Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with The Atlantic Contributing Writer and "Rebellion" Author Robert Kagan; Interview with "Babygirl" Director and Writer Halina Reijn; Interview with "Porcelain War" Co-Director and Subject and Ukrainian Artist and Military Trainer Slava Leontyev; Interview with "Porcelain War" Co-Director Brendan Bellomo. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired January 13, 2025 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need Mother Nature to give us a break.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: California still burning. I get the latest as dangerous winds threaten to undo progress already made.
And Trump's 24-hour deadline for ending Russia's-Ukraine war slips. Foreign policy expert Robert Kagan on what losing Kyiv to Putin would mean for
Trump, for America, and for the world.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NICOLE KIDMAN, ACTRESS, "BABYGIRL": We need to have a conversation. I don't want to hurt you.
HARRIS DICKINSON, ACTOR, "BABYGIRL": I think I have power over you. Because I can make one call and you lose everything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- "Babygirl." Writer-director Halina Reijn joins me on her bold, buzzy new film starring Nicole Kidman about reclaiming female
sexuality.
Plus, "Porcelain War." Documentary directors Slava Leontyev and Brendan Bellomo talk to Hari Srinivasan about Ukrainian artists who keep creating
beauty in their scarred country.
Welcome to the program everyone, I'm Christiane Amanpour in New York.
The winds are picking up again in California and the death toll is rising in what could be the state's worst wildfires ever. It's an all-out race
against the environment. Firefighters are battling to keep the blazes contained and maintain what progress they've made in the past few days.
More than 20 people are confirmed dead, dozens more are missing, over a hundred thousand are under evacuation orders, and thousands of homes have
been destroyed. These parents lost even the most personal keepsakes and memories of their late daughter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GIORGI ANTONORI, LATE DAUGHTER'S ASHES LOST IN FIRE: We had a daughter 15 years ago. She'd be 15. And she passed away when she was one. And her ashes
were in our home. And I mean, they're gone. Like every memory, every piece of physical evidence of her life is just gone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It's unthinkable. And let's go now to Veronica Miracle who's in Altadena for us. Veronica, you might have heard those parents who've lost
even the ashes of their late daughter. Tell me more about the victims and what you're seeing where you are.
VERONICA MIRACLE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, just absolute devastation here in Altadena. This whole area is ravaged. And we're just seeing block after
block of homes completely incinerated. We see chimneys standing in some areas and some of the foundations, but that's pretty much it.
I mean, if you take a look inside of this car here, you can see the outside of it, but you can see how hot that these fires burn because everything
inside has been burned to ash. And what's really incredible about these fires and just shows how precarious the winds were, all of these homes here
behind us are burned to the ground. But then just right over this way, a home is still standing. So, it's really -- if you're lucky, the home stands
so much has to do with just how the fire is moving.
Right now in this neighborhood, what we're seeing our crews here. So, Cal Edison crews, they're trying to get power lines back up. Really, the
efforts right now is just to make sure that everything is safe so that people can come back in and tend to what is left or to see if their house
is still here.
But then, after that begins the cleanup. A FEMA administrator telling CNN today that it will likely take about six months to get everything cleaned
up because all of the toxic ash is now seeping into the soil. They will have to completely remove foundations of homes. These air thousands of
homes that we're talking about.
So, just six months -- rather six months of cleanup, and then after that, how will these communities rebuild? Those are some of the questions that
people are bringing up at these community meetings that we're seeing, Christiane.
AMANPOUR: You know, Veronica, it sounds almost even too big to deal with. And I wonder what people are saying, including firefighting officials and
others, that even the progress they might have made over the last few days may be threatened tonight and tomorrow by more high winds.
MIRACLE: Yes, there are major concerns for this next wind event. Winds have already started picking up over to the east of us, and these are going
to last through all the way through Wednesday.
[13:05:00]
In fact, officials are saying people who live in Ventura County all the way to San Diego, that's basically all of Southern California, need to be
prepared to evacuate. That's millions of people. And then, you have communities, many communities here that are already emotionally stressed,
whether they have been evacuated where they've had evacuation warnings, many businesses in L.A. County have shut down because they don't have
employees to come to work or they just don't feel that it's safe.
So, there's a lot of a psychological damage that's happening right now. And so, this next wind event, people will be very on edge.
AMANPOUR: And as you pointed out, the direction of the winds make the difference between an establishment that's burnt down and one that is
spared. What about the efforts to rescue people, to search for the missing? We understand 20 to 24 have died and yet, there are hundreds potentially,
or at least 100 who are still missing.
MIRACLE: Yes, that is something that investigators touched upon today. That's one of the main reasons why they aren't letting people back into
these evacuation zones because they're still searching for those missing. They're finding remains when they go into some of these properties, and
they have to go home by home. Take a listen to what authorities had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT G. LUNA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF: We are in the third day of grid searching. It is a very grim task. And we -- unfortunately, every day
we're doing this, we're running across the remains of individual community members. That is not easy work. Very sad to report. And I believe that work
is not only going to continue, but I believe we'll continue to find remains.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Again, it's very stark, isn't it, Veronica?
