>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with politics and talk to karen tumulty of "the washington post" and mark halperin of bloomberg politics. >> i don't think donald trump has problems with strong second amendment advocates. i don't think he needs to spend a lot of time firing them up. the nra is the only one with major advertising money on his behalf. i think his chances of winning depend in part on reaching married female voters in battleground state suburbs. i think those voters would like to see less of this combative, ungracious, some what tone deaf side of donald trump. >> rose: and we continue with a conversation about aleppo syria with clarissa ward of cnn. >> i first went to aleppo in 2012. and i thought to myself this is what hell is like. life can't get worse than this.

the relentless artillery day in, day out. the lack of power. the planes that would start at a:00 mt in the morning buzzing overhead and you don't know where they are going to drop their pay load and you have this pit in your stomach just waiting to see where that bomb is going to fall. and then i went back to aleppo just a few months ago and i found indeed the situation had got worst. >> rose: we conclude this evening with a new film called "florence foster jenkins." it stars mer ill streep and hugh grant and simon helberg and is directed by stephen frears. >> when she said music is my life, i think that was partly true and partly she was animated by her love for bayfield and his support in letting her follow her dreams and try her best to express herself. i mean most lives are curtailed. she had plenty of money and plenty of support to make a fool of herself.

>> rose: politics, syria and a new film when we continue. >> funding for charlie rose is provided by the >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: we continue this evening with a look at the presidential election, republican nominee donald trump stirred controversy again yesterday with his comments suggesting gun rights advocates take matters into their own hand against hillary clinton. >> hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the second amendment. by the way, and if she gets to

pick-- if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. although the second amendment people, maybe there is, i don't know. but i will tell you what, that will be a horrible day. if-- if hillary gets to put her judges, right now we're tied. if you don't do what is the right thing, you're not going to have-- either you're not going to have a second amendment or you're not going to have much of it left. and you're not going to be able to protect yourself, what you need, what you need. you know, when the bad guys burst into your house, they're not looking about the second amendments and do i have the right to do this. >> rose: trump insists that the comment was not meant to advocate violence against clinton the. the republican nominee has suffered a steep drop of support from republican women which has served for an electoral corner stone for the party's nominees in past elections. the campaign has launched an official outreach effort to

build a coalition of republicans and supporting her candidacy. joining me from washington karen tumulty from "the washington post" and mark halperin from bloomberg politics is here in new york. karen, what did donald trump mean when he said that second amendment advocates ought to use their power. >> well, we know what he says he meant. but i think that the explanation that sort of strikes me as probably the most-- closest to the mark here was one that paul ryan gave today where he said it was just a joke that went bad. so you know, but now they're trying to say that know, they were trying to marshal a coalition of, you know, devoted supporters of the second amendment. but you know, judging by the sort of tone of voice and the reaction of the audience, i think, you know, again that explanation doesn't really make a lot of sense. >> rose: mark? >> it is uncomfortable to take one of the two campaigns and say

we don't believe what you are telling us. we don't believe your explanation. but i think what i have been saying is even if you want to ed city their explanation, if you want to say donald trump actually meant that after the election, second amendment advocates could use their power or before the election at the ballot box or as lobbyists, he has to understand, his campaign has to understand that a lot of people are really troubled by what he said. because they took it to mean advocating violence against president clinton. i think in donald trump needs to convince people that he is reasonable, exactsate, that he is gracious, that he is sensitive, he thinks he needs to convince people of those things to win, he missed another opportunity to do those things. >> rose: it is a presidential quality to be able to censor yourself and make sure that what you are saying is not misunderstood. >> yeah. and if you are misunderstood, a topic so serious, so serious that the united states secret service is taking it seriously, then you have to be reflective.

and you have to say hey, i don't like the way the press is taking what i said wrong. but obviously no one should make any joke about threatenk the life of a united states president, or would-be president. and the point of the distraction of, you know, 90 days to go, wasting from his point of view, a couple of days on something that obviously has no benefit to him. is just another, just a question the flow of news. understanding guy who was given credit a couple months ago as a master of the flow of news now seems to not understand you can't waste days. >> rose: his supporters believe most of all what they have to do is get their message out. the more time they spend trying to explain what they meant in a comment dns shall it. >> it is a losing way to operate. and again i don't think donald trump has problems with strong second amendment advocates. i don't think he needs to spend a lot of time firing them up. the nra is the only one that

