] was that Benedict has played so many geniuses and he's sort of at this time known for

[00:24:54] being playing just genius after genius. And Grebel is not. Grebel's not a genius. He's

[00:24:58] actually a very ordinary guy. He's a gifted salesman and he's charismatic and he's good

[00:25:02] with people, but he's not smart in that sense. And his character is not upper class

[00:25:08] and it's sort of, but to answer it back to your question, I don't think there was anything

[00:25:14] specifically any film in mind I was using as a touchstone. I think it was trying to

[00:25:23] just sort of honor the best of the Cold War spy films and knowing all those very well

[00:25:27] and just trying to sort of be trying to earn our way into that pantheon.

[00:25:32] Well, firstly, I'd say that you did. I think this is one of my favorites at the sort of

[00:25:37] telling of real stories because as Cam has said, we've seen a lot of them.

[00:25:43] Thank you.

[00:25:45] I mentioned Dominic Cooks. You mentioned him coming in and that really sort of got the fire

[00:25:50] going for this film. Having a director attached things started moving. What was

[00:25:56] Dominic bringing? You mentioned Jesse Buckley and Fleshton, that character.

[00:26:00] What other suggestions did he have?

[00:26:01] I think Dominic is such a, his world, his work in the theater is just unparalleled.

[00:26:11] I think deepening, I think specifically deepening the friendship between the two men,

[00:26:16] we really spent a lot of time going over that friendship and just finding those beats and

[00:26:20] find those moments and just polishing, tightening. I think also things like focusing

[00:26:26] the story. I think there were again, there were historical things I found fascinating.

[00:26:29] We all found fascinating like the RFK, Debrinne and back channel that was like,

[00:26:33] okay, but we can't do that. That's not the story we're telling.

[00:26:36] And so really character work. I would say that Dominic's focus was really on character

[00:26:41] work. And I think in terms of also Dominic's English, not not. And so of course there were

[00:26:46] things that were specific about the class that these characters occupied. The sensibilities I

[00:26:53] wouldn't quite have. And that was great to talk about what, in what ways the characters

[00:26:58] need to be English, in what ways the character was American. Because one thing is interesting

[00:27:01] that we talked about is that, you know, the sort of salesman, the Willy Loman salesman type is a

[00:27:06] very American archetype. It's very American. And so even though Greville Wynn is English

[00:27:11] and the character's English, there was a very American subcurrent to it. And

[00:27:15] I remember one thing that Dominic had said about films he came onto, he was developing

[00:27:19] it, was that I think at one point there'd been a conversation about one of the all-time

[00:27:25] great spy films that's English is Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. And I think there had been

[00:27:30] conversations about, oh, should we try to make this feel more like Tinker Tailor?

[00:27:34] And Dominic had said, and Dominic had a very fascinating concept. He said, you know what,

[00:27:39] this film was written, this film was written by an American. And Tinker Tailor is an English

[00:27:45] film. And this film is written by an American. It doesn't have the, it has that sort of

[00:27:49] American kind of heart to it and the sort of unabashed sort of romance between the, I mean,

[00:27:55] the romance in a platonic way between the men, between the leads and the sort of deep

[00:27:59] emotionality that is sort of not an English, naturally English version. You know, Tinker

[00:28:03] Tailor's all about the destruction of people and people destroying each other. And it's all,

[00:28:07] it's, so he's like, no, this was written by, I want to direct this script and I want

[00:28:11] to make the best version of the script. And this was written by an American. I want to

[00:28:14] keep that. It was such an interesting perspective because Dominic, as an Englishman,

[00:28:18] was saying, I want this was written by an American. Let's tell this story. And that was,

[00:28:24] as you can see, this road, this film could have gone down a very different route had it

[00:28:27] been, had it absorbed, had they used Tinker Tailor as a touchstone.

[00:28:30] Will Barron It's interesting you say that because one thing I noted down is

[00:28:34] this film has a real sense of hope to it. And I think you mentioned Tinker Tailor,

[00:28:38] Soldier Spy. That is one of the most pessimistic spy films I've ever seen in my life.

[00:28:42] And that's very much the British way of life sometimes, unfortunately or unfortunately,

[00:28:46] however you want to take that. So yeah, there is a sort of American sensibility to this,

[00:28:51] what is a British and Russian story? Will Barron

[00:28:55] Right, right. Exactly. As an American, I told that story differently than had an

[00:28:59] English screenwriter been the first one to come in and it would have been a very

[00:29:03] different movie, I think. Because actually Tinker Tailor is, there's nothing better than

[00:29:06] Tinker Tailor. It's very English, very pessimistic, very, you know, it's smiley.

[00:29:13] And that's not who these people are. So.

[00:29:15] Will Barron Although it would have been easy to turn

[00:29:17] it pessimistic with what happened with the future with Greville, of course, as well.

[00:29:22] Will Barron Right, exactly. That would have been

[00:29:24] a very different storytelling choice. Someone could have told that story and said, okay,

[00:29:27] let's really look at what his later life was like. And I guess as an American,

[00:29:30] I made the, I didn't want to tell that story. I wanted the movie to end, hopefully. I didn't

[00:29:36] want to do what we call the fourth act. The fourth act of the movie is what happens to Greville after.

[00:29:40] And it's interesting, and that would have been a very compelling film too. It had been an

[00:29:44] incredibly compelling film, but that wasn't the story that sparked to me when I first

[00:29:50] found this material. Will Barron

[00:29:51] And you also don't want to have kind of these unfortunate details just in text at the

[00:29:56] end. It's like, oh, sure. Right, okay. Bit of a buzzkill there. Yeah.

