As a filmmaker with a background in both television and film, I can truly appreciate the unique challenges and rewards that come with each medium. Working on “House of the Dragon” and then transitioning directly to “Presumed Innocent” was an exciting and educational experience.
Warning: The following discussion reveals key details from “The Witness,” episode 7 of the Apple TV+ limited series “Presumed Innocent.” Please proceed with caution if you have not yet watched this episode.
As an admirer, I’d put it this way: Despite not being a lawyer myself, I understand the general wisdom of avoiding the witness stand during a murder trial. However, Rusty Sabich (Jake Gyllenhaal) seemed to have overlooked that particular lesson in legal studies.
As a devoted film enthusiast, I was completely engrossed by the ninth episode of “Presumed Innocent” on Apple TV+. In this thrilling installment, created by the brilliant mind of David E. Kelley, the protagonist Rusty (played by Richard Gere) finds himself in a desperate situation and makes a bold decision to defend himself in court instead of relying on his lawyer Raymond Horgan (Bill Camp). This shocking turn of events unfolds in the blink of an eye, with Horgan collapsing from a heart attack right before the judge’s eyes.
I find myself impulsively leaping to my friend’s defense before the jury, an instinctive reaction that adds complexity to the prosecution’s argument against me being the heartless murderer of Carolyn (Renate Reinsve). Tommy and the District Attorney, Nico Della Guardia (O-T Fagbenle), are concerned we may have lost the jury with my brave actions. However, I’m overconfident enough to carry on representing myself, a risky move that overshadows Raymond’s astute second chair, Mya (Gabby Beans).
As a film enthusiast, I can tell you this: When it’s my turn to testify in court, I need to push aside the chaos I’ve created and collect myself before stepping into that intimidating room. Tommy, my longtime adversary, doesn’t waste any time, launching his attacks as soon as he sets foot in the witness box. But with a cool demeanor and candid responses, I manage to keep him at bay. That is, until he brings up two individuals who have felt the brunt of my temper. Out of context, these allegations leave me reeling and vulnerable, shattering my attempt to present myself as a calm and collected individual.
Rusty’s defense takes a significant hit, leaving Tommy elated – securing his first substantial triumph against his successful ex-colleague who he had always felt overshadowed him. However, Tommy’s joy is short-lived when he finds his home burglarized and a fire poker, the suspected murder weapon, left behind with a message that reads, “Go To Hell.”
Does the poker game indicate that someone is supporting Rusty or merely teasing Tommy? What action will Tommy take to safeguard the crucial evidence in the upcoming court proceedings? These queries will be answered in next week’s finale.
The dust hasn’t fully settled from Rusty and Tommy’s fight in the TV series, with five out of the eight installments being led by Director Greg Yaitanes. He oversaw the scenes leading up to their family showdown as they are related – Sarsgaard married Gyllenhaal’s sister Maggie. Yaitanes previously worked with Bad Robot and J.J Abrams on ‘Castle Rock,’ and recently directed three episodes of HBO’s ‘House of the Dragon,’ including its Season 1 finale.
In my perspective as a movie reviewer, I’d like to share some insights about Yaitanes’ discussion with EbMaster regarding the penultimate episode of the show. He talked about his initial encounter with Jake Gyllenhaal and how he effectively turned their courtroom debate into an engaging spectacle for viewers. Moreover, Yaitanes highlighted the significant contrast between directing “Presumed Innocent” and “House of the Dragon.” In my opinion, this conversation offers valuable insights into the creative process behind bringing these captivating scenes to life.
What do you remember about your first meeting with Jake Gyllenhaal?
In Los Angeles, I went to Jake’s house for a 10 a.m. meeting while he was preparing for “Road House.” They inquired about any dietary preferences of mine, but I simply opted to eat whatever Jake was consuming. Surprisingly, they placed a substantial serving of wagyu steak before me, as Jake was gaining weight for the film. Initially, I believed this was a challenge – a test to see if I could finish a steak with Jake. Consequently, I finished my meal.
As our connection deepened, I was invited to join the team as the director for two episodes. During production, Dusty and David, my esteemed executive producers, and I collaborated on shaping the vision for the show. Meanwhile, Jake developed a strong attachment towards me, expressing his desire for me to remain on board. Sensing his reluctance to bring in a new director, we reached an agreement that allowed me to continue leading five out of the eight episodes. From a film enthusiast’s perspective, it felt exhilarating to be a part of this creative journey and collaborate with such talented individuals.
That’s certainly a vote of confidence. What was about this show that piqued your interest?
To put it simply, I’ve always been passionate about directing ’90s thriller films. This opportunity allowed me to revisit the classic sources that ignited my love for this genre during my formative years. It was an exhilarating prospect to approach these projects with a contemporary perspective and the experience I’ve gained over the years. When I learned the topic of Episode 7, I couldn’t help but think, “This is the one I need to direct.”