spend major advertising money on his behalf. his chances of winning depend in part on reaching married female voters in battleground state suburbs. and i think those voters would like to see less of this combative, ungracious, some what tone deaf side of donald trump. >> rose: what do you think they want to see? what does donald trump have to do, karen, in order to broaden his appeal beyond his core constituency? >> certainly there is a desire on the part of this country for change. and if you, the number in the polls of whether the country is on the right track or the wrong track has been in negative territory since at least the financial collapse of 2008. and i think he really needs to speak to the anxieties and the first for change of a lot of people in this country. the problem with comments like the ones, the one that he made yesterday is, you know, number one he steps on his own, the word "pivot" is becoming a cliche in this campaign but it

comes right after he gave an economic speech that was supposed to kind of launch the new substantive donald trump. the second problem is that it comes in the context of a lot of things that he and his supporters have been saying about hillary clinton. the chance of "lock her up" at the convention, the sort of vulgar t-shirts that people wear to his rallies, that sort of thing. and i think, you know, i think that whatever side of the, you know, bam ot you are on on this, at some point this loses its usefulness in reaching out to people who might be genuinely undecided which way to go. >> rose: do you believe that more republicans will come out in a either sirply say they can't support him, then perhaps say they are going to support hillary clinton. and in case some who have endorsed will withdraw their endorsement? does that have momentum? >> i think that is under way. and it is under way right now

because the party is very afraid of what is going to happen to the rest of its candidates going down the ballot. they are, you know, standing in a position where they could lose control of the senate. people are talking about even the pont of losing control of the house. something that, where they enjoyed their strongest majority since before the great depression. i mean this would have been unthinkable some months back. but there is this question of whether donald trump is not only going to, you know, go down in flames himself but to take a significant portion of the party with him. >> mark? >> until elected officials see it's in their own interest to break from trump, they won't in large numbers. the prominent ones who have are for the most part people who are retiring or not on the ballot this year. or from states or districts where trump isn't as popular. >> rose: that explains susan colins. >> yeah, susan collins is so popular in maine she can do what she wants. she is not up for election this

year. george p bush, texas official, jeb bush's son, president bush 41's grandson came out over the weekend and said people should vote for trump. i'm for trump. i think there is no clearer example of the degree to which people with political aspirations in red states or red congressional districts will continue to be loyal to trump until and unless his numbers amongst republicans really fall. >> rose: is there anything to this argument that show this is becoming a moral choice? you know, and you will be judged as to where you stood on donald trump? >> that's a narrative that a lot of democrats are pushing. it is a narrative a lot of reporters i think talk about. it is a narrative for a lot of spouses and children of republican office holders for sure. it is not something that i think is existing in large numbers. you remember where we are now. we are in august. members of congress and most republican politicians are not talking to each other. they're not talking much to

their pollsters or advertisers, they are off on vacation or doing things that don't have them in the hot house atmosphere of capitol hill when congress is in session. there are debates coming up. i think the combination of the lack of chatter around them, and the fact that trump, they feel, could turn things around the debates mean they're not thinking about this in moral terms. they're just thinking about it in cold, hard, political terms. after the first debate if trump hasn't done well, if the poll numbers haven't done well, then i think they will remember. for some of them, some of the people close to them say moral dimension. and that could king in and be extremely dangerous to the trump campaign. >> one who did embrace that narrative was ted cruz who stood up on that stage and said vote your conscience. and that really did not go over well either with the republicans in the room or i think with the party at large. >> rose: but most people suggest did he it for the very reason we are talking about. that he thought that if trump came crashing down, he would have been on the right side of history. >> and he still may be.

>> rose: and he still may be. so therefore put him in a position to pick up the pieces. >> but that was a different kind of self-interest. he's not on the ballot this year. he's looking to the short-term future to try to be the heir to heir to whatever the party is after trump, if trump loses. and he also, i think, felt a personal rebuke, a sting from what trump exorted himself. and i think that allowed him both the sort of anger to do it, but also i think gave him a talking point that he thinks he can use for those who might be angry at him for what he did. >> rose: look at the polls. the national polls show about a ten point lead. >> bloomberg politics has a poll out today that shows a six point lead for clinton in a two-way race. four point lead in a four-way race. that closer to some posts have it, also the latestin the field and out of the field. so it's possible, if that trend continues, since our sts first poll. it is possible that some of hillary clinton's lead coming out of her convention.

