This interview felt difficult. It seemed like Reihan wasn't able to find the best way to engage him until right at the end. Morris didn't like his quips. Hated his assertions about what he felt his work expressed. It was only Reihan's "I wonder about..." at the end that actually seemed to get Morris to say something with out first questioning the question.
i don't think Reihan could do anything to really engage him because Errol seems like an antisocial and arrogant type with completely unpredictable reactions. I am still puzzled to why Rumsfeld agreed to be in his movie. Seems counter-intuitive.
Dmitri Katsman Easy to surmise antisocial from this interview alone but I think introvert is more accurate as Morris cares more about his work than fame. He is much more lively to Bill Maher and other interviewers.
Riehan approached the film with altogether too much respect for Rumsfeld. I think the film is difficult to read without an initial understanding that rumsfeld is a proven liar and that Iraq is a monumental failure. Fog of war has a similar approach in that its not interested in convincing you that veitnam was horrid, it assumes you know that and that is especially important because McNamara understands it too. Rumsfeld on the other hand refuses to acknowledge that something horrible actually happened.
I love how people in these comments are writing off Morris just because of his attitude and tone of voice, and not because of what he is actually saying. Oh you young Americans...
I wish I could have watched this right after seeing the documentary. It's rare to hear a director speak so honestly and candidly about heir subject like this.
Reihan Salam is a fucking trooper. One of my personal heroes. Best interviewer ever, for reals. He has a better grasp of syntax and protocol (verbal) than anyone I've ever seen in media. Or anywhere else, for that matter.
this format is so much better for getting into the mind of Errol Morris than the Daily Show. it takes time to understand where hes going with things and get his humor and such.
obviously, Mr. Morris has been around, and has met, and interviewed some very important and interesting people.... But his arrogant, and seemingly inebriated, persona, was really distracting. I give much credit to the interviewer, for hanging in on that one, and not "walking off", as was talked about at the beginning of the meeting...
That's ridiculous. The interviewer was the arrogant windbag, adding pretentious commentary. The interviewer is there to ask questions, not assert his or her own thoughts and ideas. Morris was just irritated by the interviewers pretentiousness, and rightfully so. See Morris promoting this movie in other, professionally done, interviews and you will clearly see what I am talking about.
I thought this video was good, and different. Sometimes these interviews feel too formal and in this case it was vented and it turned into more of a conversation. Reihan simply steered the discussion and allowed Errol to talk. I'm quite all right with this mode of discussion, a welcome change of pace as I said.
"Despite the hurried nature of the visit, I am proud to report that my wife met and exceeded the operational standards set by the U.S. military for readiness in a two-front war," said Rumsfeld in a press conference shortly after the visit. "I am confident that she can still stand up to heavy fire and serve ably, even in a rearguard action."
Reihan continuously tries to be apologetic for Rumsfeld (and paint him in a favorable light) and Errol is always stopping him from doing so...and it's Errol that the comment section isn't liking. Rumsfeld was one of the people that led us into and then fucked up a completely unnecessary war. And then were completely unapologetic for it. So, why try and apologize for people like Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush that are unapologetic? And why insult the person that is stopping the whitewasher from whitewashing?
A suggestion for the interviewer: Don't finish your subject's sentences for him. You'll never get to the "unknown known" if you do. Rumsfeld is typical of the atherosclerosis of America's "administrative cortex". Morris mentions the DSM and suggests a new inclusion, "irony deficiency syndrome" as exemplified by Donald Rumsfeld's imperviousness to irony. Well, he's on the right track, but for quite some time now American officials have given evidence of a wide variety of dissociative, not to say, completely delusional behaviours. The American public itself appears to be as dissociative and delusional. They keep putting trust in and electing head cases to run the country. I haven't seen the film but I am glad that Morris has at least put the reptile on the dissection table. Believe me, if Morris can't make head nor tail of what he is looking at, there are plenty of people out here in the world of samizdat who can.
Reihan has to keep the ball moving. If you don't shove Morris along he will spend the next 20 minutes in silence trying to find words that convey his point.
The reason he seems disrespectful is because he respects the interviewer enough to question him and engage a conversational tone. I've seen interviews with lesser interviewers, and he's kind to them, making the conversation tedious. That aside, I don't think Salam in this case has a good enough grasp on Morris and his work to ask the right questions.
Very enlightening. I was at the TIFF showing of Morris' documentary last year, and he gave similar responses but here he gives much more information. I think his thoughts on Rumsfeld would be a good documentary.
