Vince Staples Won’t Explain His Netflix Show

by

Vince Staples often comes across as quiet and unassuming, but he’s actually a very clever and complex artist. For over a decade and a half, his music has been both thoughtful and mysterious, showcasing ambition and vulnerability, even though he often seems detached when talking about it. His new Netflix comedy series, The Vince Staples Show, perfectly captures this duality – he’s both a highly creative person and someone who observes life with a sense of distance. The show explores the complexities of fame, particularly for Black artists, while simultaneously suggesting that fame isn’t truly important. In a recent interview on the Good One podcast, Staples explained his seemingly contradictory views, stating that people don’t talk enough about how fame isn’t a genuine reality.

The second season of The Vince Staples Show, which recently premiered, uses the story of O.J. Simpson – reimagined as a character named James Brown, but clearly inspired by both O.J. and Jim Brown, and also a completely made-up person – to explore complex ideas. Staples himself is hard to categorize when it comes to his artistic influences. He’ll mention admired filmmakers like Roy Andersson, then quickly admit he still loves Back to the Future III. His comedy often feels like a playful challenge, leaving you wondering if he’s being serious or not – and sometimes, he isn’t, and sometimes he is.

I’m a huge fan of this show, and I’m really curious about where its creators get their inspiration. As a kid, we didn’t have cable, so I used to watch The Simpsons, King of the Hill, and Seinfeld – I’d even time my bedtime to catch them! Seinfeld didn’t really click with me back then, I was too young to get it. But I think I’ve seen almost every episode of The Simpsons. I still watch new episodes occasionally, but nothing compares to how much I watched it when I was growing up. Seriously, I watched it every night for years, so picking a favorite episode is impossible!

One of the things people notice most about your show is the exaggerated, cartoonish personalities of all the characters, even those who only appear briefly. What inspired that approach?

It’s similar to how things change between the first and second seasons of a show, but honestly, it comes from my inexperience with filmmaking and television. I naturally gravitated towards treating every character as equally important – there aren’t really any ‘main’ characters. I see Vince more as a way to view the story, and everyone else are the characters. I mostly just observe what’s happening.

I picture the lawyer reading the will in episode three as being under the influence of drugs – visibly agitated and hallucinating throughout the scene. That’s my overall take on it. While humor naturally arises, it’s not the core of the story. Everything you see from me is heavily edited – usually from around thirty different sets of notes – to make it concise and easy to follow. My directors and crew always film a lot of material, and I often don’t explain my vision, letting them interpret things their own way. I believe this freedom fosters creativity.

The show usually features self-contained episodes, but this season had a more continuous storyline than the previous one. I don’t really believe in the idea of ‘serialized’ TV; it just felt like they filmed for a longer period. Personally, I dislike shows that rely heavily on a continuing plot. What I loved about growing up with shows like The Simpsons, South Park, and Family Guy was the freedom of terrestrial television – not knowing exactly when episodes aired. I didn’t even realize Mr. Rogers wasn’t live when I was a kid, and I don’t think most kids do. That’s what makes those types of shows so strong – you can jump into any episode and still enjoy it.

I’ve noticed you often mention Roy Andersson as someone who inspires your work. I hadn’t seen his films before, so I watched a few in preparation for this interview, and it’s amazing how much your show resembles his work, even though they seem very different at first. I’d like to play a clip from his 2000 film, Songs From the Second Floor, that really struck me as being similar to your style. That really resonates with me. Sometimes when you’re developing ideas, it’s hard to put them into words – you just have to experience them visually, don’t you?

I mention his name frequently. I’m not sure if anyone on the team checked earlier footage, aside from the directors, of course. What’s notable about the way this scene is filmed is that the camera’s perspective and composition create a sense of closeness and tension, even though it’s shot outdoors. And the wide shot doesn’t distract from what’s happening in the story.

