It’s not unusual for a director presenting his film at a film festival to express some anxiety. But as he spoke to the audience before a packed Telluride evening screening of his controversial Donald Trump biopic “The Apprentice” on Saturday, director Ali Abbasi felt himself sweating with his own particular brand of nervousness.
The screening, which had been kept under wraps ahead of the festival, would be the first time American audiences would be able to see the film that sparked a storm at the Cannes Film Festival in May, where “The Apprentice” received an 11-minute standing ovation even as it faced threats of lawsuits from the Trump campaign.
“I don't get nervous often, but I'm actually nervous,” Iranian-born Abbasi (“Sacred Spider”) told the Telluride crowd. [film] He has been preparing for some years and now he is coming home to you.”
“The Apprentice” chronicles Trump’s rise to fame and power in 1970s and 1980s New York, with Sebastian Stan playing the real-estate developer, future reality TV star and politician alongside Jeremy Strong as his ruthless lawyer and mentor Roy Cohn. Scripted by journalist Gabriel Sherman, who wrote a 2014 best-seller about the late Fox News chief Roger Ailes, the darkly comic film portrays Trump as a sleazy, callous, yet charismatic social climber who learns the art of power through aggressive attacks, ethical disregard and strategic media manipulation under the tutelage of the amoral and deeply flawed Cohn.
Following the film’s premiere at Cannes, Trump campaign communications director Steven Cheung called it “garbage” and “pure fiction” and vowed to file a lawsuit against the filmmakers in an attempt to block its release. Studios, streaming services and independent distributors were understandably wary of choosing such a political subject matter. But Briarcliff Entertainment ultimately stepped in to distribute the film domestically, scheduling its release less than a month before a presidential election that has already been among the most tumultuous and fiercely contested in American history.
The morning after the Telluride screening — and just 64 days before Election Day — The Times sat down with Abbasi, Sherman, Stan and Strong to talk about the film’s trajectory, the challenges of portraying such a polarizing figure and the impact they hope “The Apprentice” will have as the country prepares for the home stretch of a deeply divisive election season.
This interview has been condensed and edited.
Ali, when you presented the film last night, you said: “This is not a political propaganda piece. It is a reflection of what has happened.” and aims to show you a picture of yourselves as a community.” Can you explain more about that?
Abbasid: This is not a political propaganda piece. The nature of politics is to simplify things to achieve a certain effect, in order to gain or regain power. And that is not really the project that is being carried out here. We are all interested in exploring the complexities.
People ask, “Why are we going to see this movie? What is it going to tell us about Trump that we don’t already know?” If you think you can get to know a character by reading a Wikipedia page, you’re welcome. But this isn’t information. It’s an experience, and it’s an experience of the complexity of these characters. Also, for me, as an outsider, this was my chance to look at the American system and the absolute corruption that has been an institutionalized part of it, at least from my perspective.
Strong: Of course, political machinations are part of what the film explores and examines, but it's really a psychological investigation and, I think, a humanistic interrogation of these people.
I think every great movie is about a relationship, and this movie is about that relationship and the formative aspects of it. Emerson said that every institution is the shadow of a man. And I feel like this movie is looking at that very long shadow of that man. [Cohn] refracted through that man [Trump]He is looking at that shadow that casts its dark light on us now.
Ali makes these kind of spooky horror movies, in a way. This is a monster movie. It's a Frankenstein movie. It's kind of an origin story of the birth of a mindset. With the combination of Gabe's journalistic veracity and Ali's Lynch-esque punk-rock cinematography, we end up with something that's not “one plus one equals two.” All politics aside, that's what I'm excited for people to see.
The Trump in this film is very different from the one we see today. He is younger and more vulnerable and is still trying to figure out how he is going to project himself in the world. Sebastian, how did you get to know him?
Stan: When I first read the script in 2019, it reminded me oddly of “The Godfather Part II.” I had the feeling that if I forgot the names of the characters and just looked at what was written on the page (which is what you ultimately had to do), it felt like I was witnessing the solidification of a person in stone. It reminded me of Michael Corleone’s arc in many ways. Once you removed your subjective judgment on the matter, you could look at it in different ways.
