On this “The Weekly Show” podcast with Jon Stewart, his guest is Maziar Bahari, publisher of iranwire.com.  As the show writes, “With the US now directly engaged in the Israel-Iran conflict, Jon is joined by Maziar Bahari, author of Then They Came for Me, a memoir that served as the basis for Jon’s 2014 film Rosewater. Together, they explore the reality of life under Iran's current government, discuss the complex challenges of regime change both in Iran and elsewhere, and consider what ordinary Iranians actually want: peace and the freedom to live their lives.
 
Side Note:  If you haven’t seen Jon Stewart’s aforementioned film, Rosewater, try to track it down somewhere.  It’s very hard to find – not just now, but also the film was inexplicably dumped when it was released – and it’s excellent.  It’s not just a good movie by Jon Stewart, but it’s an excellent movie, period.  And for someone’s first movie, it’s seriously impressively done.  A terrific script (that Stewart wrote), but also maturely and richly directed, by him with several innovative tweaks.  Why it got thrown away has always been beyond me – in fact, during “awards season,” they didn’t even have screenings for it, or send out DVD to guild members.  The movie isn’t remotely a comedy, it’s the gripping true story of what happened to Mr. Bahari after he’d been interviewed for a segment on The Daily Show, back when Jon Stewart was hosting, and Iranian secret police thought that this had made him a spy.  (In a small role, his character’s wife is played by Claire Foy, who later came to fame as the young Queen Elizabeth in the first seasons of The Crown.)  As a bonus, I've posted the trailer below.

Back to “The Weekly Show”, here is the show’s "breakdown" of when specific topics are covered during the conversation, so you can jump to the sections that most interest you.  Those time codes are hyperlinked to the video on YouTube and will jump you automatically to the right spot.  But for those who watch it here, this is the schedule.
 
0:00 - Introduction
5:41 - Maziar Bahari
9:51 - Difficulties of maintaining contact with sources in Iran
14:45 - Ad break MINT MOBILE
16:25 - Story about 2012 Ehud Barak assassination attempt
18:02 - The difficulty of getting information into Iran
25:02 - What kinds of leaders are Iranian people supporting?
32:51 - Mistake of Mosaddegh & former Iranian politicians
41:08 - Ad break INDEED
42:56 - Talk of nuclear programs, what is defining foundation holding a nation together?
53:27 - What do other countries think about conflict?
59:16 - What is the regime’s support level?
1:03:25 - Ignorance, incompetence, and evil
1:08:02 - Nature of the people versus nature of the leadership
1:19:59 - Breaking Down the Discussion

BONUS:  

Here is the trailer for Rosewater.  ​It's done well -- but the movie is even significantly  better.

On this week’s episode of 3rd & Fairfax, the official podcast of the Writers Guild of America, the guests are J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay who developed Amazon’s epic fantasy series, The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, which is set in in the Second Age of Middle Earth, thousands of years before J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

Although I cancelled my many-decades subscription to the Los Angeles Times after one too-many unacceptable abuses by its current owner, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, I'm still on their mailing list.  And today, I received the following email that told an absolutely fascinating story.  (I've left in the hyperlinks for those who might still have a subscription.)  It read -- 

"Mostly forgotten today, Mary Pickford was once the world’s most famous actress, and perhaps its most famous woman. But by the time The Los Angeles Times sent a plucky young intern to ring the doorbell at Pickford’s Beverly Hills home in 1974, the silent movie star and co-founder of United Artists was 80 years old and had been living in a self-imposed seclusion for more than a decade. 

"The resulting encounter — recounted with poise and humor by the intern, Joan Zyda, who was just 21 at the time — is a ghostly, charming classic. The setting is the Xanadu-like mansion, Pickfair, where Pickford and her first husband, Douglas Fairbanks Sr., reigned over lavish dinner parties with celebrities of the day, including U.S. presidents, Charlie Chaplin, Albert Einstein, Helen Keller, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Amelia Earhart. 

