. >> woody allen films.ple of things things, you both appeared in some woody allen, some are giving money back and some say they will never appear on a woody allen film. i get this art is art and line of what is art and when do you leave somebody's politics or personality or whatever -- however you want to do it, where are you on this? >> it is such a complicated question. i mean, i believe people when they say i was assaulted or i was molested or something like that. because i don't think you really have any other choice. because if we start not believing people, it is a slippery slope. so that's -- >> the hard part is why would they make it up and put themselves or label themselves -- >> they say that it is very, very rare that somebody makes something like that up. so i would rather error on that side. i know that -- >> does that made -- you would think twice before taking another part in a woody allen movie. >> i've already done a woody allen movie. >> but would you do another? >> no. >> what about you,

. >> so woody allen films are typically, they're extremely low budget. but they really are. pretend thing, like they're made with very little money and you just-- you know what to expect when you get there and you're very much sharing trailers, which i didn't mind sharing with justin timberlake at all. ( laughter ) >> stephen: he kind of was intimidated by you. >> well, that's ridiculous. >> stephen: no, because he said that what made him nervous is that because the walls are so thin... >> ...i could hear him peeing. >> stephen: yes. ( laughter ) >> it's true. it's completely true. i would always be at work a little bit before justin. so i would get to work and i would put the kettle on and i'd make mistake myself a cup of tea, being british. i'm afraid it is something that i do. and i would know he was there because i would hear this trickling sound. ( laughter ) i would go: "morning, darling! "morning!" ( laughter ) and i'd go, "oh, sing me a song!" ( laughter ) >> stephen: would he sing you a song while he was ( bleep )? >> yeah. ( laughter ) >> stephen: wow. >> yeah. i m

it's like woody allen's quip about cuisine, that the food is bad but the portions are small. so i will be -- i will be as brief as possible, but just to tee us up for today, a couple things. the first is, i'm fond of saying and you will get a lot of my favorite sayings because it's free and you can't get a refund, but i'm fond of saying that the best thing about beating your head against a brick wall is how good it feels to stop. and i don't know about you all, but in many ways i feel like 2017 was a brick wall against which i'm happy no longer to be beating my head. various efforts at the national level and across the country that i think were more interference than helpful to election officials across the country and so to paraphrase the old country song, i think i'm happy to see 2017 in our rearview mirror. all that's left is a federal election year, the 2018 federal election. the good news as it always is, is that as an election official you don't have to sweat the small stuff. the bad news, of course, is that when it comes to elections there is no small stuff. and i thin

in two thousand and thirteen charity to an oscar nomination as best supporting actress in woody allen's blue jasmine. the way that i know you aren't in the shape of water american actor doug jones plays the creature and objectively lies is a faction expressed only through emotion. like a child she is such an innocence so beautiful so pure you know and she's all instinct but she doesn't know. that she's a creek there's something in her that is similar just recognizes that there's a real connection. and doesn't quite understand what that is but doesn't matter. oscar winning actress frances mcdormand is possibly her closest competitor for the oscar she took on the bafta in the same category for her role in three billboards in missouri. the film and plays a grieving mother who devises a provocative method to motivate the police to further investigate the rape and murder of her daughter. right here with another actress vying for the oscar is so sharon and for her role in it she's going to college and then jail and this is in some ways a much more understated performance i mean in this catego

and, it is not the version of midnight in paris that woody allen gives us. the american dollar went far, so starving writers could live in randomly. hemingway -- nd he and hemingway came together. -- felt the war had fractured society in such a way that the old way of expressing themselves would not work anymore. the vocabulary we use would not work anymore. they purposely set up to write in a different fashion. he actually engaged in the same of a best consisted pronoun, verb and maybe something else. it was a different thing that he set up. they were both involved to try to find a new way to express what they had seen. for things like news clips, jump cutting from films. all of these things that people were experiencing in talking about these two people, they took such different lessons from the war. my version of hemingway is he saw war has in -- and inevitability. he saw war as a test of one's one's illness -- manliness. and secondly, war brought love. and it came by virtue of war. the sponsor's was much more influence by his left-wing thinking. hemingwa