Did you look to the 1990 “Presumed Innocent” movie for any type of visual inspiration?
As a passionate cinephile, I’ve immersed myself deeply in that film genre since my days at film school from 1988 to 1992. I’ve been an ardent devotee, almost a priestess to those movies. However, I hadn’t yet had the chance to direct my own film back then. But now, I wanted to breathe new life into this project with a contemporary twist and a raw, firsthand perspective that resonates with our current context.
In this episode, instead of watching Rusty and Tommy exchange blows as they have done throughout the season during their sparring matches, we get to witness a more controlled encounter between them. With Rusty taking the stand as a witness, there’s an audience present that keeps them from engaging in their usual heated exchanges. As a supporter, I found setting the stage for this courtroom showdown an intriguing way to add tension and suspense to their long-standing rivalry.
In this episode, the pace was faster and more dynamic due to the unexpected events unfolding. Raymond’s urgent hospital visit and Rusty’s decision to take charge and speak for himself were particularly thrilling moments for me. I was on the edge of my seat, eagerly anticipating these pivotal scenes. The constant action leading up to the courtroom was exhilarating, only for Rusty to momentarily collect himself before taking center stage.
As a seasoned television producer with years of experience under my belt, I’ve learned that sometimes, holding onto certain scenes and moments can add depth and resonance to a storyline. Such was the case with a particular scene we shot in the bathroom for an earlier episode. Initially intended for when Rusty’s trial was set to begin, there was a certain emotional weight to that moment between him and Tommy that I wanted to preserve.
In the courtroom sequences, the cinematography is quite dynamic. What served as your muse for this, given that you’ve no prior experience in creating courtroom dramas?
In examining cinematic sources for inspiration, I found “JFK” particularly appealing due to Oliver Stone’s masterful 45-minute courtroom sequence featuring Kevin Costner. Courtroom scenes can be quite dull and lengthy, so my goal was to infuse these proceedings with vitality and excitement. I admire the fast-paced editing and sudden cuts out of the courtroom that offer fresh perspectives or clarify what transpired outside its walls.
As a movie buff, I believe it was essential for me to add an element of unpredictability to Rusty’s character. I drew inspiration from films like “Compulsion” directed by Orson Welles and “The Verdict” featuring Paul Newman. In both cases, the audience had to trust the characters fully, without interruption or distraction.
From my experience working as a director on film sets, I’ve come to appreciate the unique talents of actors like Jake. I’ve learned that Jake thrives when he has a clear focus – in his case, a single camera to act towards. His ability to adjust and adapt his performance based on the presence and angle of a camera is truly remarkable.
In reality, Jake and Peter are brother-in-laws due to their familial relationship. Yet, in the narrative, they harbor significant animosity towards each other. How did you effectively convey this conflicting dynamic between their personal past and present hostility?
In the course of their conversations with Jake, Maggie and Peter would occasionally share stories about themselves. Although they didn’t delve deep into any disputes they might have had, there was a sense of security, trust, and love between them that allowed their discussions to be nuanced and profound.
As a passionate film enthusiast, I can’t help but notice that those two actors seemed to share a living space during some or even the entire production. It strikes me that they might have prepared their scenes together in private as well. The thought of them having a secure and intimate environment where they could fully immerse themselves in their craft is truly fascinating to me.
In the filming of “Runaway Jury,” my friend Gary Fleder shared that during the bathroom scene featuring Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman, the entire crew climbed ladders to observe the action from above. Similarly, here on set, there was great anticipation as everyone eagerly awaited witnessing a genuine showdown between two exceptional actors, live in action.
As a seasoned courtroom reporter with decades of experience under my belt, I can tell you that Rusty’s decision to take the stand was a risky move, one that ultimately backfired spectacularly. Tommy secured his first major victory in the case, leaving Rusty red-faced and humiliated. However, what struck me as peculiar was the absence of Raymond during this pivotal moment. I recall vividly how defense attorneys often intervene to save their clients from damaging testimony, but in this instance, we didn’t witness any sign of Raymond attempting damage control. I wonder if that scene was intentionally left out or if it was simply how things transpired behind the scenes. Either way, it remains an intriguing twist in the narrative of this captivating trial.
In a courtroom setting, history shows us that after harm has been inflicted, it becomes difficult to undo the past. Consequently, the most captivating moment is when damage occurs; any attempt to retract actions following this point may not hold the same level of intrigue.
During the performance and in the courtroom, there are scenes showing Rusty and Carolyn’s affair, but it’s unclear which parts are true and which aren’t. As a director, how do you handle a scene that includes significant flashbacks to be added later?
I delight in employing flashbacks as a narrative tool. Some of these were preplanned, while others were spontaneous moments; our agreement on the steak adventure was all about chasing the magical experiences with Jake.