"On that day in 1974, however, Pickford could not be coaxed downstairs from her bedroom to meet with Zyda, forcing her doting, gracious third husband Buddy Rogers to instead give the reporter an old-fashioned rotary dial phone on which she could interview Pickford from a downstairs sitting room. 

"Pickford — unseen by Zyda throughout the entire meeting — nonetheless proves a surprisingly sparkling, if enigmatic, interviewee, offering her views on cinema; her pioneering career as a Hollywood businesswoman who retained an unusual degree of control over her career; of the current crop of male stars (“none since Gable” impressed her, she said); and even of Watergate. 

"Two years after the piece was published, Pickford did appear again in public, when she consented to be filmed at her home for a pre-recorded acceptance of an honorary Oscar, a bookend to go with her first Oscar, awarded in 1929. She died in 1979. 

"This classic story is being republished as part of 'L.A. Timeless,' a selection of great reads from the Los Angeles Times’ 143-year archive."

In hopes that perhaps some articles they send emails about would be available to the non-subscribing public, I checked out the link.  But unfortunately, no, it was blocked and for subscribers only.  I was able, however, to get the very opening -- which, brief though it was, was movingly touching on its own.

                                                 By JOAN ZYDA
                                               Times Staff Writer 
                                                 March 3, 1974

​“Just let me go tell her you’re here.”

Former Matinee idol Buddy Rogers bounded by the winding staircase to the third floor of his Beverly Hills mansion and called to his wife of 37 years: “Mary, darling. You have a visitor, pet.”

There were murmurs upstairs. Then Rogers walked slowly down the white steps to his visitor beneath the portrait of Mary Pickford in the spacious living room.

He shrugged and shook his head. “Mrs. Rogers would like to see you, darling, but she’s in the shower, dear.”

The good news is that the video referenced in the email -- of when the Motion Picture Academy presented Mary Pickford with an honorary Oscar in 1976, for which she agreed to appear in public in a pre-recorded film for that year's Oscar ceremony -- is available online.  And what a lovely, moving tribute it is.  Lovingly done and presented for the broadcast -- down to the last moment of the clip, cutting back to the audience.  Honoring not just a Hollywood legend of massive work onscreen, but also a businesswoman who helped change the movie industry as a partner in the creation of United Artists studio.  And as the camera winds its way through her renowned estate of Pickfair, it honors, as well, a bygone era of Hollywood. 

In some ways, as the video progresses, it's hard not to think of Billy Wilder's classic movie, Sunset Boulevard.  But not for its dark cynicism, rather for the sweetness that age of movies brought to the country and world.  Though clearly frail, her words and appearance give grace to it all.  

A few years ago, a friend from back in Glencoe, Mike Katz, wrote and produced a dark comedy, Remembering Phil.  And happily, it was just added to the free, movie website Tubi.

The film is about a guy who thinks he is losing his identity.  As it's described on Tubi, "When Phil returns from vacation, no one remembers him. Debbie, a woman claiming to be his daughter, is the only person who sees him."

The cast includes Nicholas Turturro (two-time Emmy-nominated for NYPD Blue), Steve Valentine (Crossing Jordan) and Dan Castellaneta (The Simpsons).  And I'll add that it was directed by a friend I played in a weekly WGA softball game with, Brian J. Smith --  though, in fairness, he does have many other credentials beyond playing softball...

Movies that are part of the Tubi service can either be watched for free online, or streamed with the Tubi app.  You can find Remembering Phil online here.

And this is the trailer --

Although for years the celebration moved around the calendar a bit more than in the past and was therefore somewhat difficult to track down (no pun intended), today -- we are full of joy to announce -- once again is that most grand fest, National Train Day.  At least it is here at Elisberg Industries, and that's good enough as a starting point.  You won't find it on any calendars for any number of reasons, but the most important is that since Amtrak funding got cut back they stopped promoting it after 2016.

(And the reason for it moving around the calendar is that it was never a set day, but the Saturday closest to May 10.  Why May 10, I hear you cry?  Because that's the anniversary of the Golden Spike being driven in at Promontory Point, Utah, to complete the building of the Transcontinental Railroad.)