MIRACLE: So -- incredibly stark. Just hard to even fathom. And at one point, they were actually bringing people in. They were kind of
accompanying people one by one to see if they could come in to get their medication or search for small pets, but the line became too long. They
have now halted all of those efforts. And they're really locking everything down. They have a curfew in place. And they are warning people, if you come
into these areas, you will be arrested.
AMANPOUR: And not just people who are coming in, who may be endangering themselves, but those who we're reading more and more about, who are
looting and scamming and basically exhibiting the worst side of human nature in this situation.
MIRACLE: Right, right. Yes, there are concerns of people looting. They have arrested dozens of people. They've also arrested people for being
armed, showing up here with narcotics, and really just being in these areas that they're not supposed to be.
Just in this area alone, a couple dozen people arrested here for curfews and also for the looting that you mentioned. And today, the District
Attorney of L.A. County said that they are going to prosecute these people. And that if you come in, you will be facing consequences. They want people
to know, in his words, that there will be teeth to these consequences. So, warning many people to not come into these evacuation zones.
And also, it is not safe. There are still downed power lines. As we showed you, there are crews working they're looking for gas lines to make sure all
of those are safe and there's toxic ash in the air. You know, I'm not wearing my mask right now because obviously we're live on TV, but if you
don't for a while, your throat starts to hurt. So, it's just not safe to be here.
AMANPOUR: Well, pop it back on now. And thank you for bringing us the latest. Veronica Miracle from Altadena. Thank you.
Now, it is the last week of President Biden's presidency. Today, he's at the State Department giving a final foreign policy speech with a heavy
focus on Ukraine.
On the campaign trail, Donald Trump vowed that he could end the conflict in 24 hours, even before he took office. But in the full light of daytime
reality, he and his designated officials are pushing the deadline down the road. As the outgoing administration pushes out its last tranche of aid for
Kyiv before handing over.
Robert Kagan argues that Ukraine is a key test for Trump, as well as for America's adversaries. And he's joining the program live. Welcome to the
program again, Robert Kagan. And we want to get your -- you know, your perspective and analysis on what lies ahead in Ukraine. And before I get to
how you've laid it out in your Atlantic magazine piece. So, what do you think Trump is going to do day one?
ROBERT KAGAN, CONTRIBUTING WRITER, THE ATLANTIC AND AUTHOR, "REBELLION": Well, clearly, they would like to have -- get a negotiation started as
quickly as possible with Vladimir Putin, but I think they may understand that there's very little prospect of getting any kind of serious talks.
Putin will, of course, talk forever if he needs to, but to really get down to heading toward a settlement.
[13:10:00]
Under the current circumstances, Putin has no incentive to negotiate. He thinks he's winning the war. And unless something changes, rather
dramatically, which would include getting a new aid bill for Ukraine, I think it should dawn on the Trump people and Trump himself that Putin is
not amenable to any kind of deal that we could possibly live with.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, let's pick that apart because, as I just said, the Biden administration is trying to send its last tranche. You're saying another
major commitment by the incoming administration is vital, not just for Ukraine's survival, but to send an unmistakable message to Putin.
KAGAN: Well, look, Putin -- obviously, Russia is suffering in this war. The casualties are immense. I think they're heading up in the direction of
500,000 casualties, which is, you know, a tremendous cost. The Russian economy is suffering from the sanctions that the world has put on it. But
Putin believes that his timeline is better than the Ukrainian timeline, and I think he's probably right.
The Ukrainians are going to run out of American assistance if nothing else is done within the next few weeks. And it takes time to get them aid. So,
by the end of the year, they may be collapsing, whether from actual incapacity to fight or from a collapse of morale if they're not getting any
support from the United States. So, Putin thinks he can hold on long enough to win this conflict.
And by win, I think we need to understand clearly that win does not mean a negotiated settlement where Ukraine keeps part of its sovereignty, et
cetera. A win for Putin is a total elimination of Ukraine as an independent entity on the world stage.
AMANPOUR: But I wonder whether anybody gets that or is willing to believe that in the sort of NATO alliance and all those who spent the last three
years trying to send that very message to Putin.
You know, Putin has thought that he could wait out the west ever since this started. Let's say at least six months into the war. In your piece, you
have said, Trump is facing a catastrophic defeat in Ukraine. That's basically the title of your piece. Why Trump?
KAGAN: Well, it's just, Trump is going to be the president -- if this scenario unfolds, Trump will be the president of the United States when
Kyiv falls and when Russia achieves its complete victory in Ukraine. That, of course, is going to have huge strategic ramifications for Europe, for
European security and I would say for America's continuing role as the -- as a major player in world affairs. And the question for Donald Trump is,
is that what he wants to preside over?