[00:30:01] Right. Yeah, it's for me, it's for me, it's about the audience experience and experience of

[00:30:07] walking out of the theater. I think that's something that, and this goes back to that

[00:30:10] someone who wrote The Hitman's Bodyguard. That's a movie where you walk out of the theater

[00:30:14] feeling good and you feel excited and you've had a fun time. You love these people. You

[00:30:17] love these characters. And I think that that's something that's my, that's what I like as a

[00:30:22] movie goer. I like to walk out of the theater feeling good. And I like to walk out of the

[00:30:25] theater feeling hope and feeling optimistic and feeling good about the human condition

[00:30:29] and human possibilities. And that's not all films. A lot of films, especially some of our

[00:30:34] greatest films tell the opposite story. And it's funny because I'm one of those people like,

[00:30:38] one of my favorite movies is The Shawshank Redemption, which is the most sentimental

[00:30:44] American film ever about the human, the triumph of the human spirit. And it's just,

[00:30:49] it's brilliant. And it's so, you know, it's so sappy in a beautiful way. And that's the

[00:30:55] kind of thing I like. And that's not all films. And that's just sort of my

[00:30:59] instinct as a writer, as a storyteller, I want to tell movies that make me feel the way that

[00:31:03] Shawshank made me feel. Now we were talking about Dominic's ideas when he came aboard.

[00:31:08] And I was wondering as well with Benedict Cumberbatch when he signs on, you know,

[00:31:11] this is an A-lister joining the production. If he has, you know, not negative notes,

[00:31:17] but just like things he's interested in exploring or what's kind of drawing him

[00:31:21] and what he wants to see maybe further developed at all? Yeah, I mean, yeah,

[00:31:25] I mean, God, Benedict, it's interesting. One of the things too, Dominic and Benedict had worked

[00:31:29] together before in theater, and I think also on The Hollow Crown, which is great. And that's

[00:31:34] sort of how Benedict got involved. Dominic just texted him, hey, I've got a script for you.

[00:31:38] And Benedict's such a wise actor in terms of his emotional understanding of the character

[00:31:48] and like where can the character go to dark places? Where are the depths of the character?

[00:31:54] I think Benedict was very interested in Greville's time in prison. You know,

[00:32:00] I mean, Benedict very much wanted to do the weight loss to make sure that he sort of,

[00:32:05] because he lost an enormous amount of weight for that part. And I think really exploring

[00:32:12] the character, I think with Dominic and I both exploring the marriage, I think a lot of

[00:32:19] really getting that marriage to work, getting the complexity of that marriage and sort of,

[00:32:23] this is a sort of day to day, the day to day of it should feel like a real marriage. And I

[00:32:27] felt like when he comes in, he's sort of making jokes and okay, I'm in my chair,

[00:32:32] I don't want you to answer the phone or she puts him on the phone. Anyway, just

[00:32:34] sort of a couple that has affection, has sort of life with each other. And I think

[00:32:40] Benedict really wanted to explore the salesman part of it. I think he was very interested

[00:32:45] in sort of, I think the accent was very specific because I think I want to say Greville

[00:32:51] was born in Wales. And there's a very specific accent, he wanted to work with a very specific

[00:32:56] dialect coach and they worked on the accent very specifically. And he did some prosthetics for his

[00:33:01] mouth to make his voice sound different. It's very, very subtle. But those are the things that

[00:33:04] I think Benedict as a performer, it's just his body as an instrument is something I think

[00:33:11] Benedict's very tied into and his physicality is very tied into. And I think he, I want to

[00:33:18] say he even put on a little bit of weight in the beginnings. He wanted to play Greville as a bit of

[00:33:23] a, a bit overfed salesman, I think that was important. And then the contrast of weight loss

[00:33:28] just these very specific performance details. It's wonderful to watch him work. He just is

[00:33:33] such a, so it makes him great. Not just his understanding of text, but his understanding

[00:33:38] of his own body, his own instrument and his own emotional state. That's just sort of

[00:33:43] unparalleled. And you talked about like the prison sequences and those could weigh down

[00:33:51] the entire movie, the audience could walk out and just be like that was grueling

[00:33:54] and I don't really want to recommend this movie to people. But I think this movie does

[00:33:58] a really good job in making you really absorbed into relationships while also not really holding

[00:34:04] back on just how grueling that experience was. I was just curious if you could talk a little

[00:34:09] bit about kind of navigating that because it would be very easy for that to tip over into

[00:34:14] a movie that's a much tougher, maybe less mainstream film. Yeah. And that I think

[00:34:21] that's, that's a great point is true. I think Dominic was very,

[00:34:26] very intent on walking that line properly. Wanting to honor the experience that,

[00:34:32] that Greville was going through without making it so absurdly dark and sort of oppressively

[00:34:40] dark and unwatchable. And I think that was something that you think, I think the things

[00:34:44] that were important about the captivity were things that were less about being,

[00:34:49] being physically abused and more about things like, for instance, like having your head shave.

[00:34:53] It's so dehumanizing having, having your clothes taken from you. And these are things

[00:34:58] that are just your basic identity as a human being. And there's when those things are taken

[00:35:02] from you and that you're the clothing that you wear and the way you style your hair. And then

[00:35:06] those things being forcefully taken from you, even if they're done, even it's not about

[00:35:10] being punched and kicked and hurt. It's about, it's just, it's a loss of self.

[00:35:14] And that's what's so terrifying. I think especially as someone like, like Greville,

[00:35:18] who dressed well and enjoyed food, enjoyed drink and enjoyed his life and suddenly to

[00:35:22] be stripped down was so jarring. I think one thing we did too, we also wanted to,

[00:35:28] we wanted the movie to feel like the kind of film where you would expect them to get away.

[00:35:35] You want it, for people who didn't know the history, we figured most people did not know

[00:35:39] the history going in. We want the movie to feel like, okay, this is a movie where the hero wins

[00:35:43] in the end and they get away and they're friends and they're all, we even set up the

[00:35:46] idea that they all vacation in Montana together. And we did that specifically because we wanted

[00:35:50] the audience subconsciously to feel like, oh, that's going to be the final scene in the

[00:35:53] movie. The final code is the two couples and their kids running around, they're picking

[00:35:56] each other up in Montana. And that's not the story. And so that point, that rug pull is

[00:36:00] important too, to I think give the audience a sense of surprise. But I think what I think made

[00:36:08] the prison sequence not as dark as it could have been was that the friendship was so strong

[00:36:15] and we understood why Greville was staying strong for Pankowski. And we understood that

[00:36:23] the love between these two men and the deep friendship had not disappeared. And that's,

[00:36:29] I think, the heart of the, beating heart of the movie stayed alive despite the captivity

[00:36:33] and despite the prison sequences. And I think that's what made it palatable for the audience

[00:36:40] and that Greville's desire to get home and his desire to get home to Jesse Buckley and

[00:36:45] carrying it through and delivering on that. In fact, he was able to get home in the film

[00:36:49] and then she was able to come see him. And sorry, I'm getting emotional now too,

[00:36:53] but I remember in those scenes it was, it's the scene when Jesse comes to visit him in prison

[00:36:58] and the things they can say and the things they can't say. And her understanding of that,

[00:37:03] he had what he'd done for his country and that he hadn't told her the truth that he

[00:37:09] couldn't tell her and her admiration of him and also her desire for him to come free.

