Sam Esmail Didn’t Mean for Leave the World Behind to Be So Timely
Caution: There are spoilers for Leave the World Behind.
Sam Esmail's style of work is easily recognizable, just like John Hancock's signature. His composing technique is so detailed and packed with information that it's hard to take it all in at once. You might need to watch it more than once to fully understand it. It seems like his camera doesn't follow the laws of physics, as it moves through objects and into hypothetical scenes. Characters speak directly to the audience, making it feel like they're looking straight at you through the screen. His work varies from the dystopian science fiction of Mr. Robot to the military mystery of Homecoming, and now his new film, Leave the World Behind.
Leave the World Behind is a movie adapted from Rumaan Alam's book and directed by Esmail. The movie is dark and takes place at a country house outside New York. Amanda and Clay go there with their children for a quick vacation. But on their first night there, two strangers show up and claim that they own the house. GH and his daughter Ruth say that there is a blackout in the city and they need a place to stay. The situation quickly becomes tense, and strange things start happening, such as deer behaving in odd ways and automobile accidents. This kind of story fits well with Esmail's style, as he is heavily influenced by thrillers from the ’70s. He recently discussed the movie’s adaptation from the book to the screen, how the script eerily connects with current affairs, and how he chose what information to reveal to the audience.
Can you share with me your experience with the book? When did you come across it and what made you interested in adapting it? I stumbled upon the book during the first year of the pandemic when we were all being extremely cautious with our hygiene practices. As I had just finished working on Mr. Robot, which left me contemplating my next project, I found myself drawn to disaster films since it's a genre that I am particularly focused on. From The Towering Inferno to Earthquake, I have a soft spot for all disaster movies, including Roland Emmerich's The Day After Tomorrow, which just so happens to be my personal favorite. Admittedly, this could be due to the fact that my wife was a part of the project, so I may be a bit biased.
The theme of the book really resonated with me because it shows how in times of crisis, people often forget their common humanity. This is especially relevant to what's going on in the world today. What fascinated me most was how this book does the opposite of typical disaster movies. In most disaster movies, the focus is on the disaster itself, with characters playing a secondary role. However, in this book, the characters are at the forefront, and the disaster is more of a distant background. This felt like a more authentic representation of how people would actually experience a crisis.
The three types of movies - disaster, pandemic, and zombie - all have a similar storyline. It's no surprise that a scene in your movie where characters are having separate conversations and the camera cuts back and forth between them reminded me of a scene from the 1978 movie Dawn of the Dead. In that movie, the characters were living in a barricaded area of a zombie-filled shopping mall where they were trying to act normal. The difference is that in your movie, the monster is unknown. In Dawn of the Dead and other disaster movies, the characters know what's happening and have to find a way to stop it. But in your movie, the characters and audience are left in the dark about the threat. The tension builds because no one knows what's going to happen until the end.
So, I had you on my mind when I was working on this. Remember when we talked about those thriller movies that leave us feeling paranoid and uneasy? You mentioned that a common theme in these movies is that the system or establishment wins, and our heroes don't come out victorious. It's like real life, where we're often left with uncertainty and have to learn to deal with it. The ending of the movie needs to leave us with that sense of unease and questioning: "What just happened? Am I safe?" Every time I watch The Parallax View (which is pretty often), I still feel that sense of paranoia long after the movie is over. It takes me a while to process it all.
At the conclusion of the film, you bestowed upon the viewers a surplus of content that surpassed that of the written work. Indeed, you did.
Why? Because in literature, you have the freedom to be more abstract since it allows readers to use their imagination. The interpretation of the text is left up to them. On the other hand, in movies, the audience needs more guidance and tends to require clear answers. However, I didn't want the film to be too straightforward and wanted to capture the tone of the book's open-ended conclusion. The goal was to stimulate discussion, not to neatly tie everything up. I believe the film accomplished this without being too abstract, which can become excessive in cinema. The final scene depicts Amanda and Ruth in the woods, observing something, before the audience sees a mushroom cloud over New York and hear sounds of explosions and gunfire. It's clear that some sort of war is happening, but we're unsure of what or why exactly. This scene ensures viewers' curiosity and leaves them with open-ended questions that align with the film's purpose.
The film introduces the concept of using technology and untraceable messages to cause chaos and make people turn against each other, something that was not in the original book. This idea ties into the central theme of the book, which explores the mistrust and conflict that can arise during a crisis. The film serves as a warning about the dangers of turning on each other instead of coming together during such times. It suggests that the world around us thrives on this anxiety, and that in times of confusion we may be prone to turning on one another.