But whether or not it remains an officially promoted holiday by the government -- and isn't being celebrated here on a proper Saturday due to prior commitments, think of it as the train running behind schedule -- National Train Day (or as it used to be known around these parts once upon a time as "Let's Make Chris Dunn's Head Explode Day," but no more since he now, at long last, acknowledges Bridge on the River Kwai as a train movie) is nonetheless still one of the most joyous holidays of the year. ​

​For our part here, we celebrate National Train Day on these pages by posting a list of the greatest train movies.  These are films in which trains are absolutely central to the story.  Where a train is the driving force of the tale, without which you can’t properly describe the plot.

(Think of it like the classic and beloved Santa Claus song, "Santa Claus is Coming to Town."  Santa Claus doesn't actually appear in the song at all.  He hasn't even shown up yet.  In most ways, it's about "you" and what you should do -- or better not do.  But even though there's not a hint of Santa Claus even appearing in the song, without Santa Claus...there's no song.)

We're strict about this.  A friend once recommended The Taking of Pelham-1-2-3, and it was strongly considered, but that was a subway train or light rail.  This list is for full-bore trains, the kind that either have sleeping cars and dining cars, or could if they were hitched on.  But I've added it to our Honorable Mentions category.  And strict, too, is that the list is for feature films only.  Yes, I could have included TV movies and series, but I don't.  It's just where I chose to draw the line.  But that's why I created the Special Mentions category.

Since the list is fluid, we keep adding to it. And so we have an addition this year.  It's Terror on a Train from 1953, with Glenn Ford as an army bomb disposal expert.  No, it's not close to being one of the all-time greats, but it's fun.

As I noted, there are two other categories added a few years back:  Honorable Mention is for movies which you can generally tell their stories without using the word "train," but they have some connection to trains -- usually a great, standout train sequence, supportive to the story, but not essential in telling the plot -- that makes them memorable.  And later, I added a category of Special Mention, for works that don't qualify as a train movie or perhaps even as a movie at all, but deserve a place of honor. 

This year, I've included two new Honorable Mentions -- The first is Some Like It Hot.  It's not remotely a train movie, but has one of the more famous train scenes in a movie comedy.  And second, we have Berlin Express, made in 1948, a story of post-World War II German subversives. Though the title suggests this is a pure train movie, most of it takes place off the train in the city.

And as I noted in the past, though something I think is likely very obvious, I love train movies.  Here is the current list of Great Train Movies.

3:10 to Yuma
Around the World in 80 Days
Back to the Future 3
Bridge on the River Kwai
Bullet Train
The Commuter
The Darjeeling Limited
Emperor of the North
The 5:17 to Paris
The General
The Girl on the Train
The Great Locomotive Chase
The Great Train Robbery
The Lady Vanishes
Murder in the Private Car
Murder on the Orient Express (1974)
The Narrow Margin
North by Northwest
Northwest Frontier
Night Train to Munich
Polar Express
Runaway Train
Shanghai Express
Silver Streak
Snowpiercer
Source Code
Strangers on a Train
Terror on a Train
Tough Guys
The Train
Transsiberian
Twentieth Century
Union Pacific
Union Station
Unstoppable
Von Ryan’s Express
 
Honorable Mention
At the Circus
Berlin Express 
Cat Ballou
Go West
The Greatest Show on Earth
Murder on the Orient Express (2017 remake)
Planes, Trains and Automobiles
Some Like It Hot
Throw Momma from the Train 
Trading Places

 
Special Mention
The Railrodder (short)
The Taking of Pelham-1-2-3 (light-rail subway trains)
Murder on the Orient Express (TV version, from the series Poirot)
Great Railway Journeys of the World (TV documentary)
Nothing Like It in the World by Stephen Ambrose (book) 
Empire Express: Building the First Transcontinental Railroad by David Haward Bain (book) 

I've also added another new feature in recent years -- a scene from one of the Great Train Movies, or another entry on the list.  And this year we have a critical scene from the wonderful movie The Lady Vanishes, directed by Alfred Hitchcock.  The scene features Margaret Lockwood, with a brief appearance by the joyous and (as you'll note) deeply important to the plot, Dame May Witty as 'Miss Froy.'
​

On Sunday, Trump sent out of his long, manic social media postings about saving Hollywood by imposing tariffs on “any and all” productions that are filmed overseas and shown in the U.S.
 