As a film lover, one thing that always bothers me about a lot of TV is how much it feels the need to explain everything. They’ll show a scene – say, someone pushing a car – and immediately ask ‘Why are they doing that? Why aren’t we cutting away? What’s the motivation?’ But to me, people just do things. Life is messy and often makes no sense. We see arguments, people struggling with tasks, all the time, and we usually just tune it out because, honestly, life is kind of absurd. When you film something like that without explanation, it forces you to really see what’s happening, to understand the relationships and energy in the moment. It’s almost uncomfortable, because we’re so used to being distracted and not really paying attention to the world around us.

During the second season, we built on many of the concepts we’d already developed. Naturally, there were some disagreements – for example, someone might ask if we could skip showing the house. But we felt it was important to actually show the house when we were discussing it.

What struck me most about this scene, and reminded me of The Vince Staples Show, is how it portrays contrasting viewpoints. One person is experiencing a terrible day, while everyone around them continues with their normal routines. It really highlights how everyone can have a valid, yet different, perspective – there’s rarely a single ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer.

I recall a producer telling me they wanted the audience to really like my character, Vince. I honestly questioned why that was so important to the story. It just didn’t feel realistic to me. I’m not sure I’m a naturally likable person, and I often struggle to understand why certain things are considered essential, especially when we’re trying to be creative. So, I focus on including diverse perspectives and viewpoints. Thankfully, we’ve been able to push boundaries, and I appreciate that freedom.

Andersson’s upbringing in post-World War II Sweden, a country that remained neutral, likely shaped his detached outlook on life – not necessarily cynical, but simply accepting things as they are. He shares this perspective and wonders about its origins for himself. He believes our environment greatly influences how we see art and life, acknowledging that we have limited control over what happens. Some label him a nihilist, but he sees himself as realistic. Interestingly, his work is often quite vibrant. He notes we tend to prefer familiarity, and that art which deliberately subverts expectations – using darkness or brightness in unexpected ways – can be unsettling, but that’s often where the most compelling work emerges.

Another big inspiration for this season comes from the Coen brothers. You can see elements of their films like Fargo, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, The Big Lebowski, and especially A Serious Man.

How does this approach actually work in my performances? It’s about letting the setting itself create the funny moments. A lot of comedy focuses on direct action, and I understand that. I admire performers like Lucille Ball and those known for physical humor, but I don’t have that kind of skill. I relate more to Bernie Mac’s style – he wasn’t overly physical. His show often featured him delivering a monologue while seated, but it was filmed in a really creative way, almost like a European art film, with moving cameras and interesting shots. Many talented comedians have taken chances, and I wanted to try something similar. I felt comfortable with this approach because I’m not naturally very expressive.

The other Coen parallel is that The Vince Staples Show appears to be highly allegorical.
Absolutely.

People often say your music feels very realistic. Why do you choose to express yourself through more imaginative and symbolic imagery?

I think that realism is just a natural part of hip-hop. It’s a strange genre, honestly. I get why people expect authenticity, especially compared to film or TV, where creativity is encouraged. In hip-hop, though, you can be completely truthful, but if you don’t fit the expected image of a hip-hop artist, you’re labeled as different or ‘alternative.’

When creating films, you have flexibility within established genres, as those genres provide a solid framework. Music, on the other hand, relies heavily on production, visual presentation, and lyrical content to define its style. Comedy offers even more creative options – you can vary the writing, the way it’s filmed, and explore subgenres like romantic comedies, dramas with comedic elements, or dark humor. It simply provides a wider range of possibilities. Plus, comedy is a visual medium, offering another layer of engagement beyond just listening, unlike music – unless you’re watching a music video, which is generally for entertainment rather than deep thought.