>> rose: is dissipating. >> settled down a little, possibly. you have seen some state polls in key states, ohio and florida, iowa in particular, nevada, where trump is much closer in those states than he is in the national numbers. >> rose: how do you explain that, the fact that they are not predominantly democratic, republican states. >> they are later, so it is possible the balance has settled down. in a national poll one in every seven people is from california, a very good clinton state. it's possible that these battleground states are going-- it's true. they will be closer than a national race, a national poll almost certainly. and remember trump has not spent any money on television advertising in these states. if you are the trump campaign which has gone through a bad period in terms of the news coverage, has not been on television with ads, being this close in battleground states is a very big deal. that having said, the pennsylvania polls continue to be so bad for trump that people are talking about is there a possible electoral college path that he can come back in

pennsylvania. >> rose: how big do we think the trump movement is today? >> all the movement in the key states, in ohio, pennsylvania, does appear to be going against him right now. one thing i thought that was really interests in the latest rounds of ohio polls that came out just in the last few days from "the wall street journal," was that where both the senate race and the presidential race were tied a month ago, now you have got clinton opening up a five-point lead but so is senator rob portman, a republican. and one thing that is really interesting about that is portman is not only distancing himself from the national republican ticket, he is actually sending volunteers to campaign for him at clinton rallies. so you are seeing, even if people are not coming out and renouncing donald trump, they are definitely distancing themselves. >> rose: are you the guy that first told me that politics makes strange bed fellows.

>> it came up before i was born. but it is the case i thought for awhile that these republican senate incumbents, port nn, new hampshire, even mark kirk in illinois, pat toomy in pennsylvania who were thought to be dead and certainly dead of the republican ticket if the top was weak, senate races make their own wind and weather. they are approximately funded, they are aggressive, they get the connection to their voters. i still think you could see hillary clinton doing very well potentially but not taking the senate for the democrats. because these incum bints get the problem, they get the challenge they face. >> rose: has trump demonstrated that he can dramically reduce the financial advantage that hillary clinton has. >> he had one month of extraordinarily grass roots fundraising primarily on the internet which i have long thought he would have the potential to do. didn't show it until last month. >> rose: sanders-like. >> sanders-like. and just now beginning to understand how to prime that pump. so let's see what this month's

numbers are like am if he keeps that up, i don't think will catch her overall but he will have enough to be competitive, again z, fundraising matters but the earned media matters so much more. it is overwhelmed by the news coverage. so yes the fund raising is important but he really needs to be winning news cycles from his own performance much more than raising 10 million here, 20 million here. >> rose: final question, karen, can one argue or have the impression that donald trump is in increasing number of cases listening to his advertisers because of the way he endorsed paul ryan and senator mccain, and. >> you know, he still operates on a sort of moment by moment impulsive kind of way. and one concern that i have heard is that he doesn't have senior enough people around him on the plane who can, as he does these kind of in the moment cut

feel makes these decisions, somebody to talk him out of them then. because they can lay all the plans they want to. but he has a tendency to sort of put ieds in his own way. >> rose: take his temperature before he sees a microphone. >> right. >> or handheld device or access to the twitter app. >> rose: yes, so you have to tie his hands up and keep him away from the twitter. >> put on the child lock passcode. >> right. >> rose: who is the most effective person you know to say no to donald trump, do not do this sth. >> i think his kids, his son in law and paul man a forth are the ones that have the best crack at it. 's still living his life in.n his preferred mode. you know, going home when he wants to go home. having the kind of events for the most part that he wants to have. putting-- . >> rose: coming home at night to the trump tower. >> sleeping at home in the trump

tower rather than a mot knell iowa. he is still not on the plane spending the kind of time doing policy prep. i will tell you, on the tra jectory we're on the mismatch in terms of quantity and quality of debate candidates before the first debate will be unprecedented. she is-- she and her team are organizing this, i believe she will be the most organized and prepared candidate in terms of hours spent in the history of our presidential dekate-- debates. and i believe he will probably be, as hard as this will be, the least formally prepared going into the debates. >> rose: thank you, mark. thank you, karen, great to have you. >> thanks a lot. >> rose: we'll be right back. stay with us. the crisis in aleppo deepened this week, fighting intensified between the assad regime and rebel forces as they tried to break a government seige on the city. two million residents are now trapped by the violence without access to running water and other things. high temperatures and depleted

medical supplies are raising further humanitarian concerns. the u.n. called for a ceasefire on tuesday. close to 470,000 people have died since the conflict in syria began. joining me now from london is clarissa ward, a foreign correspondent for cnn. she testified yesterday before the united nations here in new york. >> the ones who have decided to stay, year in and year out who have braved the relentless bombardment day in and day out, most of them don't plan on leaving. they made a decision a long time ago that they would rather die in dignity in their homes, than leave. and they have watched what has happened in other places in syria. and they know how this movie ends. bomb them, starve them out until they finally leave. we've seen it again and again in-- they know what happens to the people who leave their homes. most of them never see their homes again. many of them are loaded on to buses and never see the light of

day again. >> rose: i am pleased to have my great friend, former cbs colleague, now cnn supercorrespondent back on this program. welcome. >> thank you, charlie. thank you for having me. it's always a pleasure. >> rose: so tell me more, what was the u.n. system about? how did it come to be? and more about what you told them before we sort of begin to dissect what is happening in aleppo. >> well, so this was an informal u.n. security council session. st known as an aria session. and essentially i was invited by the u.s. mission to the u.n. to testify along side two incredibly brave syrian american doctors who work with sames, the syrian american medical society. and also the u.n. ambassador samantha power. the u.n. sambas dor samantha power spoke, followed by the two doctors, then i spoke. then several of the other security council members spoke.

