♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: ian bremmer is here, the president and founder of a political risk consulting firm, eurasia group. the company published its annual risk report today, outlining the main geopolitical developments to watch in the coming year. this year includes the transatlantic alliance, an increasingly closed europe, china's global footprint, as well as isis. saudi arabia is another country on the list. the country's prime minister announced that trade and diplomatic links to iran would be cut.

that comes in response to the saudi attacks and terror on -- tehran. tensions between the two countries inflamed after saudi arabia executed a shia muslim cleric with 46 others. i pleased to have ian bremmer back at this table. what are you looking for when you talk about the top risk of 2016? ian: number one, we keep these up on our homepage for the entire year, so i can't just be hitting the headlines this week and making news, it has to actually stick. we have over 130 people, and everyone at the beginning is asked to come up with their best and biggest and most insightful, and even some crazy ideas, and then i chop some of them away and i have things going on in my head. by the end of the year, we have narrowed it down, done enough writing, and this is what comes out. it's not that we have a crystal ball, we don't, i think that you

put enough smart people on issues, and you can see the politics of what isn't feasible. it is so much easier to get rid of things that won't happen or are implausible than it is to make protections. -- predictions. so we aren't calling who the next president is going to be. we don't feel like with a strong call on that. charlie: but what you do know is? ian bremmer: what we do know is most importantly, i've run this for 18 years now. i've never seen a a geopolitical environment that has concerned me this much. much more instability. what concerns me is that we have six failed states across the broad middle east. we have a record level of refugees globally, we have the most powerful terrorist organization, and the global context of that will make sure that all of those things get worse over the course of 2016. that worries me. what worries me is to go back to risk a number one, that the single most important alliance in the world for the past 70

years, the transatlantic relationship, when the document security or human values, is that it is that its weakest point -- it is at its weakest point. since the marshall plan. charlie: define what weakest means. ian bremmer: it means that the united states, in the middle of a polarizing election, is talking about foreign policy and national security in terms of terrorism, muslims, building a wall with mexico, but absolutely not in terms of a relationship with europe. charlie: is that because most of the dialogue is about and from trump? ian bremmer: i think it doesn't help. i think outsiders are playing as much of a political role as they have in europe for the last few years. while i don't think the u.s. election is it -- a risk domestically, i don't think it will impact investment or any of that, but i do think the impact of 2016 will matter internationally. when you think about america's european allies, britain,

france, and germany, and how they look at what their priorities are, britain is looking for cash. they want investments into britain. they see that the americans are useful for that going forward -- not that useful going forward, but china is writing the checks, so britain wants to be the best friend of china. i see the french saying they are concerned about security in their region, the united states is not looking like much of a leader there. russia is suddenly playing a big role in syria, we want to hedge with the russians. the germans, they say they are going to take one million refugees a year, but the united states is not going to do anything. but the turks have 2 million refugees, we need to keep them there and make a deal with them. i see the europeans out of insecurity, fear, and proximate concerns saying that there are

other things that matter a lot more to us right now. charlie: you signal out the transatlantic alliance, what was to me a failure of leadership about america. ian bremmer: i think the europeans being weak does matter here, but there is no question -- charlie: but they are, and you -- and they are looking for something from america. that is a failure of leadership. it is an indictment of the -- president obama's leadership, the end of the transatlantic alliance. ian bremmer: if you had to put the blame on the end of the trans atlantic alliance, for the hollowness -- it is not over. it is a shell of what it used to be. if you ask why that is, certainly the united states deserves the lions share of the blame. but if there is one thing we have been able to count on from europe, it is german leadership, and merkel. in 2016, merkel is a lot weaker.