showed the woody allen show played. the what dance is. slow the nights are going. well good twenty years old is the company of a province the producer is one foot just trying to expose the signs of wealth visible everywhere. her. face hunting down how that sounds i guess that male male it's a new boy's hand on my atlas three and now see me more than i said to look for they're nice things but i was so much. to know he is sure to be on the. whole truth for us to halt. the whole show at that time. now carol it's. really going to come down to needs when we know decent. news and it's. usually good we don't just need to do we've got a huge issue and we need you to. tell you. how it was going to be done. at least see if they are doing anything since. she's out. here on the. forecastle god damn. time you remember young this humble music. you got no hole going on como homage to the band hey you. in the hey it's hard to his whole deal was a hello. long ago the one being gone the. more they do the thing the. moment they are high and. one. of. these. is. to see that ten thousa

i remember the woody allen joke that he failed his first year philosophy because he looked into the soul of the person next to him. you can't look into the other person and see their true intentions and you might be deceived. i wonder how u.s. historians would grapple this age-old problem in my field, how to deal with the problem of deception. jeremy: that is a great question. i think that the policymakers who understand the other side, they come to it through a combination of two routes. one, from the personal impressions. but also the rigorous process around them that is providing contextual knowledge and forcing them to think that through. that is what i would call a good process. you don't just read the cia psychological profile and go on that. you combine that with your experience with them. information. it is how you are processing -- so it is not just your impression. it is how you are processing it. it is who is bringing him information and he is using that information as he is planning moment to moment. the problem with roosevelts process is that it takes an enormous amount of e

it reminds me of the woody allen that he failed first year of philosophy because he looked into the soul of the final exam. you can't do that. you can't look into the other person and see their true intensions and you might be deceived. so i'm wondering how u.s. historians would grapple with this age-old problem in my field of how do you deal with that tension between trying to understand one another and also deal with the problem of deception? >> so it's a great question and it connects to arna and tim's point, as well. i think the policymakers who get their adversary and their allies who understand the other side. they come through it through a combination of two root, right? one is they come to it from their personal impressions, but they also come to it from having a vigorous process around them that is providing contextual knowledge and forcing them to think that through and that is what i would call a good process, right? you don't just read the cia psychological profile and go by that and you combine that with your information. it's how you process it and i do think franklin roose

if you remember woody allen. it is true that we had met in mississippi earlier in 1967, that ended the stage in our lives by getting married. we're coming to 50 years later this year. it is personal for us. the relevance to our conversation today is marion would have gotten to be quite friendly with robert kennedy, as well as with me. they liked each other a lot. robert kennedy had very good taste and the people he chose to be -- who he respected. one day, i believe it was in october, though in your research, you will know exactly when it was, came out, was in town. he said why didn't marion and i come out to his house for lunch, which we did. at the end of lunch, he said i would like to take a swim in the pool then we can go back to work. he was in the pool and we were sitting on the side. he said, where are you going when you go from here? said, i'm going down to see dr. king, we will be talking with him about what we should do next. they were searching. those were difficult times, as we all know in terms of th

i am a little bit like zoellick in this story, if you remember woody allen. say, that wes you had met in mississippi earlier end at, and that did that stage of our lives by getting married. we are coming to 50 years later this day. it is personal for us. the relevance to our conversation today is marion had gotten to the quite friendly with robert kennedy, as well as with me. they liked each other a lot. robert kennedy had really good taste in the people he chose, who he respected. in one day, i believe it was october, although in your research, you will remember exactly when it was, came out, was in town. he said why didn't marion and i come out to his house for lunch, which we did. lunch, he end of said, if you don't mind, i would like to take a swim in the pool, and then we can all go back to work. so, he was in the pool and the two of us were sitting on the side. and he said, marian, where are you going when you go from here? and she said, well, i'm going .own to see dr. king and i and others will be talking with him about what would she do -- with him ab