[00:37:15] There's a lot going on, I think, that the heartfelt making those things feel real was,

[00:37:19] I think, what made it palatable for the audience. Those relationships that kind of carried us

[00:37:24] through. And you have that gut punch too where she's like, don't worry, maybe another year.

[00:37:31] It's like, oh god, this poor man, this poor, poor man. Right, right. Because

[00:37:36] right, right. In political prisoners, you don't measure time in weeks. I mean,

[00:37:40] you're seeing it happen in real life now with, I mean, Evan Gershkovich, the Wall Street Journal

[00:37:45] reporter is being held in Moscow right now. He's been there for months now and he's going to be

[00:37:50] there for months easy. So it's brutal. We've just seen what happened to Navalny

[00:37:55] just weeks ago now. Right, that's right. As we're recording this. Yeah, of course.

[00:37:59] Of course. I mean, with Navalny, the parallel to the Magali, that's much closer

[00:38:04] to Pankowski. There was no way Pankowski was going to walk. They were never going to let

[00:38:09] him go free. I'm sure we kept all of that off screen. I mean, what we know from the history

[00:38:16] of Pankowski's treatment activity was awful because they knew that he had betrayed his country and

[00:38:23] he was interrogated very harshly. We left all that off screen. That was not something, I mean,

[00:38:29] you only see him, you see his injuries, but you don't see any of it happening to him. And

[00:38:34] that was a very deliberate choice on our part. We didn't want to see that. We were not going

[00:38:38] to subject the audience to the moment-to-moment experience that Pankowski had in prison.

[00:38:43] We've spoken a lot about Benedict, about Mirab, sort of the central casting, but expanding to

[00:38:49] other cast members. I don't really want to get into alternate casting because I feel it's unfair

[00:38:53] on the actors. But what I'd like to ask is maybe, is there another performance outside the

[00:38:57] central people that really surprised you with what they did with the words that you'd written?

[00:39:03] Let's see, gosh, I mean, such an incredible cast. It's so fortunate. It was just such

[00:39:08] an embarrassment of riches. I'm surprised. Rachel Brosnan was wonderful as the CIA officer.

[00:39:20] She came in, because I'd known her from the Office of House of Cards and Mrs. Maisel.

[00:39:26] One thing that's really interesting about working with Rachel was that she's very,

[00:39:30] very precise, very precise, very smart. And her concentration is pretty fierce on set. And

[00:39:37] it's really intimidating to watch her work because her focus is so complete.

[00:39:45] That was more of a writer watching from Video Village, impressive experience watching

[00:39:50] Rachel work. I think surprises. I think, oh yeah, there was one. I was such a,

[00:39:57] blanking on her name, blanking both the name of the actress and also the character. But

[00:40:01] there is a woman who is a friend of Jessie Buckley's character who comes to see her and

[00:40:06] is like, oh, can we come around? And she made that part so funny and so, it was just,

[00:40:12] she did one of those things where a wonderful actress took a small part and made it so

[00:40:16] special. I remember being at the table where it was like, who is this woman? My God,

[00:40:20] she's amazing. And Dominic went on to cast her and plays the national.

[00:40:25] That was really nice to have this moment of discovery of like, who are you? What else

[00:40:30] have you been in? Why haven't you been in more things? It's always nice when you can

[00:40:34] never have that moment. And that comedy lands at a perfect time too as the movie's getting more

[00:40:38] intense. So it's a nice little change up in that kind of, yeah, section of the movie.

[00:40:43] I was going to actually ask about the Rachel Brosnahan character because I believe that was

[00:40:48] a composite character, correct? Yeah, it was a composite character between many people and

[00:40:52] also specifically there were no female CIA officers at that, very few, very, very few.

[00:41:00] At that time, it was just a very male-driven kind of business. And both, and that's true

[00:41:06] of MI6 as well, but specifically there were no female CIA or MI6 officers that worked on the

[00:41:12] Pankowski operation. So she was a composite and also an invented character. Well,

[00:41:18] I was going to ask because I've seen many movies, as we've said, based on true events,

[00:41:23] where the composite character sticks out like a sore thumb. And in this case, I found that not

[00:41:28] to be the case. And I was curious, it felt like a fully fleshed out individual who belonged in this

[00:41:33] world. If you had any tips or tricks for people who are writing composite characters,

[00:41:38] because often they almost edge on the side of just write it bland so they just kind of

[00:41:42] blend in and I don't want to draw too much attention to this composite character.

[00:41:47] Yeah, that's a great question. I think the truth is to very much not think of it as a

[00:41:53] composite character because that leads you into this sort of default position where you're

[00:41:58] writing a cipher. What we did was, and this was something that Dominic wanted to explore as well,

[00:42:04] was the idea that, okay, I had chosen to make that character a woman for a number of reasons.

[00:42:13] One just on a simple level of just balancing out the gender mix up of the cast, but more

[00:42:19] on a deeper level, it was about really trying to differentiate between the CIA and MI6.

[00:42:25] At the time, MI6 was a much more senior, much more established agency. CIA was very much the

[00:42:32] younger sibling in that relationship and they were still new and still learning their ropes.

[00:42:36] Having the lead MI6 officer be played by an older man and then having the CIA officer played

[00:42:42] by a younger woman really leaned into that. One thing that Dominic really wanted to play

[00:42:47] with, again, gained a specific choice is not just composite characters, was Rachel's character

[00:42:52] had to be very smart in how she navigated the patriarchy of that time and the misogyny of that

[00:42:58] time. She had to come at things from the side and she had to use flattery and be careful and

[00:43:05] not be overly challenging. If you go back and look at the first scene when she's

[00:43:08] sharing information with the chief of MI6 and with Angus' character, the MI6 officer,

[00:43:14] she's very careful on how she comports herself and she's careful to flatter.