time magazine just named merkel the 2015 person of the year. i was in favor of the time process. one reason i thought we should do that is because it is her last chance. charlie: what do you think the threat of refugees is to stability? ian bremmer: in europe are more broadly -- or more broadly? charlie: let's start with europe. ian bremmer: just today, the swedes pulling up border controls, denmark saying we have to do that ourselves as well. the agreement breaking down. the growth of populism. the national front with 27% of the popular vote, and historic high in france. charlie: they do not do as well as about there were going to do. ian bremmer: they did not do as

well in terms of how many seats they secured, which is zero, but that's because the mainstream parties -- how many seats they secured, which is zero. charlie: but it was seen as a loss. ian bremmer: because they didn't get seats, yes. if you ask me, do you think the national front is doing better than ever in france, the answer is unequivocally yes. and i think if you look at germany, the alternatives for the german party which has no leadership at this point, the election -- charlie: so this is the rise of that kind of populism. ian bremmer: this is the rise of that kind of populism, and it is the fact that merkel's ability to cohere at the end of the day, leadership of europe is staunchly undermined by what is such an unpopular position. when you look at the german industrialists, they are supporting merkel. we need these people, this is stimulus for the german economy, and meanwhile our population is shrinking, we need an extra million people. there was no question -- charlie: what they do is they provide buying power.

ian bremmer: that's right. every $14,000 a year the germans are throwing at these refugees is going directly into the economy. they are spending all of it. it's not like they are saving it. but you are right, the issue of are you willing to integrate syrian refugees -- not only are they muslim, but these are not the most educated. it is not like turkish workers coming over. and of course, there is enormous psychological damage that comes after your country has been destroyed. a lot of families are ripped apart. and a proximate security concern because of terrorist threats in -- and the what is happening in of the and munich, two train stations close down because approximate terrorist threats. that they had not been dealing with. charlie: what about the leadership in europe? people like vladimir putin, and the shankill. ian bremmer: well, i think one

of the things that is interesting, you and i have spoken about putin quite a bit over the years. these are not shy men. they don't lack for ego. they also are not constrained. charlie: but they also believe they have a larger mandate. ian bremmer: and they believe they are being treated badly internationally. i would add to that list something i am sure we will get to shortly, the saudi deputy crown prince. you put those guys together, you have leaders that -- you put those guys together, you have leaders that are strong at home. they are fairly unpredictable and in an environment that is getting more challenging. charlie: unpredictable because he is young and unexperienced, or because his views are such? ian bremmer: because he is young and inexperienced, but his country is in a whole world of hurt right now.

he is able to act in relative impunity. the media is not going to criticize them. charlie: but what about the crown prince? ian bremmer: the crown prince is increasingly getting edged out. you see that in policies. whether it is the creation of -- charlie: father and son running the country. ian bremmer: it seems to be, and the father moving the country -- moving the son along as fast as possible. charlie: take me to this thing that recently happened in terms of the execution of 47 people, including a shia cleric. ian bremmer: we were ok with 46. 47 just knocked us over. charlie: why would they do that? ian bremmer: why would they also roundup hundreds? we didn't complain when they were put in jail and said they were isis connected. it's not like they have due process in saudi arabia. we have been saying the need to do more about that.

they are doing a lot. it is kind of like -- let me make an analogy -- it's kind of like when you are in china and they do their anticorruption, anti-monopoly, but before they go after the chinese companies, they round up other companies and builder of national credibility. the saudi's are going to go after 36 sunnis who they say are connected to al qaeda and isis and are living there. why didn't they pick them up five years ago? suddenly, they found all of them? create some ballots of support -- charlie: it's because of actions that took place 10 years ago. ian bremmer: that's right. it's not because they did not know any of this, but they are under international pressure. international pressure from a geopolitical environment that has turned against them as badly as it could. charlie: so they gain credibility, relieved the pressure by executing 47 people? i don't understand that. how does that eliminate pressure against them? ian bremmer: isis has become an