and then the floor was opened up for comments. essentially the idea behind holding this session was to talk about the humanitarian crisis in aleppo to get a refresher of what is happening on the ground. and to perhaps try to dig up some new ideas about how on earth to deal with this disaster. and it came, of course, the day before yesterday's session that the u.n. security council held again on this issue of aleppo and what to do about this horrific humanitarian crisis. >> rose: what is the situation today and why is it different than other places under seej? >> the situation is dire, charlie. and you know, one of the things i mentioned in my speech is that i first went to aleppo in 2012nd and i thought to myself this is what hell is like. life can't get worse than this. the relentless artillery day in day out. the lack of power. the planes that would start at 5:00 in the morning buzzing overhead and you don't know

where they are going to drop this pay load and you have this pit this your stomach just waiting to see where that bomb is going to fall. and then i went back to aleppo just a few months ago and found that indeed the situation had got worse. there was only one road going in and out of eastern rebel-held aleppo known as the costello road. and you had to fly down it at top speed because it was flanked by enemy positions on either side. and the rebels had built these burms of earth alongside the road to try to protect the way. of course it felt, such a feeb el defense mechanism when you look at the aerial power that the regime has. and of course with the backing of the russians as well. today the situation in aleppo is even worse than that. because for the better part of a month you have had a full seige. it does appear that reb ems over the weekend managed to break through that seige. but the fighting it still so intense that there is very

little humanitarian aid being brought in and out in that small area that they have managed to lift the seige. so you are looking at a situation in eastern aleppo specifically whereas many as 300,000 people are trapped with limited food. as you heard from the u.n. now, there has been damage to the water infrastructure, to the electricity infrastructure. so very little drinking water, almost no electricity, no diesel which of course is needed to power generators. many of the hospitals have been hit and because the rebels have made some progress in breaking the seige you are now seeing the full force of the russian and regime air power being brought to bear in retaliation. so from people that i have spoken to on the ground, the situation is quite unbearable right now. >> rose: so are you talking about the russian support from the air, are they doing anything else to help the syrian army? >> well, almost certainly

they're involved in providing various logistics and various help with intelligence. they have bases throughout the country. but as you well know, charlie, the russians are not the most transparent when it comes to talking about the extent of their military intervention. and what was interesting, after my speech at the u.n., when i had gone through all the various human right as beuses we've seen, the bombings of bakeries and schools and courthouses and hospitals, the one thing that the russian representative really seemed to take umbrage with was my use of the word intervention. that when it came to his turn to give a speech, the only thing he really seized upon or i should say the primary thing he seized upon is why do you use this word intervention. this is not an illegal presence that we have in syria. we're there at the invitation of the, you know, of the government, of the country. and i just found it so interesting that in the midst of all the things that we're

talking about, this came down to him for a question, to a question of is he man particulars. >> rose: i assume without the russian support for assad, he would not have surviveed wfng i mean meaning people will tell you that. of course it's always difficult to predict these things. let's just say this. this time a year ago just a month before the russian intervention or whatever you would like to call it began, the assad regime was absolutely on the back foot. rebels seemed to have the momentum. and everybody was whispering aout, you know, could the end be nye so to speak. at the same time we have seen that many, many times throughout this now five yeacivil war, we've had numerous occasions where people have thought that the fall of one fight or the other was eminent. what is becoming more and more clear, charlie, is that neither side can win a decisive victory. and nowhere is that more

proanyones-- pronounced than aleppo. because even if the seige is reinforced tomorrow and the assad reg each once again has ensierk eled the whole of eastern aleppo, you are talking about potentially years to starve or bomb those 300,000 people out of eastern aleppo. so it's quite clear to anyone on the ground that a question of a device-- decisive victory is simply not on the card. >> so what is going to happen? are going to have a stalemate and they continue to kill each other and more civilians are victimized by this and more children are starving and all of the horror and the hell that this has created. >> it's heartbreaking, it's absolutely heartbreaking. and there are no winners on either side. there are no winners in aleppo. but at the moment, whenever you have a situation where each side thinks that they just have enough of an advantage or they just have enough momentum going, that they can win a decisive