[00:43:19] She's very smart now. She does things. It gave her something to play and it gave me something

[00:43:22] to write and gave Dominic something to direct in terms of you're making a character who has an

[00:43:26] interesting character problem. She was a woman operating in a traditionally male environment

[00:43:34] and that gave her specific sets of things to do and things to play, which also led to other

[00:43:39] interesting things like, for instance, when she does the four-minute warning speech to

[00:43:43] Greville in the restaurant. Part of what's funny about that scene is she's laying the mask slip

[00:43:48] and now you're seeing the real person. You can see Angus' reaction to the MI6 officer.

[00:43:54] Oh, this woman's not who I thought she was. I thought she was just a dumb American. She's

[00:43:58] actually steel-fisted. This is an iron fist and a velvet glove and oh, I've been taken.

[00:44:05] There's a wonder and it's all subtle. It's all voice. It's all looks, but you can see

[00:44:09] after the end of that scene that Angus at that point realizes that he's dealing with a different

[00:44:14] person. So the trick is, I think, to composite characters is make them specific and don't make

[00:44:18] them composite. Find specific choices that can be played. We interrupt this program to bring

[00:44:24] you a special report. Red Alert, Spy Hards, we are shaking things up over on the Patreon page.

[00:44:32] That's right. We are launching an exclusive new show where we tackle the exploits of

[00:44:36] the small screen's greatest secret agents like Jack Bauer, George Smiley and beyond.

[00:44:42] And don't forget every month you also get two agents in the field episodes where we

[00:44:48] decode the adventures of your favorite spy actors in their biggest non-spy movies.

[00:44:54] But cab tell the people what we have coming up next.

[00:44:58] Well Scott, in our latest episode of On the Small Screen, we're going to look at 2008's

[00:45:05] redemption TV movie. Will Kiefer Sutherland deliver or will this be a Jack Bauer?

[00:45:11] So strap on your condorman wings and soar into the future with us over at patreon.com

[00:45:18] slash spy hearts. But before Big O zaps us with a red pulsating laser,

[00:45:23] let's get back to the spy jinx. I had a small question about a small note I'd notice in

[00:45:34] the story of making this film and that is a title change.

[00:45:38] Yeah. Because at one time it was known as Iron Bark and then which I think was the code name and

[00:45:44] then it became the courier during the process of the release. I think it was more to do with

[00:45:49] that and being picked up by Lionsgate and people like that. Is that how it happened?

[00:45:53] And was there any other alternate titles along the way?

[00:45:56] Yeah, so Iron Bark was one of the code names given to Pankowski's character.

[00:46:03] And the point was made during as we were getting ready for release and getting into marketing is

[00:46:10] that well why is the movie named after not the main character? It's Benedict's movie in the

[00:46:15] other day so it really shouldn't be Pankowski's Iron Bark. So that's not going to make sense.

[00:46:19] And then I think there was a sense of just communicating the idea of the film and that

[00:46:24] was very much there were probably other titles that were thrown around but I wasn't privy to

[00:46:27] that conversation. That was Lionsgate marketing and FilmNation doing that amongst themselves.

[00:46:35] In a very writerly fashion when I heard about the title change at first I was like no it's

[00:46:38] got to be Iron Bark. That's the title. But it's one of those things where they're right.

[00:46:42] You have to get over yourself as the writer and not be overly precious about things.

[00:46:50] It is a better title in terms of communicating the idea of the film and

[00:46:53] making Benedict's character the title character. Which was honestly a huge mistake on my part.

[00:47:00] You don't make the title character not a title character. So it's writing 101.

[00:47:04] So Lionsgate saved me on that one. So good for them.

[00:47:08] And I was curious, we were talking about making the Brosnahan character female in the film.

[00:47:16] Taking dramatic license when you're telling a true story if there's any

[00:47:19] moments you struggled with or ones that you were like this is an invented moment and I think

[00:47:23] I need this to get to the core of the story.

[00:47:26] Yeah, I think the guiding light for me was to be true to the heart of everything that happened

[00:47:32] and be true to the we were very rigorous about what Pankowski and Wynn did and did not do

[00:47:38] regarding the Cuban Missile Crisis. We wanted to not oversell that because the truth but

[00:47:42] the what Pankowski's intel really did was incredibly valuable. We didn't want to exaggerate

[00:47:45] it. But one thing that was interesting actually and I don't know if something that

[00:47:49] that everybody knows but Greville Wynn wrote after the events of the movie wrote an autobiography

[00:47:56] and the autobiography he wrote frankly is riddled with falsehoods. I mean it's just he

[00:48:02] just invented all sorts of things and it's crazy. He pretended that he was a basically

[00:48:07] James Bond figure and the reason that he did it for two he did it for a number of reasons.

[00:48:13] And one reason was I think that the British government never publicly acknowledged his

[00:48:18] sacrifice because it was an intel operation. You don't acknowledge intel operations. There's

[00:48:24] no public acknowledgement of what he had done. He was in deep financial straits because he

[00:48:29] was no longer able to operate as a salesman in Eastern Europe and Soviet Union obviously.

[00:48:34] And of course he'd just been going through this horrible experience and felt like he

[00:48:37] deserved recomp compensation and so he wanted to write a book that would sell and so

[00:48:41] he wrote a book that would sell and it was just not true. So one of the things I really

[00:48:45] struggled with the writer was going like okay I'm writing a movie about a man who's wrote

[00:48:49] a book about himself that's just not true and sort of finding and being willing to sort of

[00:48:56] throw that stuff out the window and being willing to say okay no this is based on all

[00:49:00] the history that I've read all the stories that I've read this is what happened and I

[00:49:06] think staying true to the spirit of the real events as long as you stay true to the

[00:49:10] spirit of it you can invent details and it's okay but you've got the beating Harvard has to be real.