Wow I always thought of Eroll Morris as an empathetic, engaged, deeply curious person with a lot of heart. And now I read here that people call him arrogant, drunk etc. What I noticed is that in the US, people always have to clap each others back and suck each others toes in order to appear "nice" and "humble". Maybe if you're deeply invested in a subject matter, then you don't care anymore how you come across while speaking your mind. That style of conversation seen here would be rather normal in certain parts of Europe.
Why blame Rumsfeld? He was very clear in his thought process. Watch the documentary "The Unknown Known" and you'll see a very clear thinking focused man. I thought he was a psychopath as well before watching this. I left watching this doco with more respect for Donald Rumsfeld. I was less than impressed with the USA. The Government (democrat or republican) are there to protect & further the influence of the USA. Damn the consequences. Haters are going to hate Rumsfeld but I'm one less hater after watching that documentary. I continue to reject the need to have gone to war & proud to have protested that war. However hating one man (Donald Rumsfeld) isn't the correct or logical thing to do.
38:40 Errol Morris has finally had enough of Reihan Salam's pretentious self-important nonsensical analysis of the film, and is clearly irritated. Morris' irritation had been subtle up until this point.
I wrote my comment before reading this. I thought I was hallucinating or being a jaded asswhipe, but I guess I was not the only one who got a weird vibe from this implant.
Mr. Salam is a very skilled and diligent interviewer whose podcasts I enjoy watching, however, this episode just shows how a grandmaster interviewee of one kind could turn the table around so easily. Mr. Morris was not pompous, arrogant or disrespectful at all. As a veteran host from his laudable experience, he simply quickly picked up mischief and misexpression blurred by Mr. Salam, which Mr. Salam conceded several times anyway, though not out of politeness but admission of guilt. Mr. Morris did raise a little of his voice when he thought the key point of his documentary was misunderstood or misrepresented by Mr. Salam, which struck me as bold, principal and uncompromisable. I do not feel Mr. Morris' statements offensive towards Mr. Salam in any way. His aggressive style to control the conversation was not rooted in his excessive ego, but his opinionated mind and acute awareness of discourse.
I feel like most top commenters here are ignorant of how people act in an interview when there is actual respect on both sides. Errol wasn’t questioning his questions out of arrogance, it was a great dialogue, you could call it Socratic. There is no antagonism in that room. Any filmmaker would kill for an interview this open
I see a bunch of comments describing Morris as a "strange man" or something along those lines. Sure he's different but that's something that should be celebrated not mocked, I think it provides an insight into the people he interviews.
when he talks about how rumsfeld is self deluded it made think of a point that zizek made, that these people who commit horrible acts they justify it with their inner lives, as lomg as their inner lives are kept in a certain way then it holds up a mirror to theor actions and all they see is the righteousness they've assigned to themselves as responsible fpr the actions. Himmler the SS commander had a group of friends who would play Beethoven pieces together. Yeah, they're nuts
"bit of a jerk"? he interviewed Ed Gein with Werner Herzog. He's from Boston! we're jerks. Thin Blue Line had impact of freeing a wronged man and is a historical film for Independent cinema and documentaries (1984). Gates of Heaven. Fast Cheap... Mr Death!!!. Check his early work. Or watch the films or First Person. I love Errol Morris. He is interviewing Donald Rumsfeld. Can you even imagine what few people could elicit quality footage from him? Fine he has an agenda and is a showman. Take it with a grain of salt. He gives us wonderful things to think about *(also gives us amazing tv commercials in a miasma of mediocrity - check his Miller High Life Ads or the new Taco Bell/Ronald McDonald)
Totally agree with your comment. Morris is smart, funny and actually quite likeable. I think some people are a bit upset that he has strong opinions or that he actually engages with the interviewer. BTW, he lives in Boston (Cambridge, actually), but he's originally from just outside NYC. In either case, both places are know for blunt speaking. But to even call him blunt is maybe going too far. It kind of upsets me that folks project arrogance onto him. It's like calling someone an elitist because they are knowledgeable. Sort of like saying "He's smart so he must think he's better than others."
@:40 Funny, I just saw an Opie and Anthony episode where Donald Rumsfeld fielded questions from Louis CK.. When Louie asked Rummy if he was a lizard person, he deflected and answered a totally new question incredulously.
Perhaps Rumsfeld appears empty and stupid because the truth he harbours, but won't tell, is so important - i.e. what is really going on with the power structures behind what we see.
An interviewer interviewing an interviewer. Reihan's style is calculated, but conversational. Errol's style is totally different, and it makes this interview difficult to watch. Although, I think this is inevitable, Morris takes his time to explain himself in almost tangental terms, which can be hard to follow.
Thoughtful approach.... but too brutally slow, unedited and raw. I'm patient but couldn't sit through these 48 minutes easily for a few small points with very few concrete examples, let alone clips of the work under discussion (I did sit through it all). Least enjoyable Vice piece I have seen yet, and I normally like their slow, thoughtful pieces.