military victory, then you take away all incentive, essentially, to bring both sides to the negotiating table. i don't believe that there can be any meaningful peace tawngs in syria while president bashar al-assad is in power. and i am basing that simply on the kmptions i've had with every single person either living in rebel-held syria or who feels supportive of the cause of the syrian revolution from outside of the country. the amount of blood that has been spilled. the amount of people that have been killed. the relentless bombardment, the barrel bombs, the targeting of schools and hospitals, people do not feel that they can move beyond that, and ever accept bar arb al-assad to continue as their president. now who on earth is in a position to make or force or push bashar al-assad to stand down as president, well, certainly not america, charlie. possibly the russians, possibly

the iranians but what insen tif do they have to do that at this stage? >> that is exactly what the 51 diplomats expressed. which is that they need more leverage on the ground in order to bring the other side to the table. >> exactly. and to be clear the u.s. has no leverage in syria. the opinion of most syrian people is that the u.s. has essentially stood back and washed their hands of this conflict. and i think the turning point was, of course, the so called red line after the use of poisonous gas by bashar al-assad against his own people. and the syrians understood after that point that there was no way the u.s. was going to step in and intervene on their behalf. that was then cemented when the u.s. decided to intervene and fight against ice is. so now essentially what leverage does the u.s. have, without doesn't really have the skin in the game. when it is sitting at the negotiationing table saying to russia hold on a second, you

need to deal with this or stop the bombardment of civilians or stop the barrel bombs or sop stop the incendiary devices or cluster bombs being used, they don't have anything to back it up. there is no reason for the syrian regime or its proxies essentially, to pay any attention to what the u.s. is saying about this at all. >> rose: the reason that the united states, according to the obama administration did not, in fact, upheld the promise they made about the red line and the syrians using gas was, in fact, that the russians negotiated a deal to get most of the gas out of the country, correct? >> of course. that's the case. and now we have the u.s. is talking about potentially entering into some kind of a partnership with russia to target together ales into ra which is now knowned as al-shem which was the al-qaeda affiliate on the ground in northern syria. now they say that they have self erred that tie.

so there has been talk about essentially entering into an alliance with russia to target that specific group in return from an affirmation or an agreement to stop the regime of bashar al-assad from bombing civilian targets. now i can't possibly say or comment on what that sort of relationship or partnership would actually look like on the ground. but can i certainly tell you based on conversations that i have had from people who are on the ground, they think it would be disastrous. they think it would be a huge mistake. because even though some of these more extremist factions are not hugely popular with everyone living in rebel-held areas, they are also the people who have unfortunately, charlie, emerged as the so called herosos in this narrative. because they are the ones who have stepped in to fill the void. not the international community. the international community has been standing on the sidelines for years now ringing its hands while the people of syria have

been bombed with cluster bombs, with phosphorus bombs, with barrel bomb, hitting schools and bake eries and courthouses and hospitals, as we know. so the reality is in rebel-held syria, these islamist factions have emerged as an important source. now if the u.s. was to decide to join with russia to take out those more extremist factions, that would certainly be extremely unpopular with the syrian people that the u.s. would purportedly be trying to actually help. >> does ales into ra in its branding change, in changing its name, is it doing more of simply a surface image or is there some significant change in what they might do in order for them to play some larger role when all this comes down to sort of parsing out what is going to be the future of syria? >> i think, charlie, when you look at this move with ales into ra now calling them al-sham,

saying that they have self erred ties with al-qaeda, this is not a change in ideology. this is a change in strategy. and if you watch the video where they made this announcement, the group's leader began by thanking current al-qaeda leader. he went on to quote osama bin laden. and the group is definitely still focused in the long-term on establishing some kind of islamic governance inside syria. at the same time that doesn't mean that this isn't significant because it is. and i think the group is trying to show several key things by doing this move. firstly, they're trying to show essentially that they put the needs of the syrian people above their own political agenda and they want to be seen as fostering unity between all the different rebel groups on the ground. they have learned from mistakes in the past that al-qaeda made and iraq under zar quaw wree and understand if you alien sate the

local pop lus you will never be able to implement the governance they are trying to implement. they are trying to enmesh themselves among the syrian public, they're trying to brand themselves as heros in this narrative. and they're trying to do that by working very closely with other rebel-held groups. they're also trying to telegraph the message to the u.s. and to the international community. which is that you may not like us. we may not see eye-to-eye on things but we are rational actors and we have no interest in launching attacks beyond syria's borders. our focus right now is the syria protect-- project. and whether or not this move really changes anything in terms of the group's larger significants, one can say one thing, this say move that is playing well on the ground in syria and it's playing well also with a lot of the allies of the rebels whether it be in turkey or qatar or saudi arabia. >> all the islamic jihadist