[00:49:16] I suppose then my final question on the Courier is more to do with its life release because it

[00:49:24] was scheduled to come out in early 2020 and then COVID-19 happened and things got bumped

[00:49:30] around and it was I think at least here in the UK it did have a small release but it was

[00:49:34] paid VOD for the most part I think that's mostly international as well.

[00:49:39] Just from your side of things is this is your child you're bringing it into the world

[00:49:43] how did what was that process like for you and sort of seeing it be put onto TVs instead

[00:49:48] of theaters? I imagine you wanted it in theaters. Yeah I mean look you know there

[00:49:53] was a global pandemic that obviously the tragedy of a movie not getting a proper

[00:49:59] release is sort of a minor tragedy in the context of COVID-19 but yeah no I mean I will

[00:50:04] tell you one thing was interesting actually I'll tell you the bright side of it was that

[00:50:08] the movie premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in January of 2020 which if you remember this

[00:50:15] is right before everything happened because February is when you know March 2020 is when

[00:50:19] everything shut down so I got to see the movie in a crowded theater in the Pack Theater

[00:50:23] the Eccles Theater in Park City Utah with a huge crowd and the cast was there the directors were

[00:50:29] there director was there we were all there and I got to have that experience got to have the

[00:50:32] premiere experience and that was wonderful to have and then in terms of the movie yeah look

[00:50:37] obviously it's unfortunate the movie did not there were two problems there was the problem

[00:50:42] of not being able to go into theaters as much because of COVID there's also the issue of

[00:50:46] Benedict's other movies that Benedict had been in that were coming in released at the same

[00:50:50] time for instance I'm blanking the name I think it was The Power of the Dog that movie was sort

[00:50:56] of Benedict's you know big release and we sort of came out at the same time and the way it

[00:51:01] works with actors and PR and press is that an actor can't really promote more than one film

[00:51:05] at a time in a cycle and so Power of the Dog was sort of Benedict's big big film and so

[00:51:13] then we sort of you know our movie kind of had to get down and to get underplayed a

[00:51:18] little bit and that's just the nature of movie stacking up on each other because of COVID and

[00:51:22] just the nature of the business and you know look it's yeah I mean look obviously I wish

[00:51:26] more people got to see it I think it's a film that I think that people like oh my god I never

[00:51:31] saw it I get this all the time people like oh my god I finally saw The Curve that's a great

[00:51:34] movie I'm like oh thank you so it's like it's a movie that really didn't get it's

[00:51:39] day in court as much but the nice thing about is then I think people are discovering

[00:51:42] it now because it's still on VOD and it's all it'll be around forever on Amazon hopefully and

[00:51:49] and you know things like this where I think people who are right people listening to podcasts

[00:51:53] who are fans of spy films and maybe haven't seen this movie or go oh no go check it out

[00:51:57] and hopefully they'll be well actually wait we just spoiled the entire movie so hopefully

[00:52:02] I just realized that no okay everyone too late all right so no oops okay so anyway

[00:52:07] Trust me it's good. If they've made it this far after a review and this episode they've probably

[00:52:13] watched it by now so I think we're on the we got the right audience here if they haven't

[00:52:16] guys go watch it anyway watch it again. I'm not going to tell you what ends we don't know yeah

[00:52:21] no so he gets away he gets away in the end so um that's funny um yeah but yeah it's I mean

[00:52:27] like you try to make a movie you hope the movie gets made you hope it's good and you

[00:52:32] hope it gets the right release and I mean you know these things are out of your control and

[00:52:37] look what's happening right now with um it's a horrible thing with that movie at Warner

[00:52:41] Brothers Coyote versus Acme I don't know if you've heard about that yeah I mean yeah

[00:52:45] everyone who's seen the movie says it's just amazing it's great and literally no one will

[00:52:49] ever see it and it's just you know uh you just you just it's such a crazy business and

[00:52:55] you just hope that things work out and sometimes they break your way and sometimes

[00:52:58] they don't so uh you gotta just just keep your head down you know the things it's a

[00:53:03] serenity prayer right you the things you can control and the things you can't control

[00:53:08] well then I suppose uh firstly I can I can give you a tiny bit of reassurance from two people

[00:53:12] who have no foundation in telling you this but we both really enjoyed it okay well thank

[00:53:18] and I know a lot of our listeners did when we spoke about it at the time it came out

[00:53:23] and I'm hoping that we knock on a few more doors when we put this episode out and a few

[00:53:27] more people check it out so I'll take that victory yeah okay well thank you and that's

[00:53:32] great to hear and I'm so glad that you guys enjoyed the film I'm glad this has been something

[00:53:37] that does you have a spy film aficionados it's really an honor that that this thing

[00:53:40] attracted your attention and so that's I'm really grateful for that and I'm glad this is

[00:53:45] um it's exciting it's uh it's an exciting uh it's an opportunity you've got here the

[00:53:49] the podcast and I think it's um it's cool because I think spy film I think people who

[00:53:53] love spy films are uh are good people that's what I think so far that's been our experience

[00:53:59] it's a wonderful it's just a wonderful genre it's such a one because it's like because

[00:54:02] if spy films could do so many different things and you can tell between different kinds of

[00:54:06] stories within that genre and the wonderful human stories and big splashy kinds of things

[00:54:11] and and you can it's you can get big and get small and you can it's just it's the sort

[00:54:14] of the universal human emotion I think it's it's a wonderful playground for those kinds

[00:54:19] of things so it's it's great to be able to celebrate that.

[00:54:22] Well moving on from the courier I'd be keen to know what you're currently working on now

[00:54:27] because I hear there is a film in the works.

[00:54:30] Uh yeah I don't know if I can talk about I can't talk about well what did you hear?

[00:54:37] Well McCarthy.

[00:54:38] Oh yeah oh yes yes so um McCarthy is-

[00:54:41] Unless there's more.

[00:54:43] Yeah no there's stuff I can't talk about McCarthy hopefully um Michael Shannon I wrote

[00:54:48] yeah I wrote us again I wrote something on spec um a I sat down and wrote a script

[00:54:53] about Joseph McCarthy uh sort of the rise and fall from the beginning of his reign

[00:54:57] of terror to the end of it um and Michael Shannon is attached to play McCarthy um and

[00:55:02] that was again that was also one of those stories where I was like how has no one done

[00:55:06] this movie yet? Right.