13:41... "They"... It's a word echoed from his discussions with Rumsfeld... A detachment from the nation as a whole. "THEY", like, "T.he H.oard of E.cumenical Y.odlers" as mentioned by the WB series "Pinky and the Brain". What could a documentary look like without such bias? It's a beautiful idea. I think, despite Errol's clear bias... He found a wonderful force-balance in "The Unknown Known", and I do indeed love him for it.
Do you guys mind doing a bit of research before interviewing these people. I understand Morris is a bit of a weird duck, but asking him stupid questions that basically just parrot back some observation he just made or rephrasing a one of the pontifications that end with a statement in the form of a question (to the viewer) where the interviewer then answers the questions and then asks it back sounds like a five year old trying to sound smart. Vice has an opportunity to ask some important people about some important questions pertaining to the current state of our world. This is exceedingly rare in an increasingly homogenous media landscape for an unabashed somewhat rebellious outsider to breakthrough. Vice does important and groundbreaking journalism and has talented people working there. They can afford to send folks to places where more conventional journalism outfits won't, don't, or refuse to send a hungry journalist to the places where people and events are making news. Just do your homework before you get someone on your show. Every single fact repeated by the interviewer had just been stated by Morris. Ignoring the rest of Morris' vast and nuanced range of work when his other films clearly relate to the upcoming Rumsfield film is a missed opportunity to say the least.
i actually like both of these guys although reihan's opinions don't mirror my own he seems like a smart man. morris shouldn't be interviewed himself, he has an idea of how interviews should be done, any less than that even if the subject is himself, he is clearly annoyed.
On Rumsfeld's light footprintedness, it's a misunderstanding: Rumsfeld wanted to invade Irak with 15K men. It was both the ideology of efficiency (the modern state has to do things efficiently like "us business executives" expect) as well as hubris (the US forces and my strategic acumen as so exceptional that no people can resist its will). The military got ver frustrated at his inadequate understanding of how hard it is to invade a country. But Rumsfeld was never stand-offish about the invasion. He just thought it would be epically easy. I got this from Cobra II: www.amazon.com/Cobra-II-Inside-Invasion-Occupation/dp/0375422625
This interviewer was the wrong choice to interview Mr. Morris. He doesn't seem very bright, and his judgements on the film were off on just about every question he asked. "Great artists steal." "I thought Mr. Rumsfeld was very serene." I couldn't believe what I was hearing. How did he get a job? Haha
41:32... Neither the interviewer (who's doing a solid job overall, btw.) nor Errol have served in a combat MOS, or the military in any form. There's a reason Hemingway resonates with soldiers on such topics... it's because he was there with us. Those who haven't been there are confused and can only speculate on what we've lived.
ok VICE i typically love your reporting but how in the hell did you chose Reihan Salam to interview one of the greatest interviewers of all time? clashing wavelengths the entire way through... errol morris nearly makes this dude cry @ 38 min. young man crying scene talking about old man crying scene. no good.
Few minutes into the interview, I just knew it was going to be rough. Mr. Morris has his own pace and processing speed, and Salem was not mindful of that. Also, Salem's injections and not-so-smart remarks were not helpful, but rather distracting.
Well, for as much as I don't particularly agree with Mr.Morris, he's a man whose a product of his era and I can't blame him. No small wonder then that he'd try to pull a "Fog of War" with Rumsfeld and yet find him self-assured and not at all contrite. For what it's worth, at least Morris let's his subjects give detailed answers and does what a documentary film maker should do: document.
Errol seems somewhat of a difficult persona. The interviewer asked intellectually stimulating and straightforward questions. Errol had serious difficulties answering these question. He gets tangled up with insignificant semantics.
@20:21 Errol Morris was also probably referring to this uppity interviewer too. I can smell his pseudo-intellectualism from a mile away. The interviewer wants to appear to be intelligent more than being really intrigued by Errol Morris's work .
I got into reading the comments; eventually, it proved tiring; a question I have is why do so many commenters find him "arrogant"... Is it because he is the kind of plain raconteur of matters and facts, in a way such, a considerable majority Stateside finds it annoying... because it simply pins down the indisputable fact that US citizens insist on being manipulated by political criminals? Meh...