issue, perhaps the top priority for you and the united states in the middle east is containing isis to some degree. and the saudi's helped birth this movement. so the saudis are saying, look, we see this organization has grown, we see them in yemen, iraq, and syria, and even at home, and we are not just going to sit by, we are going to go after these guys. if you are going to go after sunni extremists and you are the saudi kingdom, you have to show that it is wacky shia too. by the way, this guy wants to tear apart our country. this guy -- what he was doing, he was absolutely calling for

independence of the eastern peninsula in eastern arabia, where there are over 2 million shia and saudi citizens. that is as close to signing the death warrant as you can get in saudi arabia, not something that we would support. and we did criticize the saudi's. charlie: but you are saying they killed him mainly because the rest were sunnis, and therefore they had to have a shia that they would kill? ian bremmer: i am actually saying that is a bit part of it. i am saying that you see this all the time. if you don't want to be figure to only be pointed at you, and they see that wahhabism -- charlie: and did they assess the risk? ian bremmer: of course. charlie: and they probably talked about it for a while. ian bremmer: especially because right now, you know that you are going to cheese the americans off because we are trying to implement this iranian nuclear deal. which they hate, and they hate

so much more than the israelis are the republicans. for the saudi's, this is real. this really threatens them. charlie: their top enemy is iran. ian bremmer: and oil. it's both. iranian section and the proxy wars. -- production and the proxy wars. i have had at least five clients call me up and asked me today, did i believe that the saudis were doing this simply as a way to get the iranians off their case. in other words, did they believe this was going to go away once they killed this guy. there was no way that was going to happen. charlie: what did they believe? the understood they were going to escalate, but saudis have huge problems at home. charlie: so you're saying the saudi's did this intentionally because they want to escalate the tension in iran. even though you have yemen, and

these are the places were there is tension. ian bremmer: i am saying that the saudis are in a horrible box. their operations are increasingly horrible. this is a country that has taken unprecedented levels of austerity in their economy. in just the last few weeks. charlie: they have to pump oil because they have to pay their bills. what else do they have? look at the bills. ian bremmer: what makes saudi arabia a legitimate kingdom? what allows these 15,000 princes to run this country? it is the cash. charlie: the iranians did not want to see their people in the streets attacking the saudi embassy. ian bremmer: if you ask me who is being more responsible here, believe it or not the iranians actually are. that's not popular. if you are saudi arabia right now, and you don't know that you have the cash to keep your people happy, you might not even have the cash to keep the princes altogether in a line,

then you had better provide something. charlie: some intelligence officials say to me, this is all about the royal family. believing -- it is about their lack of respect for the president. ian bremmer: the american president? charlie: yeah. ian bremmer: it is certainly true that the u.s.-saudi relationship has deteriorated dramatically. there are many reasons. american energy product -- american energy production, the fact that we have screwed up in iraq and afghanistan. there are many reasons. charlie: you are saying the fact that they did this had nothing to do with the displeasure with the relationship with the united states. ian bremmer: i am saying that when obama does a deal with iran, knowing that this is going to undermine every shred of saudi stability, that shows that that is not a priority for the united states. it is perfectly fair, it is reasonable, even supported it at

the time, though it was tough. when the saudis go after and say we are going to execute the shia cleric, and they do it right before they implement the iran deal, they are not doing it to tweak the americans, they are saying we are going to focus on our priorities. and we will not listen to yours. basically they say everything that was expected to happen is happening, and said that we can implement the deal. we will loosen the sanctions and the money will be unfrozen. that is the moment we are at, correct me if i'm wrong. ian bremmer: that is still going to happen. charlie: the timing of that and the timing of this is no coincidence. ian bremmer: there is no -- the saudi's do not believe that they can stumble the implementation of the iranians. they believe they have to maintain the stability of their leadership.

if they can point the finger at the iranians, if they can blame the iranians -- they set the embassy on fire and they ransacked the consulate, and they can see these evil iranians with their supporters in the kremlin, and we have to do something about it. the problem is, not only did the saudi's not have the economics, but they have sudan and bahrain. they have the uae to downgrade. otherwise, crickets. quieter on this set when you and i are not talking. that is not where you want to be if you are saudi arabia. where is egypt? charlie: is he playing china and russia against the united states? ian bremmer: everyone is trying to play china against the united states because the chinese are spending a lot of cash.