Strong: As an actor, I think what Sebastian did is a remarkable achievement. I never saw the seams. It was completely real. I met a very different Donald up to a point in the script where there were hints of the person we know today, a kind of Darth Vader. And when I met that Trump, that's when I really understood the arc of what he was doing.
Sherman: For me, when I sat down to write the movie, one of the things I really wanted to explore was how to humanize him. He's a larger than life figure who lives in our imagination, but he's also a human being. I love the scene where Roy calls Donald and he's asleep on the couch. There's no superpower there, he's just a guy who's passed out on his couch. Normalizing him as much as possible, I think, is something that's rarely done with his character.
Stan, left, and Strong in a scene from “The Apprentice.”
(Pief Weyman / Apprentice Productions)
Trump's team is not only claiming that the film is defamatory, but that its release constitutes a form of election interference. Was there always hope that it would be released before the election?
Abbasid: I think it's really important to talk about timing. I'm glad the timing is here, it's exciting, obviously. But we've been trying to make this movie since 2018, and every year we're like, “We're almost there.” By the time January 6th came around, we had some of the financing and everything else, and then everyone was like, “No, thank you. Bye.”
Sherman: At an event, I think in 2019, a very prominent Hollywood executive came up to me and said something like, “When Trump loses, call us. We’ll be interested.” We weren’t planning on bringing this out in a political sense. It was just a battle to get it out.
The film includes a scene in which Trump rapes his wife Ivanto on the floor of his apartment, along with other scenes showing him getting liposuction and cosmetic surgery for his baldness. Why was it important to include those particular moments and how did you decide where to draw the line between what was just right and what was too raunchy?
Sherman: For me, the Ivana scene was a touchstone of the film because we're asking the audience to spend time with this character and we have to show all sides of her. We'd be failing ourselves — I'd be failing myself as a writer and journalist — if we didn't include that. He's been credibly accused of sexual assault by more than a dozen women. A New York jury found him liable for committing sexual assault and defamation against E. Jean Carroll. This is an aspect of his character and it would be a glaring omission if it wasn't there, especially right now. [post-#MeToo] climate.
Ivana made those allegations in a divorce deposition under threat of perjury, under oath, and every time she changed her statements, it was always because she was pressured by Trump's lawyers before a book came out or while he was running for president in 2016. So if you're trying to assess the truth of something, if she says one thing and then retracts it because her lawyers threaten her, what seems truer to you? To me, her first statement seems truer. That's why we felt it was the most honest way to show the scene.
Given the stakes of the election, and knowing the motto Trump learned from Cohn to “attack, attack, attack,” how are you preparing for what might come from him and his supporters when the film is released?
Strong: I feel that the stakes of this film are much higher than what each of us can do individually. Our role as artists is always to hold up a mirror to nature, and that can come with some risk. This is not the kind of film that is being made, for the most part. But I feel that, in this age of alternative facts and fantasy, it is more important than ever for art to speak the truth and question it without fear. None of us are interested in judging, demonizing or vilifying these people. We are trying to understand them, which would be in all our best interest at this time.
Stan: I think the people who support him and admire him will certainly see what they want to see in this film. But we've been living one day at a time, and it feels really good to enjoy this day right now. We live in uncertain times. I mean, look at the very different weekends we've experienced, where we went from an assassination attempt to a president resigning. So who has the answer? I don't know.
Abbasid: When we did “Holy Spider,” I went through a version of this. Much like the Trump campaign who didn’t see this movie and came up with all these [attacks and threats]In Iran, they saw the trailer for “Holy Spider” and said, “This is blasphemy. This guy should be executed for this.” I don’t know how much he really meant, but you never know. My parents still live in Iran, and my mother would call me crying and beg me to cut things out of the movie for her safety. I was like, “We’re riding on the back of the dragon. There’s no way to control it. So let’s enjoy the ride at least as much as we can.”
I don't feel like we've done anything really dangerous and terrible and now we need to expand our security and hire two people with guns. [for protection]There's a complexity there. The experience of the film and the performances are superlative for the political message or whatever. Ultimately, I think people will see it that way.
You know how Barbie worked, right? They said, “If you love Barbie, it’s a movie for you. If you hate Barbie, it’s a movie for you.” So we say the same thing. If you love Trump, it’s a movie for you. If you hate Trump, it’s a movie for you, too.