Reihan Salam - have you really watched the Rumsfeld film - how on earth have you got that kind of impression of him - do you think that you can recognize human nature well - or - maybe not (but I suppose Rumsfeld can fool many)
Podcaster to podcaster... I'm almost 8min in and the mouth sounds are borderline intolerable. Did y'all have a big greasy steak dinner before this? Or did you not filter your audio in the least for your post production? th-cam.com/users/chaseellisvoice
Halfway through this interview, and I'm really glad I watched it, so that I can avoid Morris' work in the future. Here is a biographer/documentarian/whatever you want to call him who calls his subject deeply self-deceived, yet who cannot stomach a characterization of his own work in any other way than as a direct attack on Rumsfeld, EVEN THOUGH he himself says he has no idea why he made the film in the first place. He literally has to interrupt Mr. Salam when Salam attempts to characterize his portrayal of Rumsfeld in a somewhat positive light (toward Rumsfeld), and insists that we see what Salam saw as Rumsfeld's ease rather in the negative adjective terms of "complacent," "removed," etc. He can't even acknowledge the simple idea that the author is dead; that Salam's interpretation of his work has validity, though anyone can see that Rumsfeld may either be seen as complacent or at ease depending on how you wish to interpret his unknowable internal experience. He cannot contain himself when Mr. Salam characterizes Rumsfeld's performance in his film as containing wisdom; he MUST recharacterize it as "seeming" wisdom. All this from a guy who says he doesn't even know why he made the film. Errol Morris, who is really deceiving who here? You know why you made the film, don't you? You're just saying you have no idea because that leaves your motive unassailable from any angle; it's quite transparent. I have no special love for Rumsfeld, but I definitely have a distinct hatred for people who use art forms best suited to unbiased investigation as a vehicle for their rhetoric. You want us to believe that an unvarnished view of the world supports your own opinions, which you can then advance after your own work has "validated" them quite by "accident," but your self-delusion is completely transparent and disgusting. Morris, you want to know why people you are antagonistic toward agree to be interviewed by you? It is entirely possible, it seems to me, that you are so stupid they consider it an easy win for them - they take on an adversarial "reporter," yet come out looking like Buddha. Your immense hubris and partisan belief system make you feel like you're the one doing the manipulation, but if anyone is deceiving anyone, it seems more likely these gentlemen have played the game far better than you. Thank you VICE for exposing this man to me. Maybe there's another documentary about Rumsfeld I can watch that truly is intended to let me decide whether the man is a demon, an angel, or maybe just a human.
They need to interview Reihan about interviewing Errol Morris about interviewing Donald Rumsfeld.
This interview felt difficult. It seemed like Reihan wasn't able to find the best way to engage him until right at the end. Morris didn't like his quips. Hated his assertions about what he felt his work expressed. It was only Reihan's "I wonder about..." at the end that actually seemed to get Morris to say something with out first questioning the question.
i don't think Reihan could do anything to really engage him because Errol seems like an antisocial and arrogant type with completely unpredictable reactions. I am still puzzled to why Rumsfeld agreed to be in his movie. Seems counter-intuitive.
Dmitri Katsman
Easy to surmise antisocial from this interview alone but I think introvert is more accurate as Morris cares more about his work than fame. He is much more lively to Bill Maher and other interviewers.
hard to have a real interview with a real journalist when you're being interviewed by rupert murdoch.
Riehan approached the film with altogether too much respect for Rumsfeld. I think the film is difficult to read without an initial understanding that rumsfeld is a proven liar and that Iraq is a monumental failure. Fog of war has a similar approach in that its not interested in convincing you that veitnam was horrid, it assumes you know that and that is especially important because McNamara understands it too. Rumsfeld on the other hand refuses to acknowledge that something horrible actually happened.
I love how people in these comments are writing off Morris just because of his attitude and tone of voice, and not because of what he is actually saying. Oh you young Americans...
I wish I could have watched this right after seeing the documentary. It's rare to hear a director speak so honestly and candidly about heir subject like this.
Two incredibly accomplished interviewers, participating in an interview. Really interesting.
Vice needs to give Mr. Salam a raise after this one, geez!
Reihan Salam is a fucking trooper. One of my personal heroes. Best interviewer ever, for reals. He has a better grasp of syntax and protocol (verbal) than anyone I've ever seen in media. Or anywhere else, for that matter.
this format is so much better for getting into the mind of Errol Morris than the Daily Show. it takes time to understand where hes going with things and get his humor and such.
this interview is extremely fascinating. will definitely be digging into Morris's work.
obviously, Mr. Morris has been around, and has met, and interviewed some very important and interesting people.... But his arrogant, and seemingly inebriated, persona, was really distracting. I give much credit to the interviewer, for hanging in on that one, and not "walking off", as was talked about at the beginning of the meeting...
That's ridiculous. The interviewer was the arrogant windbag, adding pretentious commentary. The interviewer is there to ask questions, not assert his or her own thoughts and ideas. Morris was just irritated by the interviewers pretentiousness, and rightfully so. See Morris promoting this movie in other, professionally done, interviews and you will clearly see what I am talking about.