there are countries doing it more effectively. they have $3.5 trillion in reserves. charlie: they just sell the securities they own and take the cash. ian bremmer: and they build infrastructure. they are the ones filling a lot of vacuums. what you see across the top -- charlie: they send that money and make the difference in their own economy? ian bremmer: what the chinese don't want to do is keep spending money on infrastructure that is overbuilt. they do want to spend money, and they do want to align their support for their own state owned enterprises and standards. that is what they are doing. they will do that effectively through 2016. the impact of china around the world for good and for bad is going to grow enormously in 2016. it will not have massive impact at home. charlie: how will it play itself out? ian bremmer: we saw it today. 7% market to go down. it is not because the chinese are going to implode, but

because the united states market goes down 400 points. that was not because of the top risk reports. i think it was a response to the china market going down. charlie: chinese manufacturing was down, and therefore the market went crazy. is that the conventional wisdom? ian bremmer: that is, and we have so little clarity in chinese data, yet they are such a big player for everything -- buying cars, buying food, buying iron, you name it. charlie: we already saw the decline of that, have we not? ian bremmer: last year, we felt than buying fewer commodities. but we feel the palpitation of every time the chinese market goes down. but we feel when they write big checks. if they are not going to spend at home, they are going to spend it, and you will see countries around the world -- why were the brits first? to say we want to be the founding member of the asian infrastructure bank. why did they do that? charlie: we didn't want them to do it. they did it before

the germans, and they told the chinese, we are going to be your best friend. why? because you are going to help us out and write us some checks. that works. in the middle east, the saudis lose, not only because the united states does not care as much about them, but because the chinese are the ones increasing, and the saudi's don't have the cash. that is the problem. i am worried in 2016 that saudi legitimacy is going away, and that will lead the saudi government to take bigger risks, both domestically and in the region. charlie: give me an example of bigger risks. ian bremmer: providing greater military support in yemen, syria, and for all of the provinces. charlie: why had they been providing more support in syria? they dried up their support and airstrikes as soon as the united states became a larger factor. ian bremmer: yes, they did. the gulf states in general played very little role in

syria. charlie: so why are they now turning around and taking a bigger role? ian bremmer: i am not talking about helping the americans, i talking about helping those on the ground that they see as ideologically aligned. those are not just going to be the five syrian rebels that we managed to find in trade. in other words, this is a much bigger filter. charlie: the history of 2015 and the prophecy of 2016 is written, will putin look smart? ian bremmer: compared to obama, putin has a serious -- had a successful foreign policy adventures. that has to annoy the white house to no end. the fact that putin could turn up in syria, could change the nature of the ballgame because he is the one to actually put the military and play, and then

force obama to meet him on his terms. not tight but ukraine, but syria my god, if i am the president of , the world's largest economy and military, that has to really upset me. obama is a pretty cool guy. that would really eat me up at night. charlie: did you hear his response to that? they are playing a weak hand. you think this is smart on their part. they are, but they're playing a weak hand extremely well. and the united states is sitting on their hands. i agree with the analogy, i just think it annoys people. putin has been able to score a bunch of points. a team this bad should not be putting points on the board, and they are, and it is because they have not shown up to play. it's like we are the cavaliers and we are sitting lebron until the fourth quarter. we are probably still going to win, but why? why make it close? charlie: do you think in 2016, we will see more isis expansion,

as we saw in libya, or will we see more isis contracting, as we saw in iraq? ian bremmer: the islamic state itself, there will be more victories for the us-led coalition. they will end up with less land at the end of 2016. i think going after the -- ramadi was taken in 2015. i think that will occur, but if you have the saudi's and iranians actively in conflict, the geneva process is dead. that means you can set as many people around the table as you want. but syria is going to get worse, and yemen is going to get worse. there is going to be a lot of places where isis as an organization cannot establish a caliphate, but will recruit a lot of people.