This is ludicrous.
 
I've worked in the film/TV industry for decades. Not only do I have no idea how this would work (or what it would even accomplish), I doubt that Trump does either. Besides which, the movie industry is not only the top export from the United States, but it has a massive $15 billion surplus!!  Let me repeat that:  The U.S. does not have a trade imbalance with movies.  They have a $15 billion surplus.  This is not what is generally considered a problem.  At least in a rational world.
 
Yes, what is known as "Runaway productions" are a problem, but this is completely counter-productive to that. "Runaway productions" are usually those that don’t film in Los Angeles, but rather shoot in other U.S. states like North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Illinois and NY where they get local tax breaks -- not overseas, other than Canada for some TV series -- so the very point of this whole "tariff" idiocy, saving the movie industry, is for the most part, 100% utterly meaningless.

The concept is bizarre and confusing and ill-thought out on so many levels.

Furthermore, it's completely unclear if Trump’s statement means that he wants to put a tariff just on U.S. movies that film outside the country, or also on foreign movies that are brought into the U.S.  It sounds like it does, since he talks about "any and all" movies made outside the U.S.  Which, if that was the case, would be even more ludicrous.  Those films, made by foreign countries themselves,  of course have absolutely zero to do with runaway productions and the production cost of movies, nor ticket prices.  And they have no impact on taking work away from Americans.  None.  Zero.

Moreover, how do you even put tariffs on making movies outside of the U.S.?   And again, what would it even accomplish?  It might possibly (might) offset foreign tax incentives enough on some films (some) to keep some U.S. productions from leaving the U.S.  (Keeping in mind that, as with all tariffs, a tariff is by the distributor on the U.S. side – which in the case of movies is often the studio that made the film.)  But a foreign country can just lower its own taxes and give other incentives to keep costs for the production low, in order to get all the financial benefits of having a film shooting there.  And also, unlike a hardware product, there’s no way for the “manufacturer” of a movie to reclaim the tariff by raising prices.  It’s not like a tariff would get theater chains to raise their ticket prices, since they’re not the ones paying the tariff.  (Could a studio try to get more from theaters if their costs rise?  It’s possible, but that’s not only how studios have operated with high budget films – but theater chains would likely balk at paying more, since they’d have to raise their ticket prices, at a time with theatergoing is facing challenges.)  But also, if a movie’s story takes place outside the U.S., which is usually the reason for filming many, if not most movies out of the country, it won’t stop anyone from going overseas.

But even more – and “but even more” is a recurring theme with this idiotic idea -- this doesn't take into consideration how so many U.S. movies in general, let alone U.S. movies shot overseas, and especially foreign-national productions (again, if this even is supposed to pertain to them) aren’t even “brought into” the country anymore to show in theaters, but stream online.  And they could stream from anywhere.
 
So, would these suggested tariffs apply to movies that stream, or only those that are shown in theaters?  And on what would the tariffs be based?  Production costs, box office revenue, profits -- and what about delayed royalties, which are foundational to film productions costs?

This "idea" is insane and unworkable.  And actually harmful to the U.S. film industry.
 
But “insane” is a good place to start – and end.
 
In fact, how insane is the idea?  Only one day after Trump made his manic posting, the White House released a statement that what Trump wrote was only a general idea and that nothing specific had been worked out.
 
Gee, no kidding.  Just what you want from a president.  General, insane rants that haven’t been worked out.  And, hopefully, may never be.

Contrast this with a proposal made yesterday by California Governor Gavin Newsom.  He brought up a $7.5 billion federal tax incentive to movie companies.  Adam Schiff is working on a similar idea in Congress.  Whether such measures ever become law, both are rational and sane, and would help accomplish precisely the point of creating incentives to keep movie productions from going overseas.

The one thing they're not -- is insane.
​