[00:55:07] It was the exact same it was the exact same thing like how has no one made a movie

[00:55:11] about Joseph McCarthy? There's been documentaries and there's been a docu drama but no one's

[00:55:15] given him the proper treatment so um so anyway but there are as with any movie especially

[00:55:22] something that's complex subject matter it's difficult like nothing's done till it's done

[00:55:26] so hopefully McCarthy will will gel and go into production and and Michael would be

[00:55:32] amazing in the role and so fingers crossed there um but no no promises on that one so.

[00:55:36] And you've teased this there's more so.

[00:55:40] Well I mean there are things I can't talk about um but yeah hopefully um

[00:55:44] hopefully there will be more hopefully there's a there's there's more there's more spy movies

[00:55:48] that are in the pipeline I do enjoy spy movies and these are these are more commercial these

[00:55:54] are more like fun spy movies so um and well so hopefully hopefully one of those will see the

[00:55:57] light of day if they do I'll let you know maybe come back and come back and talk about

[00:56:00] one of those. That'd be awesome and yeah I mean even even like McCarthy we've touched on

[00:56:06] so many spy films on the show that were made during that era and some of them are really

[00:56:10] crazy like the McCarthy era led to some very bizarre spy films. Yeah I did what were your

[00:56:15] favorites what are your favorites in that era? I don't know that I have a favorite it's more

[00:56:19] that you're like wow like what a weird time. There's there's one that always sticks out in

[00:56:24] my head is not a favorite but just how weird it is which is a John Wayne film called Big Jim

[00:56:29] McLean which is uh I mean yeah no one did because no one went to see it but it's it's

[00:56:36] a wild ride I'd recommend checking it out just uh just to blow your mind on a Sunday afternoon.

[00:56:42] Yeah he plays a PI headed to Hawaii to seek communists uh communist spies and

[00:56:49] it's a absolutely bizarre movie and very much um encapsulates the entire spirit of that

[00:56:54] McCarthy era. Oh wow that's wild hey I gotta check that out that was such a crazy time.

[00:57:00] Well the last question and I'll wrap us up with and we may have spoiled it a little

[00:57:05] bit with the first question we asked you but hopefully there's a different answer here or

[00:57:08] it's the same but everyone gets asked this final question on the show Tom O'Connor what is your

[00:57:14] favorite spy movie of all time? Oh okay let me all right so let me I've got a little more

[00:57:19] time to think about this now since those are okay so my favorite spy film of all time

[00:57:26] I'm trying to I'm trying to I'm trying to god they all have different means for me

[00:57:30] You know I'm I am gonna I am gonna go and this is probably because it's a bit more of a dark horse

[00:57:35] I'm going to say Spartan I'm gonna say Spartan and because I think it's one that's interesting

[00:57:40] and I want people to see it if you haven't seen Spartan you should um it's very David

[00:57:44] Mamet it's very David Mamet at the height of his powers and it's interesting it's you know

[00:57:48] it's very that's very stylized dialogue and it's it's an interesting it's an interesting

[00:57:52] treatment uh I think go watch Spartan and then think about how other people would have told

[00:57:57] that kind of story because he makes some very interesting choices throughout um so I think if

[00:58:02] you're an official if you're an official out of spy films and you haven't seen Spartan go see

[00:58:06] Spartan and it's one I haven't seen actually it's on our master list to cover and we will get

[00:58:10] there one day but yeah it's kind of a little bit of an obscurity but one I've definitely

[00:58:15] heard about yeah that's the part what makes it fun it is an obscurity it's something that

[00:58:19] that sort of it's it's one that one to discover and I'm not going to say it's it's

[00:58:22] the greatest spy film I think it's one it's just we're gonna say it's my favorite so I think I have

[00:58:26] I have affection for it because I know about it and so many people don't I will take that over

[00:58:32] uh Casino Royale or Mission Impossible which we hear often I like an oddball choice

[00:58:38] well again that's what's fun what's fun about those movies is that again you're

[00:58:42] showing different kinds of spy films I mean obviously one of the part of the Mission

[00:58:45] Impossible movies I mean I can't remember which one it was but Philip Seymour Hoffman

[00:58:48] played one of the great spy villains ever ever oh I mean just I just oh you know what also

[00:58:55] I mean you know what also uh I'm sure have you well he's passed away but um a most wanted man

[00:59:01] is that one you've covered on the podcast we haven't no not yet it is on yeah it's definitely

[00:59:07] on the list we almost did cover it actually I think last year and then ended up swapping

[00:59:11] it with something else yeah I mean that's again that's Philip Seymour Hoffman's last performance

[00:59:16] yeah and just amazing so good Robin Wright is in the movie um Rachel McAdams is in that movie

[00:59:24] they're all great Willem Dafoe's in that movie it's just it's ever it's just it's great yeah

[00:59:28] have you haven't covered have you guys seen it and you can't talk about it you don't I

[00:59:33] haven't yet uh it's one of the lacari films I haven't seen one of the few all right well

[00:59:37] you're in for a treat because that's that's a great that's a great film that's a great

[00:59:40] one and it's it's I mean I so I miss Philip Seymour Hoffman every day and that's one of

[00:59:44] the reasons why it's such a wonderful performance and it was it was a wonderful

[00:59:47] one for him to go out on and I mean it's that had to be his last one that was a good one so

[00:59:52] I think you've made a lot of spy movie fans happy with those two choices there

[00:59:56] good good good well I'm a fan of the genre and I'm not I'm not someone who just that

[01:00:00] who sort of came in and I like I really like spy films I want to do more actually I should

[01:00:04] tell you I should tell you I'm hopeful I'm hopeful one of my next things I want to do I

[01:00:08] want to write a spy novel I definitely have I want because that's I I want to write the

[01:00:13] dream is write a spy novel and then that turns into a television show or something like that I

[01:00:16] think you think of something like like what happened with slow horses and just that whole

[01:00:20] series and it's like that's that's sort of like a long-term dream of mine is so hope maybe

[01:00:25] needed again then maybe they'll be back to discuss that one day so we'll see you're

[01:00:28] teasing us with a round two that I hate I'm looking forward to it I give you time to