charlie: and they can hold territory in libya. ian bremmer: yeah, but if you are isis, i don't think your future is holding territory. to hit saudi. you want these guys to be illegitimate. that is what i worry about the most. what happens when isis starts showing up in a serious way? what are we going to do about that? is that when we put boots on the ground? of course it is a real threat. i don't know what keeps saudi arabia together over the long term. i think the saudis are starting to recognize that, but the reaction has been escalation against the iranians know they are in trouble. what if a client calls you and asks what's the good news, what do you say? ian bremmer: there is a lot of good news. we barely talked about asia. when you think about all these conflicts that you and i have talked about over the years --

india and pakistan, china and japan, even the south china sea, you've got leaders in all these countries that are reasonably strong, pretty insulated, and they are not escalating. i think you are not going to see those risks hit the markets. india-pakistan, you could actually see a breakthrough. charlie: that looks like it, doesn't it? charlie: some interesting dialogue. modi came over for the birthday -- ian bremmer: and god bless him for doing it. i think it was great. charlie: i do too. ian bremmer: the white house, i have heard them say there is absolutely no way putin would cut a deal with japan. putin is the only guy who can cut a deal with japan. if you wanted to sell an island for money, putin could do that. as isolatedn't be then. the japanese would cut that deal. i think there are things to watch in asia that are promising. another good piece of news is i don't think -- as much as we will complain about the american

elections for the next 10 months -- i don't think you matters. -- i don't think it matters. charlie: i cannot believe you are saying that. trumpemmer: i don't think is getting elected. but from the way the world works -- charlie: let's assume -- take trump away from the package for a second, and it is cruz versus clinton. in terms of the stewardship of foreign policy. are you saying to me that it does not matter a bit, regardless of what side you are on? on the one hand, one person has said he wanted to carpet bomb syria. ian bremmer: there is no question it matters in terms of u.s. foreign policy, but does it matter for the strength of the u.s. dollar? doesn't matter for the u.s. marketplace? all the fortune 100 ceos i talked to, there is not a single one that would change one bit of their plans and where they are going to invest on the basis of the outcome of this election. charlie: they don't know that, because they don't know the outcome.

ian bremmer: you'd think they would be hedging a little. charlie: all i say to you is to look at the difference between assassinations make, for example. i can list three or four. ian bremmer: you are completely right, but we are talking about 2016. you started this by saying, give me some good news for 2016. the good news i am giving you is that the western hemisphere is insulated from this risk, asia is insulated, and the good and bad is that as a consequence, the united states is under a lot of pressure to act. that is going to hurt the europeans bad. charlie: happy new year. it's a pleasure to have you here. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

charlie: the film "son of saul" follows a jewish prisoner at auschwitz. he is enlisted to help with concentration camps. he encounters a dying boy he believes to be his son. the "washington post" said it has the staying power of a loved one's death. it is unbearably brilliant. here is the trailer. ♪

♪

>> ♪[singing in foreign language] ♪ ♪ charlie: we have laszlo nemes and geza rohrig, who played saul. the trailer has received enormous praise, as reflected by the awards and by people who write about the film who have seen it. congratulations. this must have been a hard film to make. tell me how you found the story. laszlo: well, i first read the writings of auschwitz years ago.

charlie: explain who they are. laszlo: they are the prisoners, almost entirely jewish, prisoners in auschwitz, forced to assist in the extermination process, to be inside a crematorium and burn bodies. charlie: they lead them to the gas chambers and then take them to the crematoriums. laszlo: yes. and once they were killed in the gas chambers by the ss, they were tagged to take the bodies to burn them and get rid of the ashes. it was a factory that needed workers. these were the people who were isolated from the rest of the camp, who did not talk to other

prisoners, and they had the possibility of eating relatively well compared to the other prisoners, finding clothes that were normal. but they knew that they would be liquidated. they carried secrets. bearers of secrets. they witnessed the crime. charlie: i will come to you in one moment with the selection of you in the role that you play in this. they did not tell their stories. laszlo: they could not tell the stories -- charlie: but after the liberation. laszlo: they were not supposed to survive.