He is one of the wannabe mysterious people that can't ever agree with what you are saying just because he is arrogant.
Is there anyway to turn up his mic sensitivity a little more? I can't hear all the sounds in his stomach.
comment section is like high school. Kind of a window on our culture, right?
I thought this video was good, and different. Sometimes these interviews feel too formal and in this case it was vented and it turned into more of a conversation. Reihan simply steered the discussion and allowed Errol to talk. I'm quite all right with this mode of discussion, a welcome change of pace as I said.
"Despite the hurried nature of the visit, I am proud to report that my wife met and exceeded the operational standards set by the U.S. military for readiness in a two-front war," said Rumsfeld in a press conference shortly after the visit. "I am confident that she can still stand up to heavy fire and serve ably, even in a rearguard action."
I love that term "Irony Deficit Disorder". I think I'm going to use that a lot.
i like reihan cause he lets errol talk. he does not interrupt. very professional
What's great about Errol Morris is that what you see is him with no filter-he is eccentric, opinionated, blowsy and truthful.
fantastic interview, thank you again Vice
lol looks like Errol is just as high as his son Hamilton
Reihan continuously tries to be apologetic for Rumsfeld (and paint him in a favorable light) and Errol is always stopping him from doing so...and it's Errol that the comment section isn't liking. Rumsfeld was one of the people that led us into and then fucked up a completely unnecessary war. And then were completely unapologetic for it. So, why try and apologize for people like Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush that are unapologetic? And why insult the person that is stopping the whitewasher from whitewashing?
Did y'all intentionally get Morris drunk before the interview, or did he show up that way?
lol. A little from column A, and a little from column B.
investigate rumsfeld with water boarding hahahaha
A suggestion for the interviewer: Don't finish your subject's sentences for him. You'll never get to the "unknown known" if you do. Rumsfeld is typical of the atherosclerosis of America's "administrative cortex". Morris mentions the DSM and suggests a new inclusion, "irony deficiency syndrome" as exemplified by Donald Rumsfeld's imperviousness to irony. Well, he's on the right track, but for quite some time now American officials have given evidence of a wide variety of dissociative, not to say, completely delusional behaviours. The American public itself appears to be as dissociative and delusional. They keep putting trust in and electing head cases to run the country. I haven't seen the film but I am glad that Morris has at least put the reptile on the dissection table. Believe me, if Morris can't make head nor tail of what he is looking at, there are plenty of people out here in the world of samizdat who can.
Reihan has to keep the ball moving. If you don't shove Morris along he will spend the next 20 minutes in silence trying to find words that convey his point.
DogsonlyGOD Then let him find the words and edit out the silence
DogsonlyGOD Totally agree, an interviewer is a director, remember that.
I was just reflecting the other day..."Errol Morris would be GREAT on the VICE Podcast" So, Thank-you!!!
To this day, Donald Rumsfeld still scares me.
This is an incredible movie. Rumsfeld lies the whole time out his TEETH and doesn't bat an eye. He even deceives himself. Incredible.
outstanding interview
Thank you! Reihan Salam Your a wonderful Interviewer.The passion you invoke in people well done sir, well done.
The reason he seems disrespectful is because he respects the interviewer enough to question him and engage a conversational tone. I've seen interviews with lesser interviewers, and he's kind to them, making the conversation tedious. That aside, I don't think Salam in this case has a good enough grasp on Morris and his work to ask the right questions.
Who else is watching this on or soon after news broke that Donald Rumsfeld died on June 30, 2021?
Very enlightening. I was at the TIFF showing of Morris' documentary last year, and he gave similar responses but here he gives much more information. I think his thoughts on Rumsfeld would be a good documentary.
Wow I always thought of Eroll Morris as an empathetic, engaged, deeply curious person with a lot of heart. And now I read here that people call him arrogant, drunk etc. What I noticed is that in the US, people always have to clap each others back and suck each others toes in order to appear "nice" and "humble". Maybe if you're deeply invested in a subject matter, then you don't care anymore how you come across while speaking your mind. That style of conversation seen here would be rather normal in certain parts of Europe.
Why blame Rumsfeld? He was very clear in his thought process. Watch the documentary "The Unknown Known" and you'll see a very clear thinking focused man. I thought he was a psychopath as well before watching this. I left watching this doco with more respect for Donald Rumsfeld. I was less than impressed with the USA. The Government (democrat or republican) are there to protect & further the influence of the USA. Damn the consequences. Haters are going to hate Rumsfeld but I'm one less hater after watching that documentary. I continue to reject the need to have gone to war & proud to have protested that war. However hating one man (Donald Rumsfeld) isn't the correct or logical thing to do.