As a seasoned screenwriter with years of experience under my belt, I’ve come to appreciate the power and versatility of flashbacks in storytelling. They provide an opportunity to delve deeper into characters and their past, adding depth and nuance to the narrative.
In Episode 3, one particularly striking scene stood out – Raymond’s terrifying nightmare where his head suddenly bursts. This shocking moment may have been the most surprising and grotesque jump scares among all those seen throughout the year.
As a seasoned filmmaker with a deep appreciation for practical effects and pushing boundaries in cinema, I wholeheartedly believe that incorporating Bill Camp’s prosthetic head in our production of “Scanners” was an essential decision. This wasn’t just a mere prop or a decorative addition; it was a vital element that added to the authenticity and intensity of the scene.
I experienced a moment reminiscent of David E. Kelly’s storytelling in “L.A. Law,” where a character steps onto an invisible elevator, leading to a shocking and absurd outcome. This whimsical yet suspenseful scene leaves one questioning the reality of what they have just witnessed.
After helming the final episode of “House of the Dragon” and immediately moving on to “Presumed Innocent,” which are significantly distinct productions, did any insights gleaned from the former influence your work on the latter in some way?
Initially, it was astonishing to traverse the entire courtroom set in just 10 seconds on “House of the Dragon.” In this production, authenticity reigns supreme. You can actually enter, climb stairs, and turn corners. Reaching various destinations demands genuine exertion. Our team had assistant directors on set, and we often remark that the most valuable lesson from “Game of Thrones” is mastering its unique style. Unlike other television or film projects, this experience is incomparable. Beyond the grandiose world-building and towering concepts, there are numerous thematic connections.
In the initial half of “House of the Dragon” Season 1, I found myself drawn in due to my role as a single father to a girl. I could relate to Paddy Constantine’s character and his bond with his daughter Rhaenyra. This aspect of the story held great appeal for me. Moreover, I was intrigued by the portrayal of a marriage on the brink, as well as a man grappling with crisis during what is often referred to as middle age. These themes resonated deeply with me.
In the finale, “Presumed Innocent” unfolds as a classic mystery series. Audiences work together with each installment to collect clues. Yet, from your vantage point as the helmsman, isn’t it intriguing to add some complexity and ambiguity, leaving viewers pondering uncertainties?
Based on my personal perspective, I thoroughly enjoyed taking the lead in the investigation and shouldering the responsibility of identifying the suspects and focusing our efforts on the right places. The intrigue and excitement that came with uncovering new information and following promising leads was an experience that truly fueled my passion for law enforcement. My dedication and hard work paid off, making each episode a thrilling journey that I wouldn’t trade for anything.
It’s been enjoyable to see the various theories and speculations from my friends and followers on social media regarding the situation at hand. Some ideas are insightful and intriguing, while others were not something I had considered before. As I continued to ponder, I developed my own hypotheses and wanted to share them as well.
I can’t help but feel a sense of anticipation as the camera slowly pans over what seems to be the elusive murder weapon, hidden in plain sight and long discussed among us – the infamous fire poker. Have I peered at it from every angle possible? Have I tried to manipulate the scene in search of new clues? The answer is a resounding yes.
It was one of those things that you come up against, and you don’t know the right way to approach it until you are in it. I had three ideas that it could be, and I wanted to experiment with them. It was always about when we see it. You know, the cat takes us to it, or his eye take us to it. We tried it with and without the note to see which was better. And to go into Tommy’s world and see what his life is like is what is so interesting about that scene. And the tension of whether the person is still in the house.
Additionally, weren’t you required to exercise self-control and avoid disclosing excessive information or dwelling overly on certain moments while delving deeper into your experiences?
We thoroughly examined each step as we progressed, ensuring everything was correct. I’m confident we nailed the ending, and I hope we haven’t given too much away. Our conclusion is deserved.
After seeing the final outcome, you’ll be able to understand the experience in a new light. Our intention was to elicit everyone’s response to what lies ahead.
This interview has been edited and condensed.
Read More
- GEAR PREDICTION. GEAR cryptocurrency
- PBX PREDICTION. PBX cryptocurrency
- EUR INR PREDICTION
- CKB PREDICTION. CKB cryptocurrency
- IMX PREDICTION. IMX cryptocurrency
- Skull and Bones: Gamers’ Frustrations with Ubisoft’s Premium Content Delivery
- ‘Starting 5’: LeBron James, Jayson Tatum and Jimmy Butler Among NBA Players Featured in Obamas-Produced Sports Series
- Michelle Yeoh Will Not Appear in ‘Avatar 3,’ Says James Cameron: ‘She’s in 4 and 5’
- BSW PREDICTION. BSW cryptocurrency
- TANK PREDICTION. TANK cryptocurrency
2024-07-18 02:19