only a very few commanders survived the liberation of the camps, but some of them wrote about their everyday lives, putting those secrets into the ground around the crematorium. some of these notes were found after the war, the so-called scrolls of auschwitz. they gave an incredible insight. charlie: and there was a book called "beneath the ashes?" laszlo: that is a collection of those texts. these texts are not very well known. i wanted to find a cinematic way to plunge the viewer into the here and now of the extermination. charlie: it also had to be said that you wanted to make a different kind of film. you were not happy with films, or you wanted to make something

different than the films about the holocaust that you had seen. laszlo: yeah, i really think that many films have been made about the holocaust, but not really about it, or the human existence within it, rather taking the holocaust for its dramatic value. i wanted to transmit something to the viewers about the human condition within the concentration camp. you could not know many things while you were in the camp as prisoner. i really wanted to forget this postwar perception of the holocaust based on survival, based on reassuring things, and really go back to the here and now and see what it was like. i wanted to do it for the dead,

because they were more or less forgotten. charlie: how did you get involved, geza? you were a poet in new york. geza: right. my grandfather had a neighbor who told me one day how he survived, and he was working to sort clothing and belongings, and he was swallowing down things, and later defecated and found diamonds. when i heard it, i did the same thing -- i wanted to hear if -- know if it works. i heard so much about it. i wanted to know if it works. i swallowed my grandmothers ring and i found it. that was the fascination of the young child.

later on, when i was a teenager, there were times when i thought she would not have shared this with me. and i grew older than that, visited the camp for the first time, i was 19 years old. step-by-step, i was struggling with this issue, but i share the sentiment that most of the movies did not do justice. i found that they were not talking about the real holocaust. i was happy to see this script. charlie: what were they missing? geza: i'll tell you. all these movies are well-intentioned, but you are getting invested emotionally almost all the time, and people survive. that did not happen. two of three jews in europe were murdered by the holocaust, so

why are we making films about the lucky third? i found that we have to be honest, we don't have to be graphic or explicit, but we have to state the facts. charlie: why create the story of the son, someone thinks saul thinks is his son? laszlo: we wanted something very simple. we saw that there was no possibility really in the crematorium for a story of another sort. we knew that the commandos rebelled in 1944, the only armed rebellion in the history of the camp. they wanted to use it as a backdrop of the main story. the story is almost like a greek tragedy. a man trying to accomplish

something that in this case -- the audience, it doesn't make sense in a world that has no hope, no god, no religion, there is the possibility to allow us to be human. the viewer will have to answer that question. charlie: you created the character to pose the question. ♪ the only way to get better is to challenge yourself,

and that's what we're doing at xfinity. we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible.

because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. ♪ charlie: this is where saul confronts a rabbi about rights as a child. here it is.

[speaking foreign language] [whistles]

[gunshots] charlie: how did you come out of this film? geza: i was just acting, i was imitating. first of all, i do not have a chance -- charlie: it had no impact? geza: of course it did, it's a never-ending story. charlie: you have said everything you have done has prepared you for the role. geza: true, but i would emphasize not only my role -- i met a command a member who lives in los angeles, 93 years old, a greek jew. he saw the movie. it means the world to us.

he said, i'm ready to put my name on the line for this movie. charlie: and the man who is the last surviving? geza: same thing. charlie: you're acting would say to them, this is the way it was. geza: i did not have a chance to meet any of them before the shooting. after the liberation, they say there was about eight or 10 alive today, but according to him, he was the last one. they met him in los angeles. he is a man who still can smile, there is a spark in his eyes. for me, it is amazing. at the time of this movie, the survivors of the holocaust will soon not be living among us anymore.