Reihan Salam is a phenomenal interviewer.
One of the greatest movie maker of film history.
38:40 Errol Morris has finally had enough of Reihan Salam's pretentious self-important nonsensical analysis of the film, and is clearly irritated. Morris' irritation had been subtle up until this point.
it seems like Morris is irritated by the presence of other people in general :)
Drunk people are sometimes easily irritated lol
Morris is irritated at Rumsfeld in that moment, not at Salam.
I wrote my comment before reading this. I thought I was hallucinating or being a jaded asswhipe, but I guess I was not the only one who got a weird vibe from this implant.
Morris was a little rude to Salam, who counter-punched politely with intelligent questions all along. Great interview
Hamilton has a cool dad. Love the part of where he tries to explain how big the universe is.
Mr. Salam is a very skilled and diligent interviewer whose podcasts I enjoy watching, however, this episode just shows how a grandmaster interviewee of one kind could turn the table around so easily. Mr. Morris was not pompous, arrogant or disrespectful at all. As a veteran host from his laudable experience, he simply quickly picked up mischief and misexpression blurred by Mr. Salam, which Mr. Salam conceded several times anyway, though not out of politeness but admission of guilt. Mr. Morris did raise a little of his voice when he thought the key point of his documentary was misunderstood or misrepresented by Mr. Salam, which struck me as bold, principal and uncompromisable. I do not feel Mr. Morris' statements offensive towards Mr. Salam in any way. His aggressive style to control the conversation was not rooted in his excessive ego, but his opinionated mind and acute awareness of discourse.
Can we do another interview with the FBI guy?
I feel like most top commenters here are ignorant of how people act in an interview when there is actual respect on both sides. Errol wasn’t questioning his questions out of arrogance, it was a great dialogue, you could call it Socratic. There is no antagonism in that room. Any filmmaker would kill for an interview this open
Listening to this guy talk is like listening to a nails on a chalkboard. You want to run away as soon as it starts.
love Errol Morris docs
Very interesting interview.
I see a bunch of comments describing Morris as a "strange man" or something along those lines. Sure he's different but that's something that should be celebrated not mocked, I think it provides an insight into the people he interviews.
Very interesting interview. I enjoyed Fog of War. I felt that McNamara was exceptional and tragic.
Great interview, very informative. The folks critical of Morris seem to be way over-reacting. Good questions and good answers.
when he talks about how rumsfeld is self deluded it made think of a point that zizek made, that these people who commit horrible acts they justify it with their inner lives, as lomg as their inner lives are kept in a certain way then it holds up a mirror to theor actions and all they see is the righteousness they've assigned to themselves as responsible fpr the actions. Himmler the SS commander had a group of friends who would play Beethoven pieces together. Yeah, they're nuts
They also shape the world in which we live. We never get the opportunity to do so.
You could say the psychology of Rumsfeld and McNamara were profiled decades ago in a fascinating book called Eichmann in Jerusalem.
"bit of a jerk"? he interviewed Ed Gein with Werner Herzog. He's from Boston! we're jerks. Thin Blue Line had impact of freeing a wronged man and is a historical film for Independent cinema and documentaries (1984). Gates of Heaven. Fast Cheap... Mr Death!!!. Check his early work. Or watch the films or First Person. I love Errol Morris. He is interviewing Donald Rumsfeld. Can you even imagine what few people could elicit quality footage from him? Fine he has an agenda and is a showman. Take it with a grain of salt. He gives us wonderful things to think about *(also gives us amazing tv commercials in a miasma of mediocrity - check his Miller High Life Ads or the new Taco Bell/Ronald McDonald)
Totally agree with your comment. Morris is smart, funny and actually quite likeable. I think some people are a bit upset that he has strong opinions or that he actually engages with the interviewer.
BTW, he lives in Boston (Cambridge, actually), but he's originally from just outside NYC. In either case, both places are know for blunt speaking. But to even call him blunt is maybe going too far.
It kind of upsets me that folks project arrogance onto him. It's like calling someone an elitist because they are knowledgeable. Sort of like saying "He's smart so he must think he's better than others."
when does the Jamaican bud vid come out
@:40 Funny, I just saw an Opie and Anthony episode where Donald Rumsfeld fielded questions from Louis CK.. When Louie asked Rummy if he was a lizard person, he deflected and answered a totally new question incredulously.
Reihan: I feel that..
Errol: Nahh..
LOL
Louis CK was a guest on a radio show the same time they were interviewing Rummy. Louis called him a lizard-man…I don’t think he was joking!
Perhaps Rumsfeld appears empty and stupid because the truth he harbours, but won't tell, is so important - i.e. what is really going on with the power structures behind what we see.