and it's not the version in midnight in paris, woody allen's movie. paris was destitute. starving writers could live grandly in paris, and struggling painter's good. they came together at that they were plotting literary revolution. their experience of the war was vastly different. they both felt the war had fractured society in such a way, that the old way of expressing themselves wouldn't work anymore. the vocabulary we used wouldn't work anymore. they purposely set out to write in a different fashion. hemingway was like a jeweler crafting short stories and sentences that were tighter than been written before. the spots was engaged in a sort of, you can't call it anosyllabic, but it was different thing, but they were both involved in this literary revolution to try to express a ,ew way of what they had seen and it affected their writing. news clips, jump cutting from films, all of these things people were experiencing, trying to put them into the writing. what is fun about talking about these two people together, and steve and i talk about them endlessly, is that they t

reminds me of the woody allen joke he failed first year philosophy because he looked into the soul of the person next to him on the final exam. you can't do that. that's the problem of other minds in philosophy circles. you can't look into the minds of the person and see their true intentions, you might be deceived. i wonder as you as historians would grapple with this problem of how do you deal with that tension of trying to understand another and also deal with the problem of deception. >> this is a great question and it connects to arna and tim's points, as well. i think that the policy makers who get their adversary and their allies, who understand the other side, they come to it through a combination of two routes, right, one is they come to it from their personal impressions, but they also come to it from having a rigorous process around them that is providing contextual knowledge and forcing them to think that through. and that's what i would call a good process, right? you don't just read the cia psychological profile of someone and go on that. you combine that with your exper

it reminds me of woody allen jokes he failed philosophy because he looked into the soul of the person next to him on the final exam. that's the problem. you can't look into the other person and see true intentions. and you might be deceived. i'm wondering how you as historians would grapple with this age old problem in my field of how do you deal with the tension of trying to understand another and also deal with the problem of deception? >> so this is a greet question. it connects to arna and tim's points as well. i think that the policy makers who get their adversary and and i lies and the other side process they come to it through a combination of two roots. one from the personal impressions. but they also come it it from having a rig rouse process around them that is providing contextual knowledge and forcing them to think that through. that's a good process. you don't just read the cia psychological profile. you combine it with your experience. it's not just more information. it's how you process tp i do think franklin roosevelt is a master at this. he spends time with stalin and

one of the most polarizing examples: filmmaker woody allen. his adopd daughter dylan farrow first came forward in 1992 with allegaons that allen used her, beginning when she n s seven years ago. aldenies this. d t he's largely retained his vauntistic status in hollywood, and had continued to oke films with major stars. farrow spo recently, e cusing those who continue to work with allen whso supporting the me too movement of hypocrisy. >> with so much silence being broken by so many brave people against so many high-profile people, i felt it was important to add my story to theirs, because it's somethinghat i've struggled with for a lontime, >> brangham: actress kate winslet recently suggested she had "bitter regrets" about working with men like allen. this week, a connecticut theater said it was canceling a production of len's musical, "bullets over broadway." ar how do we wrangle with the stic works of people accused of awful behavior? there's a wide spectrum of voices on this topic and tonight, we talk to a prominent art museum director who'

he came across the sky like a meteor back in that -- woody allen and i used to go see him every night at the basin street east along with ella fitzgerald. i remember this joke, nixon, he said, is the sort of man who if you fell overboard 20 feet from shore, he would throw you a 15- foot rope. [laughter] and kissinger would announce the president met you more than halfway. leon: wasn't it mort sahl you told me was also the person who said to you two days after the burglary, i hope this is the thing that brings him down? dick: i don't recall that, but i'm willing to pretend i did if it makes you comfortable. [laughter] leon: i was going to say a second ago, is that it's very in a funny way cathartic for me to be making all of these comparisons to trump and nixon because in the show, we tried so hard to restrain ourselves and sort of just, like, say what happened and not run too, you know, aggressively towards the parallels. so it feels quite good to be finally speaking openly about it. but i do wonder, and elizabeth, i wonder what you think since you covered it then and you're covering