That episode title card, “Being John Malkovich,” makes me think about how people see famous individuals versus the reality of their lives. Could you talk about what that meant to you? I’ve always found playing with how things are perceived to be the most enjoyable aspect, and I intentionally leave things open to interpretation, but it sounds like you’ve picked up on some interesting ideas…

Like the Coen brothers, I prefer not to reveal too much in interviews. It’s just not enjoyable. But I think people don’t talk enough about how strange celebrity actually is – it’s not really real. I’ve seen very famous people doing everyday things, like shopping at Sprouts. Playing with that public image can be useful when you’re creating something surreal. Because people don’t fully understand fame, you can attribute a lot of odd behavior to it. They might say, ‘Vince got away with something because he’s famous.’ It allows you to explore what kinds of assumptions people will make about a character’s flaws or mistakes, simply because of who they are. Often, the characters in the show blame everything on Vince’s success, even when it’s completely irrelevant. The point is, it’s not meant to be logical.

It feels like fame is more symbolic than real, especially given how much this season focuses on it, yet you don’t seem to care about being well-known. Early on, the studio insisted your character needed to be a musician, which seemed pointless to me. I don’t consider myself famous, and it’s strange that it matters more to people who are close to me. You see it within families – they justify their own limitations by pointing to your success, or they take credit for it as if your achievements reflect on them. Ultimately, fame seems to mean more to the people around you than it does to you, whether they use it as an excuse or a way to get ahead.

Without giving too much away, this season features the death of your uncle, James Brown. It initially seems like they’re referring to the famous football player Jim Brown, but it quickly becomes clear they mean O.J. Simpson. You were just a baby during the infamous car chase involving O.J. What does O.J. symbolize to you?

O.J. Simpson is a fascinating figure because, as I’ve said before, fame often impacts those around a person more than the person themselves. For many in the Black community in Los Angeles, the O.J. case felt like a form of justice, but that wasn’t the case’s significance for your character, Vince. Within the story, O.J. represents guilt for Vince, who sees parallels between O.J.’s situation and his own personal struggles. So, Vince’s connection to Uncle James is unique and separate from how other family members might perceive O.J. It’s an interesting dynamic to explore in the show.

O.J. Simpson, as a person, was genuinely funny. The way people saw him was very personal and tied to the culture at the time. While many later realized how problematic he was, initially we, like with any celebrity, used him as a source of comfort and inspiration. People connect with celebrities for various reasons – enjoying their work, feeling inspired by their success, or seeing a way to escape their own lives. Simpson embodied that kind of celebrity connection. You’re the first one to bring up the comparison to Jim Brown, though.

I was actually about to ask about Jim Brown, as he and O.J. Simpson handled fame in similar ways. What are your thoughts on him? Jim Brown is a fascinating figure. Growing up in Los Angeles, I saw how much he contributed to the community, especially through his political work with gang intervention and other important causes. However, his later actions are noteworthy. It’s really interesting to observe how public perception of someone can shift over time, how they use their celebrity, and what motivates their choices.

Michael Jackson appears throughout the season as a recurring motif. He serves a similar purpose to Judy Garland – they represent the same ideas, and share a visual resemblance, especially after some cosmetic changes. We actually had to remove some scenes involving Michael Jackson. We created a scary sequence featuring him, but it didn’t quite work as intended, so we reimagined him as the monster from The Babadook.

Vince’s mother often thinks about Michael Jackson and his complicated relationship with his own family, particularly his early performances with Motown, as a way to understand how Vince should handle difficult situations. She feels Vince needs to assert himself, and she uses Jackson’s experience as an example. I see parallels between that dynamic and how Vince is processing his uncle’s death and his family relationships. There are other, more personal issues at play, but I won’t go into detail – though you’re on the right track with your understanding.

I saw your tweet from earlier this year where you joked that the Criterion Collection wouldn’t let you access their archive because you’d “break the matrix.” Well, we’re going tomorrow, I think!

Are you ready to reveal the matrix?It’ll be fun.

What’s the deal with The Matrix? I really dislike how people assume a foreign film is profound simply because it has subtitles.

The video we just saw wasn’t relevant to the discussion. It wasn’t even Back to the Future. If I had to choose between that film and A Pigeon Sat on a Branch Reflecting on Existence, I’d definitely pick Back to the Future III. That’s just my preference.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=watch?v=guCeplp5-g4

Read More

2025-11-13 23:04