groups are sync, are they not? or most of them. >> they are. the sunni jihadist islamist groups that we talk about, whether it is ales into ra or whether you are talking more about the islamic group al-sham, they have been the focus of so much of the receipt kick and discussion and of course isis, i don't even include them because they are operating in a separate part of the country and they don't have the support of any of the syrian people or the other rebel groups. but i do think it's important to also remember that there are extremist groups working very closely with bashar al-assad to name one, of course, hezbollah which is designated a terrorist organization. there are also iraqi militias working with them. afghan militias as well. iranian rpz forces. so there are a whole number of extremists operating on both sides of this conflict rps it's great to hear from you. thank you so much for joining us. and for your appearance before the united nations security council, thank you.>> thank you, charlie. >> rose: clarissa ward from

cnn in london. back in a moment. stay with us." florence foster jenkins "is a new film from director stephen frears. mer ill streep stars a new york heiress and socialite whose terrible singing voice doesn't stop her from becoming an opera singer. the hollywood reporter calls the film a warm-hearted celebration of single minded amateurism. here is the trailer. >> i'm so excited. we're going to make a recording. >> that was wonderful. >> do you want to try another take. >> i don't see why, that seems perfect to me. >> when i was 15 years old my father told me if i didn't give up music, we cut me off. of course he didn't understand. music is my life. >> that's me. >> this is a talented young man i was telling you about. >> then let's get started.

>> she's remarkable, isn't she. >> she can be a little flat. >> flat? >> it defies medical science. >> maestro, do you think i'm ready for a concert. >> expand your diaphram, florence. i think mad am florence might need some more lessons. >> please, my wife is ill. singing is her dream and i'm going to give it to her. >> we have to help her, because without loyalty, there is nothing. >> no, i played for the president when i was eight years old. >> really. >> yerks little miss foster they called me. i had very high hopes of becoming a concert meanist. but then when the nerves were damaged in my hand, that is not to be. >> her condition sim proving what is her secret. >> music, she lives for music. >> that was florence foster jenkins. >> how did she get on the radio. >> that dame has got me happy to be alive. >> the lady is a lesson in courage and we love her. >> oh god.

>> she must never see this. >> i would like every copy of the post that you have. >> i think this might be too much for you. >> this is my favorite place and i'm going to sing here. >> can i not play carnegie hall with mad am florence. >> we'll be murdered out there. >> music is pornlt and. >> she has done more for the musical life of this city than for anyone, and that includes you. >> 3,000 people, they need music. >> i'm afraid. >> madame florence, you must go on. >> this is what he with live for, isn't it. >> it's going very, very, very well. >> bravo. >> i am pleased to have the stars of the film mer ill streep, hugh grant and simon helberg and director stephen frears at this table to talk about florence foster jenkins. >> describe her singing voice for me and tell me how you create it.

>> well, she was famously the worst sing tore ever sing at carnegie hall. >> rose: can you hear it on youtube. >> oh yes, yes, quite a lot of her. a lot of her arias. yes. at the same-- so you start to laugh, at the same time she breaks your heart. because she's so courageous. >> rose: yeah. she wanted it to badly. >> yes. and she was a woman of such spirit and such will. she was terrific. >> rose: but is that quality good that she had, the sense that i want to do this and to hell with what critics might say. >> that is what you americans do, isn't it? >> rose: i don't know. >> i'm british. we don't behave like that. >> rose: you said that she was the perfect amateur. >> she was. i think that she did, hen she said music is my life, i think that was partly true. and partly she was animated by her love for bayfield and his support in letting her follow her dreams and try her best to

express herself. i mean most lives are curtailed. she had plenty of money. and plebtee of support to make a fool of herself and also to do-- . >> rose: so this is a guy who is married to her, has a mistress, has a relationship. does he love her? >> or is it simply teunlt? >> well well, you are allowed to wonder. >> rose: that is the question. >> and i'm glad you brought it up. because that is what we want the audience to ask themselves at least for a part of the fill. then we want them to gradually learn the truth which was indeed the truth that we now know imperically because we have researched the historical characters. i read his diaries, read his letters. these two genuinely adored each other in this long 35 year marriage, that wasn't quite a marriage because they never actually remembered to get married. but there was massive love. all it be that it was a

relationship with a very unorthodox, very modern kind of shape. >> rose: they understood each other's. >> well, again, my character makes that argument to simon's character during the film. he finds out that i have this mistress. and i say you don't really-- . >> rose: simon is her accompanist. >> yes, he plays the piano for her and he is shocked to find that what he thought was a happy marriage, in fact, have i a mistress. but as i explained to him, no, we have an understanding. but really, it's more me convincing myself than the actual truth. >> rose: that it's okay. >> yeah. >> i have an understanding that i am not going to understand it. not going to-- la, la, la, la. think about it. >> rose: was it hard for you to learn to sing this? >> it was difficult to learn these extremely challenging arias. some of the most challenging arias in the-- . >> rose: but they are

challenging to sing well. you had to learn to sing them badly. >> yes, but not at first. first i had to learn them and to learn them right. and it was really hard. and then you know, we were singing and simon was playing live in the film. and so we were allowed to play with where we went off. and where we failed. >> rose: yeah. what is your character's role in this? >> stephen? >> rose: didn't you get. >> i thought he knew. >> there is a book right there. have i to read that. my character's role is, well, it's the accompanist but-- functions as-- . >> rose: kind of consciousness. >> the eyes of the audience, in a way, i think. that is why my eyes are so prominently featured bulging out of my head.