[01:00:33] watch Big Jim McClane so there you go yes maybe maybe I'll do the update of Big Jim

[01:00:38] McClane I'll do that'll be it well no you don't want to do that you don't want to do that

[01:00:43] things are going too well for you don't do that fair enough fair enough well Tom it's been an

[01:00:47] absolute pleasure talking about the curry and much more with you and we wish you all the

[01:00:50] best with McCarthy and all the secret projects you can't talk about yeah well thank you and

[01:00:54] thanks for having me on and I really I really appreciate and uh thank you for making spy

[01:00:59] movies for supporting spy movies I think it's such a wonderful genre so this is exciting

[01:01:04] awesome thank you thanks guys there you go folks that was our chat with Tom O'Connor our first of

[01:01:12] two courier spy and master interviews I want to thank Tom once again for taking the time

[01:01:17] to decode and break down the courier with us it was a fantastic interview if you ask me very

[01:01:23] insightful but Cam I want to hear from you what did you think this was a really enlightening

[01:01:27] interview I thought Tom was of course very generous with his time to join us to talk about

[01:01:31] the movie but gave us so much detail in terms of bringing this story to the screen and the

[01:01:36] complications that come with that he talked a lot about having to learn to tell the story off screen

[01:01:43] because the real world events are so complicated so much time goes by

[01:01:47] a lot of politics are happening that really don't involve our two characters like that's all

[01:01:52] happening around them and him talking about like the challenge and pulling that off because

[01:01:56] I think it works in the movie where you really have kind of the weight of history happening

[01:02:01] off screen as your two characters are really just forging a relationship

[01:02:05] and having that relationship strained yeah well it's an interesting one because looking at sort

[01:02:10] of Tom's work he did we mentioned the hitman's bodyguard before this and then went on to do the

[01:02:14] sequel afterwards but like in terms of it's basically his second big feature film yeah and

[01:02:21] you know I give credit to him for doing a lot of that world building behind the scenes because

[01:02:25] you do get a sense of what's going on without it being like beating you over the head

[01:02:30] or doing like exposition dumps or really overt like you know someone ripping off a page of a

[01:02:35] calendar or something like that it just hints towards what's going on it also speaks to the

[01:02:39] creativity you can display when you have a lower budget because he talked about how they

[01:02:44] really didn't have that much money and you are then forced to be you know ingenious in

[01:02:50] coming up with solutions to solve these problems it's why I often think like it's kind of like

[01:02:55] those often lead to some of the best movies like in genre films where people have to make

[01:03:00] low-budget sci-fi or horror films and because they have no money have to like come up with

[01:03:05] really clever solutions to make the thing feel cinematic and yeah you know this is a little

[01:03:11] bit bigger than say a you know three million dollar Blumhouse movie but it was not big

[01:03:16] budget and it has to tell a pretty sizable story over many years and I just think it's

[01:03:23] done incredibly well and a big part of that is of course Benedict Cumberbatch just carrying

[01:03:27] us through this whole film but you know he's been sent on a very strong direction by the script

[01:03:33] yeah for sure I mean in terms of things I wanted to to discuss what jumped out to me was I

[01:03:39] think we did also mention this in the review earlier this week I was sort of interested

[01:03:45] by the sort of differences in how you tell spy stories and how you know over the last four

[01:03:51] years we've been looking at different ways of telling those stories and this one is you know

[01:03:55] you a lot of people would say it's akin to something like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy but

[01:03:59] it's just a it's it's got a bit more of an optimism about it yeah and it's interesting

[01:04:04] to hear that that was actually more of a choice like that was actually something more

[01:04:07] they were going for and through the process of making the film it's a different way of

[01:04:10] telling these sort of darker cold war drearier spy stories if you will but it and it just

[01:04:17] shows that and actually this is probably the most important thing for me it's just it shows

[01:04:20] the flexibility of the spy movie genre oh definitely there are so many different ways of

[01:04:26] telling I don't want to say the same story because this isn't the same as Tinker Tailor

[01:04:29] Soldier Spy but the same type of story well I think it also underlines the kind of the

[01:04:36] dueling sensibilities of the two primary creators where you have Dominic Cook who's

[01:04:40] British and you have Tom O'Connor you know the screenwriter who's American and he talks

[01:04:45] in the movie about how like he was inspired by Death of a Salesman and the Willie Loman character

[01:04:50] and there's very much an American dream aspect to that story and also like the kind of the

[01:04:57] optimism that the movie has at the end yeah um and the relationship and how much it means

[01:05:02] these two characters feels like much more optimistic and hopeful uh and then you have

[01:05:08] like the pessimism that they're kind of fighting against and it does feel like it's

[01:05:12] these two creators kind of bringing each of their influences back and forth and making the movie

[01:05:19] feel all the more interesting for it like some movies could be pulled apart because of that

[01:05:22] used to have two people from two different walks of life and the movie just feels like

[01:05:26] it's kind of getting whiplash going back and forth but in this movie it feels fully baked

[01:05:30] into the storytelling and we talked about you know Bridge of Spies with Ian a while back and

[01:05:35] like that is a very American take on that story you know it's very American in the way

[01:05:40] it's presented and I like that the courier kind of walks you know with one foot in each world

[01:05:46] well it also speaks to the duality that's being presented in the film

[01:05:51] yeah there is a American is a British man and a Russian man and they have very different

[01:05:57] sensibilities the way they conduct their life their families but they are also working

[01:06:02] towards the same dream and you also have the um kind of opposing sensibilities of the CIA

[01:06:09] and MI6 in the film and the way they're presented one is like the older male institution

[01:06:15] and then we see the CIA as this younger institution led by in this case like a female agent

[01:06:21] and of course it's uh it's a mirror for how we are behind the scenes exactly like we do

[01:06:26] nothing but fight it's just like we are being pulled apart we are not working in tandem here

[01:06:31] we don't even have videos of each other on whilst we're recording we don't want to see

[01:06:35] our faces that much I smashed my monitor and you'd be right to do so no one wants to see this this

[01:06:41] is why we do a podcast not a video podcast exactly yes yeah uh but anything else you want

[01:06:48] to bring up camp I thought it was really interesting when he talked about