charlie: do you have a number? in terms of survivors to live -- still alive? geza: altogether, i don't know. it's just, day by day, there's -- charlie: there's no record-keeping. geza: right. charlie: where do you think this film will fit in the canon of films? laszlo: i think it is an important step in our vision of the holocaust. i don't know whether we are ready for that can of new vision, but i think we might be ready to forget the theatrical versions of the holocaust. charlie: remember the horror? laszlo: yeah, but my film is

-- it never shows it in a open way. it is very narrow in its focus. it leaves mostly everything to the imagination of the viewer. in a way, this film relies on the viewer. i think there is an innovation, because now the viewer has to go through the journey of his film, and it becomes personal because imagination is at work, because we are not showing the horror, but we are showing the human face. i think the human face is what gives this film its importance, because the holocaust became a sort of abstraction. we forgot about the face, the individual.

it became too big to understand. but if you have one person now, it becomes understandable, and a very visceral way. charlie: i totally agree with you. it is the face -- it brings it home. geza: mad something to what laszlo said? -- may i add something to what laszlo said? i think the commando is a lesser-known aspect of what happened. this film i think fully exposes the crime, the most terrific crime of the nazis -- horrific crime of the nazis, which is deliberately forcing jews to burn jews. the system was working like this -- how can the most jews be murdered by the least amount of germans seeing involved? in other words, it was a division of labor. these people had no genuine

choice, the sense of moral choice just finished. so besides killing them, they also took their innocence away, because again, they forced them to assist in the extermination process. that is the most diabolic aspect, to make pain out of evil and make the victims because of their death. charlie: you have said he almost has an obsessive -- has an obsessive quality about him.

laszlo: you have to live in the crematorium to make a film like that, that's what makes it difficult, but we were ready for that. charlie: and you brought on historical advisors to keep you close to the truth, or on the truth? laszlo: yeah, we wrote the screenplay based on the writings of the commandos, and we wanted to anchor this film is much as possible. to the very smallest detail in history. it was important. for me, i studied history. i am not scared of reading documents in history books, and i am really interested in it. i am always interested not to present a history book kind of approach, but being there in a visceral way is i think, if you make a period film, it's almost

like a different planet, but rather you place the audience in a real situation. it is a different experience. charlie: this is another scene from the film of saul. here it is. language]foreign

charlie: what was happening in that scene? geza: this is saul's mission, his pursuit. this is where he realizes that

this boy belongs to him, and he belongs to this boy. no matter what, he is going to do his best to bury this boy. i don't think we mentioned, this boy survived the gas chamber. by doing that, he beat the system. nobody was meant to survive the gas chamber. he survives it and is killed a second time by a nazi dr. successfully. -- a nazi doctor successfully. seeing this death, he is able to have a shot of feeling. these people were working on autopilot. they could not allow themselves to feel and have empathy. but here, he felt something. so he is grateful for this boy for feeling again.

for what else can you do for a dead person besides bearing him? charlie: would you do anything different? laszlo: of course. i don't want to go back to the concentration camp. charlie: never? laszlo: no. charlie: your next film is about hungary? laszlo: the next film is about the story of a young woman right before the first world war. it is in the heart of europe, right before the 20th century was born. charlie: is "son of saul" hungary's choice for best foreign film in the academy awards? they are submitting it? laszlo: it is on the shortlist, and we are waiting for the final nominations. charlie: much success. laszlo: thank you. charlie: a pleasure to meet you. laszlo: thanks for having us.

geza: thank you for having me. charlie: thanks for joining us. see you next time. ♪

yvonne: north korea has tested a nuclear weapon. defense stocks soared, but the wider economic decline in the yuan get a three month low. a controversial ban on check airbags has been lifted. struggling to reach your because of strong headwinds. passengers could not check any baggage in amsterdam.