yeah, this unwitting, sort of pure little wisp of a man that wanders in to what he thinks is his dream job. and florence opens her mouth and birds fall out of the sky. and he's looking around for help and nobody seems to understand what the problem is. >> gentlemen, the chairs are not for practical use, you have been told. >> what should i play? >> well, i really don't mind as long as it's not too loud. ♪. >> that's lovely well, i must

say i think you are absolutely ideal. >> did i mention that i also compose? >> and he also composes. >> yes, i'm sure he does. >> rose: tell me more about how this, it could possibly be that someone with florence's vocal skills could emerge. >> lamb of-- lack of-- . >> rose: could emerge as a popular singer who has a chance to go to carnegie hall? >> well,-- . >> rose: how did that happen? >> she saning, she was a member of many, many, many clubs. which is where women of means thrived at that time. they weren't in the professions and they had no other thing to do except good works. so she found herself in new york with a lot of money from her father and she and her mother

negotiated through society this way. and found a place. gave lots of money away. and mostly to musical organizations. and she just loved music. and she basically really wanted to sing but she couldn't sing at all. >> rose: and she knew that. >> yes. and she launched little private concerts at these salons that she would give. and but at a certain point, at 76 years of age she decided to make her debut which ended up being her fairwell concert at carnegie hall, bought the hall. >> rose: this reminded me a little bit. you may know about this, it is gill kaplan who was a-- turned out to be a very good conductor for, not universally viewed. this guy had a magazine. he had come to new york. he lived in new york and went to school at duke and then came back to new york. had a magazine which made him rich called the institutional

investor. he fell in love with molar and molar's second resurrection symphony. fell in love with it and therefore set out to, he is now deceased, died, last year. he fell in love with-- it meant more to him than anything he ever heard. heard it at carnegie hall. and set out to be a conductor to conduct this one symphony, nothing else. and went and conducted in london at the london symphony, with the london symphony. and spent the rest of his life, he would occasionally play this. would pay for the hall. and had critics who said, he did a good job. and he only knew that one symphony. now some of the people who were conductors, who were music purists said this is not fair. this is not right. >> yeah. >> but there was a touch of florence in him. but he did it well, this one symphony.

>> but i'm sure people recognize as i think they did maybe, in florence. it was equal parts bad singing but that as operational gleel, that sort of wonderful, pure desire to share this thing she loved. and to wear elaborate costumes and do a little dance if the mood struck her. >> rose: one of the most fun things you have done in awhile, fun would be the word you would use. >> yes, absolutely. it wants, it was. i think it was the spirit, the spirit of the woman and it sort of, you know, sort of a toxic cast over the world currently. and it's wonderful to encounter people who believe in love and art. and that's-- these are the saving graces of civilization. >> rose: people here around the table. >> when you say toxic cast. >> i meant-- .

>> rose: the toxic kaps over the world. >> exactly. >> rose: what made it fun is people believed you had a could lab braition here of things that mattered. >> it made it fun that i made people laugh on the set and i could look around and the camera men were going like this-- . >> rose: she can make people laugh. >> yes. >> rose: she could have very well done comedy all her life. >> yes, absolutely. >> i don't know about that. >> rose: she found the comedy in maggie thacher. >> well, i do a mean donald trump. >> rose: i heard about it, can you do it now? >> nope. >> rose: why not? >> i'm saving it. >> rose: for what. >> the inauguration. >> rose: so is this film about her ambition in the end? or is it about something else. >> her ambition. it it didn't feel like ambition t felt like an embrace, an

embrace of the audience and of the people who she was sure wanted to hear this. and they did. and they did. so she wasn't wrong, but for what reason. >> it was an unfortunate thing happens in the film which is that she makes a record. >> yes. >> she releases if to a radio station. everyone goes mad, search calling in saying i want copies, cole porter want ace copy, poor old florence didn't understand it was she was funny. >> they were laughing instead of appreciating it. >> that is why she deidentify-- decided to vay big concert at carnegie hall. >> rose: what is important about what you said to me is it explains his relationship. she was the enabler, the protecter, the all of that. >> that's right. is he a sort of machiavel.