The company TikTok, which is owned by China, is being accused of causing disagreement in American politics. This film mentions China as a potential player in this situation and even includes a scene where Clay is chased by a plane dropping leaflets in Persian that say "Death to America." This is a risky move to include in the film. Additionally, the movie's timing is coincidentally relevant to current events, such as the conflict in Gaza and America's involvement in it. It's surprising that the movie was so on-point considering it was made a year ago. The director doesn't really have an answer for this kind of coincidence, but it's not something they intentionally planned for or want to take credit for.
When watching a movie about the possible collapse of society, it's important to not hold back. We can discuss politics another time - what really matters is exploring the human aspect of it all. What occurs when we succumb to our most negative tendencies regarding race, social status, and fear of outsiders? What is that aspect of humanity that causes us to become defensive and create divisions? That's what I aimed to examine. I'm not afraid to incorporate genuine worries and apprehensions into my work. However, I never intended for it to mirror reality, and I sincerely hope it doesn't with this film.
The movie mentioned a reactor meltdown in New Jersey, and the speaker is laughing because you noticed it.
Where is a comparable incident to the one on Mr. Robot located? Is this an indication that this film is part of the greater Mr. Robot world? I dislike using that terminology; however, whenever I compose something, I want to keep it within my world. Why not keep it all within the family?
I wanted to discuss the style of the movie. You have a talent for moving the camera in interesting ways to show us things, but it seems like you state everything clearly, even when the camera is at a strange angle. You have simplified something in your own unique way? I'm not sure if "restraint" is the best word for it. I had the same crew - the same cinematographer, the same production designer, composer, and sound-design team. However, compared to Mr. Robot or even Homecoming, where we were more experimental and bold with our choices, when we started filming Leave the World Behind, I thought, "Let's use everything we've tried before, test it all out, and come together to convey the story in its most fundamental form. What does the film essentially want to be?" It's possible that this is simply due to a sense of maturity or that this particular tale didn't lend itself to all of the techniques I used before.
When doing daring activities, it seems like it all fits together perfectly. The way the camera travels through the buildings gives off an eerie sensation, as if an evil force is entering the area. This is comparable to the movie The Shining, which was a major source of inspiration. I have a particular fondness for large camera movements, especially when they convey information the audience does not know. This is like the film is controlled by an unknown presence, and you are the devil peering down at the characters. A great example of this is the scene in Rear Window when Jimmy Stewart is sleeping and the camera is moving, revealing things happening across the street that he is unaware of. As the viewer, you become unsettled, pondering your own identity and role in what you are watching.
You may label it as diabolical, but it dwells inside of you. From the moment I watched that movie during my childhood, I've been fascinated by the concept of a camera possessing a distinct personality.
It's fascinating how my initial thoughts on this conversation were more in line with a story of paranoia, while you saw it as a disaster movie. Now, we're touching upon the topic of horror. Whenever I come across a film that I can't quite categorize, it's always an exhilarating experience. It reminds me of how I felt while watching Get Out - it's hard to pin down if it's a paranoid thriller, horror movie, or even a dark comedy. It's impossible to tell. I relish the unpredictability of it all. The perfect combination is an ambiguous tone that keeps you guessing at every turn.
In both this film and your past work on Mr. Robot, there seems to be a recurring technique where a character will pause to observe something before the audience is shown what they are looking at. What draws you to including these moments in your work? Additionally, have you had the chance to watch the documentary, Visions of Light?
Which section are you referring to? The one featuring cinematographer William A. Fraker, discussing the filming of Rosemary's Baby.
Do you remember that scene in the movie where Ruth Gordon is sitting on the bed? She was mostly blocked by the doorframe, but it made such an impact. Fraker's observation about it is spot on. When that scene plays, the audience leans to one side, almost as if they're trying to look past the doorframe. You can feel their curiosity, they want to know what's happening! It's moments like these that make oners so special. With a one-take shot, you have a limited frame, no cuts, and the audience is forced to focus on every inch of the screen. It's incredibly engaging and always evokes a physical response from the viewer. This is critical for suspense, which is like pulling a rubber band, stretching it further and further until it's ready to snap. When a film can create that tension, it's a truly amazing experience.
In films, there's a technique where the audience gets to see exciting events from a distance or through the eyes of the characters. For example, you might see G.H. running away from a plane crash before you even know what's happening. Let's talk about how it feels to watch a film. Being up close to a big, dramatic scene like a crashing plane can give you a rush as a viewer. It's like you're part of the action. But that kind of experience can feel shallow to me. It's just a joyride. What's really scary is when you see something in the distance getting closer and closer, and you have to run away. That kind of reaction feels more authentic and relatable to the characters because that's what they're going through. It's a more realistic journey for the characters, rather than just a thrilling ride for the audience.