God isn't TH-cam fantastic? I've got goosebumps... Maybe too much java.
Reihan Salam got the Morris treatment here...
I saw his film The Fog of War, which was interesting and disturbing at the same time. This one seems like it will be almost too disturbing to watch.
When Errol Morris speaks it's often in a way that sounds like he's about to have a stroke.
i can just tell errol's mouth is dry af by the way you can hear his mouth smack open every time he speaks
You are so funny.
Lmao. he deleted his comment
face
An interviewer interviewing an interviewer. Reihan's style is calculated, but conversational. Errol's style is totally different, and it makes this interview difficult to watch. Although, I think this is inevitable, Morris takes his time to explain himself in almost tangental terms, which can be hard to follow.
I like this guy, i will study his work.
Is Morris himself somewhat...strange or am i imagining it?
Just did a thesis on this... :'( my beautiful eyes are Roger'd.
Thoughtful approach.... but too brutally slow, unedited and raw. I'm patient but couldn't sit through these 48 minutes easily for a few small points with very few concrete examples, let alone clips of the work under discussion (I did sit through it all). Least enjoyable Vice piece I have seen yet, and I normally like their slow, thoughtful pieces.
13:41... "They"... It's a word echoed from his discussions with Rumsfeld... A detachment from the nation as a whole. "THEY", like, "T.he H.oard of E.cumenical Y.odlers" as mentioned by the WB series "Pinky and the Brain". What could a documentary look like without such bias? It's a beautiful idea. I think, despite Errol's clear bias... He found a wonderful force-balance in "The Unknown Known", and I do indeed love him for it.
reihan crushes it
Requires two sittings. Salams damn patient.
Good questions, Reihan. Shame he didn't really engage with you.
I feel like this guy infuriates Reihan. Love it... brilliant interview
Do you guys mind doing a bit of research before interviewing these people. I understand Morris is a bit of a weird duck, but asking him stupid questions that basically just parrot back some observation he just made or rephrasing a one of the pontifications that end with a statement in the form of a question (to the viewer) where the interviewer then answers the questions and then asks it back sounds like a five year old trying to sound smart.
Vice has an opportunity to ask some important people about some important questions pertaining to the current state of our world. This is exceedingly rare in an increasingly homogenous media landscape for an unabashed somewhat rebellious outsider to breakthrough. Vice does important and groundbreaking journalism and has talented people working there. They can afford to send folks to places where more conventional journalism outfits won't, don't, or refuse to send a hungry journalist to the places where people and events are making news.
Just do your homework before you get someone on your show. Every single fact repeated by the interviewer had just been stated by Morris. Ignoring the rest of Morris' vast and nuanced range of work when his other films clearly relate to the upcoming Rumsfield film is a missed opportunity to say the least.
i actually like both of these guys although reihan's opinions don't mirror my own he seems like a smart man. morris shouldn't be interviewed himself, he has an idea of how interviews should be done, any less than that even if the subject is himself, he is clearly annoyed.
On Rumsfeld's light footprintedness, it's a misunderstanding: Rumsfeld wanted to invade Irak with 15K men. It was both the ideology of efficiency (the modern state has to do things efficiently like "us business executives" expect) as well as hubris (the US forces and my strategic acumen as so exceptional that no people can resist its will).
The military got ver frustrated at his inadequate understanding of how hard it is to invade a country. But Rumsfeld was never stand-offish about the invasion. He just thought it would be epically easy.
I got this from Cobra II: www.amazon.com/Cobra-II-Inside-Invasion-Occupation/dp/0375422625
This interviewer was the wrong choice to interview Mr. Morris. He doesn't seem very bright, and his judgements on the film were off on just about every question he asked. "Great artists steal." "I thought Mr. Rumsfeld was very serene." I couldn't believe what I was hearing. How did he get a job? Haha
is that a vodka tonic?
41:32... Neither the interviewer (who's doing a solid job overall, btw.) nor Errol have served in a combat MOS, or the military in any form. There's a reason Hemingway resonates with soldiers on such topics... it's because he was there with us. Those who haven't been there are confused and can only speculate on what we've lived.
robert california ?
ok VICE i typically love your reporting but how in the hell did you chose Reihan Salam to interview one of the greatest interviewers of all time? clashing wavelengths the entire way through...
errol morris nearly makes this dude cry @ 38 min. young man crying scene talking about old man crying scene. no good.
The country has certainly been destabilized as a result of having Rumsfeld as secretary of defense. McNamara was just as crazy.
Reihan Salam u are awesome bro are you from India
Mr. Morris is a mean jerk to that Indian man. I believe that Mr. Morris is an anti-Indian.
not serene, but comfortable with his own self
The old man sounds cranky like he just woke up.