[01:06:53] not talking to anyone in the family related to either of these two characters

[01:06:57] and the reasons why were I just thought that that much more interesting because

[01:07:01] you know Pankowski there's like a stigma that still hangs over him and his daughter it seemingly

[01:07:07] has gone to work for the KGB you know as she's grown up and his wife disavowed basically him in

[01:07:13] his actions in the wake of the scandal and so they were kind of off the table and even said

[01:07:20] that it was very difficult to cast Russian actors because of the like the weight that

[01:07:25] Pankowski's name still carries in Russia and so I thought that was interesting and then also

[01:07:30] about Greville Wynn's life after the events of the movie which was very it wasn't great he did

[01:07:36] not live a particularly happy life and the way that like yeah it was tough to talk to any

[01:07:40] family members on that side because they were kind of disconnected and estranged and things

[01:07:46] didn't go that well for him it's interesting because like it is a very Russian thing like

[01:07:54] it isn't a Western sensibility or point of view I don't think we are beholden to our ancestors

[01:08:02] particularly but that sense of legacy and the sins of the father just carries down has more

[01:08:07] weight to it over there and that's a true thing that I've read in other scenarios and

[01:08:11] it's interesting that it has held up in this family too. And what I think is interesting is

[01:08:16] we talked a lot in the episode in the review about the comparisons between Bridge of Spies

[01:08:21] and this film and when we talked to Matt Charman about co-writing Bridge of Spies

[01:08:27] that was a case where the family of the Tom Hanks character were very involved and very

[01:08:32] enthusiastic and very proud of that story and it's interesting then to contrast it with the

[01:08:37] story of the courier which has I think a lot more you kind of have to walk on eggshells

[01:08:42] around the events of that one. And that is a shame because I think there is a I don't think

[01:08:46] there's a lack of authenticity here I don't think that's an issue or it needs to be

[01:08:50] pointed out with the film but I think it would have added a sense of authenticity an extra sense

[01:08:56] of authenticity to the film if more people had been involved from the real life story.

[01:09:03] True but you can just tell like the events of the courier like the weight it had on the

[01:09:08] participants versus the way that the lead figure in the Bridge of Spies story walked out of

[01:09:16] that with a much more I think positive life-affirming perhaps experience moving forward and

[01:09:21] I think while we know that Pankowski did not have a happy fate after the events and obviously

[01:09:26] Greville Wynn it weighed on him the rest of his life. Yeah I don't think he lived that much

[01:09:31] longer afterwards. Don't think so no. No no a shame but I'm glad that the story is being told

[01:09:39] and I'm glad through talking to Tom that it was told with such eloquence and dedication.

[01:09:44] Definitely and also some good tips just for aspiring writers there when he talked about

[01:09:48] creating composite characters in a movie like this you know when you're telling a true story

[01:09:52] or how to make a side character just pop that extra bit more because you know he was very

[01:09:57] you know just modest about it when he talked about it but like Scott you and I watch

[01:10:02] movies all the time based on true events and how many of them feature cardboard characters just

[01:10:07] spouting exposition you know it's kind of like little touches of effort that make the courier

[01:10:14] pop that much more. Yeah and you know we've been asked this a dozen or so times when we've

[01:10:19] been interviewed for publications or other podcasts and you know they ask what is your

[01:10:24] favorite interview and now I will always default to something like Denise Richards

[01:10:28] or something like that because of the size of the name and how much of an achievement

[01:10:33] it felt to get that person on the show and hear their stories but I have to say and this Tom's

[01:10:40] chat with Tom just there holds true to something I've said before having screenwriters and

[01:10:44] directors on is so important to telling the history of these films and that's why I put

[01:10:50] the feelers out every time when we're doing a film where I know I could probably get someone

[01:10:54] and try and get them on because even if it is a film that isn't as widely known and the

[01:10:58] courier didn't exactly like change motion picture history because it kind of got lost in the shuffle

[01:11:03] with with streaming we talked about that with Tom it's they would have loved to have a wider

[01:11:08] release but COVID prevented that but having these people on allow us to get into these

[01:11:13] films and tell the stories that aren't being told. Yeah and also often like the versions

[01:11:18] we didn't see or how changes were made along the way because we like to talk to people who

[01:11:23] didn't just make movies like the courier that we really appreciate and love but also ones

[01:11:27] that were maybe you know had issues along the way that got overwritten or rewritten and wound up

[01:11:32] kind of being compromised. I remember you know when we talked to David Franzoni about Jumping

[01:11:36] Jack Flash and he talked about how he pitched it more as like a somewhat serious movie like

[01:11:42] it was not intended as a wacky slapstick kind of movie and he talked you know about like

[01:11:46] kind of the vision of what that was going to be and so I always find no matter what the

[01:11:51] final product is I'm always fascinated in the writers because they are there to kind of

[01:11:55] chart the journey and the evolution of what winds up on screen. For sure, for sure but the party

[01:12:01] for the courier doesn't quite end there you've got one more package heading your way folks.

[01:12:06] Cam who do we have joining us later this week? We will be joined by Dominic Cook the director

[01:12:11] of the courier who we actually interviewed for a declassified episode a while back but we're

[01:12:16] going to let that interview back out of the vaults so you can just get some more insight

[01:12:20] into kind of what was going through his mind when he was creating the courier. Yeah so you

[01:12:24] basically given the whole gamut of the courier the only thing he's missing is Benedict Cumberbatch

[01:12:29] but hey we'll keep working on that too. I mean he has so many spy projects that will have

[01:12:34] countless attempts I'm sure. I'm sure one of these days he'll end up on spy

[01:12:38] hearts and I can ask him about penguins in Madagascar. The darkest day of his life.

[01:12:45] So there you go folks your mission should you choose to accept it is to join us

[01:12:49] later this week as we sit down with director extraordinaire Mr. Dominic Cook. I want to thank

[01:12:55] Tom once again for being on the show this week and if you want to hear more from spy hearts

[01:13:01] please find us over on social media at spyhards that's s p y h a r d s on Facebook Twitter and

[01:13:07] Instagram but until next time listeners I'll be writing copious emails to Benedict Cumberbatch's manager.