Initially, Denzel Washington was set to portray G.H. in the upcoming project. However, there was a conflict in his schedule and Mahershala Ali was brought in as a replacement. Nonetheless, Mahershala was a perfect fit for the role since G.H. was envisioned as an archetype commonly seen in Hitchcock's movies, resembling iconic actors like Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart. G.H. is not a superhero type who is always five steps ahead, but an ordinary person who is half a step ahead and can assess any situation. Mahershala possesses these qualities and more. He is captivating and personable, but also authentic and down-to-earth. When he appears in close-up scenes, you can detect the fear in his eyes without any overt action.
Have you collaborated with Julia Roberts before? Actually, this would be the third time if we consider Castle since I was in charge of producing it.
The work she's doing for you seems unique compared to what she's done for others before. She's fully immersing herself in character acting, separating from her iconic image as Julia Roberts. My first interaction with Julia was only five years ago. She strives for self-improvement and enjoys mixing things up. As soon as I read the book, I immediately thought of her. Not because she resembles Amanda, she has no similarities to her. However, I knew the character required Julia's persona as America's Sweetheart to be turned on its head.
Julia is portraying a character who has some traits of a Karen. However, she is able to bring out the humanity in this character, something that is necessary for the movie to be effective. It's fitting that the world's most famous movie star is the performer taking on this role.
The folks behind the camera for this project are Sam Esmail who is taking care of the direction, and the cast members include Ethan Hawke, Julia Roberts, and Mahershala Ali. In the picture, they can be seen posing together for a photo op taken by JoJo Whilden who worked on behalf of Netflix.
We all know Ethan Hawke is not afraid to take risks when it comes to acting, but I was surprised by how much he bared himself emotionally in this performance. It was almost like watching a magic show. Typically in movies about disasters, the father figure is the hero who knows how to save the day, but Clay is the complete opposite. Despite his countless failures and letdowns to his family and himself, you can still sympathize with him, or even because of them. Ethan portrayed this vulnerability in a very powerful way.
He is a person who often ponders about philosophical concepts. Did he share any insights regarding this particular story? Yes, we had extensive conversations about it. I recall inquiring, "What do you think the sentiment of this movie is? I can't seem to draw a comparison to any other film." He took some time to ponder and returned the following day stating, "Have you witnessed the movie Fearless?"
I adore that movie. It's been around for three decades, and this year marks its anniversary. I hadn't watched it before, but when I did, I developed a strong affection for it. I felt it had a tonal similarity to the film I'm working on. Even though it had grand and spectacular scenes like a plane crash, it was truly relatable and human.
Do you reckon Clay got intimate with his pupils? I doubt it. In my opinion, he's not the type Ruth had in mind. Sure, he enjoys being the center of attention, but I don't believe he goes overboard.
What made Archie lose his teeth? I need to be cautious with my response. I believe it's a bad dream. The film feels like a bad dream, and in bad dreams, things occur without any clear cause.
I've had scary dreams where my teeth fell out. It's strange, right? Did the last episode of Friends play a role in the story or was it your idea to include it? The book mentioned Friends, but the desire to watch the finale was my personal touch.
Why Friends? Friends is a popular TV show all over the world, not just in the USA. It gained popularity again around five years ago due to streaming, and it appeals to people of different generations. In the show, Ruth tells Amanda that Friends is nostalgic for a time that never really existed. This is interesting because we can see things in a positive light which may not be true. However, it can also make us believe that things were better in the past, when we know deep down that they weren't. This connects to Rose's journey in the story, as she is trying to find something pure in her life which she can't find in her family. In a way, the characters in Friends become her real friends. As an author, I wanted Rose to have a happy ending because many paranoid thrillers tend to be brutal at the conclusion. I wanted to give Rose a small sense of hope in the end.
You may not have thought about it, but after seeing the impressive collection of vinyl records at G.H.'s place and the massive DVD collection in the neighbor's basement, I firmly believe that owning physical media is the way to go. This movie is a perfect example of why. I am absolutely convinced! In fact, I had been thinking about it quite a bit. Interestingly, the makers of Netflix seem to have missed this point: during the final scene, Rose's thumb hovers over the remote and instead of selecting the Netflix option, she chooses to play the movie on the DVD player.
What are you saying? If a situation like the one shown in this film occurs, Netflix won't be able to offer you a way to escape. You'll have to rely on tangible forms of media.
Even though Leave the World Behind got released in October 2020, Esmail got a pre-release copy in July of the same year. He then won a competition to bring the story into the big screen. Esmail tied the knot with former Shameless actress, Emmy Rossum, in 2017. The shots were captured without any noticeable cuts, making them appear as one continuous take.