Few minutes into the interview, I just knew it was going to be rough. Mr. Morris has his own pace and processing speed, and Salem was not mindful of that. Also, Salem's injections and not-so-smart remarks were not helpful, but rather distracting.
Well, for as much as I don't particularly agree with Mr.Morris, he's a man whose a product of his era and I can't blame him. No small wonder then that he'd try to pull a "Fog of War" with Rumsfeld and yet find him self-assured and not at all contrite. For what it's worth, at least Morris let's his subjects give detailed answers and does what a documentary film maker should do: document.
I really enjoy Morris's work but they really need to get that mic further from his mouth! Who is the sound guy in the room?!? Jesus Christ!!
Is this a Marlon Brando / Alfred Hitchcock thing? Or is this dude hammered. He seems eloquent & lucid, but did someone smell that glass?
Errol seems somewhat of a difficult persona. The interviewer asked intellectually stimulating and straightforward questions. Errol had serious difficulties answering these question. He gets tangled up with insignificant semantics.
Richard Dawkins nah.
John Smith ya.
Bit of a bore fest this. Interesting fact though.Errol Morris son Hamilton Morris is a journalist and science editor of Vice magazine.
Whoa. Huge fan of both and never ever realized that was his son.
Let it be known that pomposity is not required to appear intelligent. Indeed, some humility would go a long way in the interview.
@20:21 Errol Morris was also probably referring to this uppity interviewer too. I can smell his pseudo-intellectualism from a mile away. The interviewer wants to appear to be intelligent more than being really intrigued by Errol Morris's work .
Is that Vodka he's drinking, or is he always like this?
Better go back to your beer commercials.
I got into reading the comments; eventually, it proved tiring; a question I have is why do so many commenters find him "arrogant"... Is it because he is the kind of plain raconteur of matters and facts, in a way such, a considerable majority Stateside finds it annoying... because it simply pins down the indisputable fact that US citizens insist on being manipulated by political criminals? Meh...
Reihan Salam - have you really watched the Rumsfeld film - how on earth have you got that kind of impression of him - do you think that you can recognize human nature well - or - maybe not (but I suppose Rumsfeld can fool many)
Damn, how drunk is Morris here? Get yourself together man.
Errol is either hammered or has auto-brewery syndrome.
from my perspective the american genocide of vietnam of which Rumsfeld was apart desensitized him, thats why he seems so cold and un-caring
Podcaster to podcaster... I'm almost 8min in and the mouth sounds are borderline intolerable. Did y'all have a big greasy steak dinner before this? Or did you not filter your audio in the least for your post production?
th-cam.com/users/chaseellisvoice
Halfway through this interview, and I'm really glad I watched it, so that I can avoid Morris' work in the future. Here is a biographer/documentarian/whatever you want to call him who calls his subject deeply self-deceived, yet who cannot stomach a characterization of his own work in any other way than as a direct attack on Rumsfeld, EVEN THOUGH he himself says he has no idea why he made the film in the first place. He literally has to interrupt Mr. Salam when Salam attempts to characterize his portrayal of Rumsfeld in a somewhat positive light (toward Rumsfeld), and insists that we see what Salam saw as Rumsfeld's ease rather in the negative adjective terms of "complacent," "removed," etc. He can't even acknowledge the simple idea that the author is dead; that Salam's interpretation of his work has validity, though anyone can see that Rumsfeld may either be seen as complacent or at ease depending on how you wish to interpret his unknowable internal experience. He cannot contain himself when Mr. Salam characterizes Rumsfeld's performance in his film as containing wisdom; he MUST recharacterize it as "seeming" wisdom. All this from a guy who says he doesn't even know why he made the film.
Errol Morris, who is really deceiving who here? You know why you made the film, don't you? You're just saying you have no idea because that leaves your motive unassailable from any angle; it's quite transparent. I have no special love for Rumsfeld, but I definitely have a distinct hatred for people who use art forms best suited to unbiased investigation as a vehicle for their rhetoric.
You want us to believe that an unvarnished view of the world supports your own opinions, which you can then advance after your own work has "validated" them quite by "accident," but your self-delusion is completely transparent and disgusting.
Morris, you want to know why people you are antagonistic toward agree to be interviewed by you? It is entirely possible, it seems to me, that you are so stupid they consider it an easy win for them - they take on an adversarial "reporter," yet come out looking like Buddha. Your immense hubris and partisan belief system make you feel like you're the one doing the manipulation, but if anyone is deceiving anyone, it seems more likely these gentlemen have played the game far better than you.
Thank you VICE for exposing this man to me. Maybe there's another documentary about Rumsfeld I can watch that truly is intended to let me decide whether the man is a demon, an angel, or maybe just a human.