>> she protected him too. he was not a very good actor. >> that's right. >> rose: he was a failed actor, he had nowhere to go. >> there were not very good reviewed and she just destroyed them. >> rose: she disnts let him see them. >> she believed in him. i am no doubt he believed in her. i'm sure he had a tin ear himself, whether. >> you had an eye for lilly ponds but not an ear for her. >> rose: what is interesting about this, do the best actors that you work with, and you have worked with a bunch of them, they have to come to some real understanding of the character. >> that comes in part from the text and where else? >> from the experience because i think you can get ready, you can get ready and learn the arias and you know everything else. but it is when you meet. and when we exchange des

operation. and so the whole thing just happens in here, in the air between us. and nowhere else. >> who needs a direct. >> i think the better the actor you are. the better you are at doing it on the hoove as you would say in america. i notice merrill doing a a lot of that. you don't know what she is going to do next. and the more insecure the actor, the more prepared they are. and this is the kind of performance. >> i'm with mer ill streep, i better be-- is that what you are saying. >> yes, kind of. but the more insecure the actor s the more they preprepared it and liable to give the exact performance they have been practicing notice bathroom mirror. and if i have learned anything in 35 years years is it is thatr ill is right. do the prep but then try and wing it on the day. >> rose: wing it. >> yeah, yeah, yeah. >> rose: my other thing about acting i know nothing about, which is the idea, if you

deliberately want to do it differently each take or simply want to take, the way i did it, i will try to do that one more time and make it a little bit better or do you view this as an opportunity to just. >> i don't even think about it that way. >> rose: what do you think about, how do you think about it? >> i just think of, you know, he lobs me the ball, i throw it back. i don't know where he is going to throw it this time. but you don't-- if you anticipate that, you're dead. the thing is dead. it is like a dead thing. >> rose: she can't even say dead without giving it some sense-- the dead thing. >> i'm just saying. right? isn't that if? >> yes, it's incredible. i mean doing scenes with mer ill is-- it makes the life come out of you. because there is-- and you too, i'm not trying. >> no, no, i picked up the slight. >> rose: it was a slight. >> it was. >> rose: i took it that same way. >> you didn't do as many numbers with him. >> you can see what a nightmare

it was directing this bunch. directors are tragic figures. >> rose: so what did you do, then. what did you-- what was your role here. >> i went to my trailer. >> they were very, very good. >> when you got down to these three people. >> you shut up. >> rose: you do more than shut up. >> no, of course you watch them, if they do something idiotic i guess you say so. but they don't. you know, the miracle s i see the movies, i see how actors are shown on the films to be these screaming monsters. here are three fine, fine actors, monday struses lot of them it is ensemble playing. they play together. >> is there is some terrible person waiting to come out. but they play t is an ensemble piece. >> you know what he does. >> oh god. >> no, seriously. often, you know, they have moniters where the director

watches what is going on, even though it is right here, he could watch us right there, but they look at the monster. stephen listens often. sometimes, didn't you notice that. >> yeah, yeah. >> that he would-- yes, he would be listening to the scene and that was where he found its truth or not. he would hear it. he would hear the truth in what-- in this. >> john huston used to turn his back. he would literally turn his back so he could listen. and billy had a wonderful ear. >> benny used to lay under the floor, you can hear far more than you can see. like that famous golf coach. i can't remember his name, mow something who coached by, he didn't look at you at all. he turned the other way. >> rose: he could hear. >> from the way the ball hit the club, he would know if you were slicing it, aren't you. and he could make adjustments. >> rose: because you can hear a great shot. you can shall-- you can feel it.

but you can really-- it sounds different. >> tennis too, it sounds solid. >> rose: when you-- what are you looking for? i mean mike nichols, a great friend, my friend, once said to me i want my actors to surprise me. i said this before. >> yes. >> rose: i want them to surprise me. i want them to do what i want my architect to do. just surprise me. is and he or return the house just what i described. i want him to come back with maybe something that totally surprises me and that is why i want to hire him. >> you don't know what are you looking for but when they do it, you will know. >> rose: you done know but they will do it. >> you know-- they do something and you think oh, that's right. i couldn't do that, what he a does. >> why couldn't you? >> oh, i don't know. i just. >> you have never thought about it for a second. >> oh, i have thought about it. but then i-- i really think of

the total job and i think-- i like the subjective eye. i like defending my character, my turf, my person, my little quiferring somebody. i don't want to think about everybody z. >> are you not slighted at all. >> she says that. >> florence foster jenkins opens in theaters on friday, august 129. thank you for joining us, sigh next time. >> for more about this program, visit us online at pbs.org and charlie rose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by

media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and of multimedia news and information services worldwide.

♪ announcer: a kqed television production. sbrocco: and everybody say, "opa!" all: opa!