Because I think that, you know, history suggests that presiding over that kind of strategic defeat by an acknowledged adversary like Russia is
usually not good for the president who happens to be there. You know, this is not obviously Trump's fault in many respects. I mean, this is a
situation that the Biden administration has left him with, but nevertheless, that -- the reality is that if nothing is done, Kyiv will
fall on Donald Trump's watch.
AMANPOUR: OK. I just want to stop you there about the Biden administration, because the president, in his all his foreign policy
speeches, always talks about everything they've done to precisely stave off Russia and to save Ukraine as a sovereign independence state.
Of course, your wife, Victoria Nuland, was in the administration, had a lot to do with that. What has gone wrong?
KAGAN: Well, what has gone wrong -- and I think many people have written about this, is that instead of realizing that we could not afford to allow
Ukraine to lose this conflict. And therefore, to pour in everything that we possibly could as quickly as we possibly could, technologically and in
terms of quantity, all the different weapons. Instead, the Biden administration delayed taking action, delayed providing certain kinds of
aid. They were worried, I think, quite unnecessarily about what Putin might do. I don't think Putin had any real options in response to that, that
could hurt the United States.
And so, they basically played a rather cautious game trying to steer this path. And the result is that we are in a situation where it has not been
enough. And I think historians may look back on the Biden administration and say they were the ones primarily -- if in fact Ukraine falls, they were
the ones who were primarily responsible for allowing that to happen.
Now, Trump himself has played a role in that by opposing the aid and delaying the provision of aid in 2024. But at the end of the day, it's the
Biden administration that will have presided over what right now is something that is on a trajectory toward defeat.
AMANPOUR: OK. And then, to answer people who say, but hang on, he sent all this stuff and they say that they couldn't send more because the Ukrainians
weren't, you know, ready to take them, weren't trained up, et cetera, et cetera. It had to be slow. We shouldn't have even tried to close the airs -
- the skies.
[13:15:00]
What do you say to that? Because now many people are saying the skies should have been closed over Ukraine from almost the beginning, and that
actually Ukrainians have managed to use the weaponry they've got.
KAGAN: Well, they've used it, but they're -- as I say, they're clearly on a losing trajectory right now, and I think that it was important for the
Biden administration to move faster than they actually did. And their major reason, by the way, for not doing it, yes, they made up -- they had reasons
about whether the Ukrainians were ready for this or that, although it takes time to get ready. So, get started quickly.
The major reason the Biden administration didn't do that is because Putin successfully bluffed them that every time they wanted to think about doing
something for Ukraine, Putin rattled nuclear sabers and pretended that he might do something outrageous, like use a nuclear weapon, and they were
frightened by that. I think they're very frank about it. It -- certainly, if you talk to them privately. So, I think -- and that was a major
strategic failure on their part.
AMANPOUR: So, why do you think they shouldn't have worried about it? Why do you think Putin wouldn't have followed through?
KAGAN: Because he doesn't have a useful nuclear option. I mean, he's not going to start -- he's not going to blow up the entire world because he's
losing in Ukraine, which would be one option, which is to start a global nuclear war. They were afraid that he would use a nuclear weapon in
Ukraine. But if he used a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, first of all, it wouldn't necessarily put an end to the conflict. Second of all, the breezes
blow east, as far as I understand, on the planet and that a lot of the radiation from a nuclear blast would wind up hitting Russia and Russian
troops and Russian people.
It was clearly a bluff and I think, you know, the CIA director, Bill Burns, in an article even acknowledged that there was very little prospect of that
actually happening. So, I think that that was just a mistake on their part.
And I think, you know, by the way, if we are going to refuse to aid anyone who's being attacked by another nuclear power, that is going to be a big
problem for us moving forward. So, we have a nuclear force for a reason. It's to deter the use of nuclear weapons. But it is not supposed to --
we're not supposed to be in a situation where we can't even provide aid to someone who is fighting an invasion because Putin is, in my view, bluffing
about nuclear weapons.
AMANPOUR: And as others have said, you know, falling for this bluff completely, you know, sort of negates and the whole idea of a nuclear
deterrence. But, you know, many people who we've spoken to and you've spoken to say, the only thing Putin understands is basically strength and a
sock in the nose after he is socked, metaphorically speaking, Ukraine in the nose.
You write that the choice for, you know, Donald Trump is quite stark. The choice he makes in the next few weeks will determine not only the fate of
Ukraine but also the success of his own presidency.
Now, we have talked a little bit in the last few minutes about that and why you say that. But you said it's not really his fault the state of where we
are. How much do you think, though, can be laid at his feet by him and his acolytes, and the designated new foreign and security and defense
officials, who all, with one voice, say, oh, we shouldn't be sending any more aid to Ukraine, oh, it's not our fight, oh, this and oh, that?
KAGAN: No, just to be clear, I said it wasn't entirely his fault. But it certainly was his fault insofar as he took a Republican Party, which, by
the way, after the invasion of Ukraine in February, a majority of Republicans favored helping the Ukrainians. It took some doing for Donald
Trump and others, as you say, in his circle, to sort of turn many Republican voters around and turn them against this aid. And the result of
that was a very dangerous and severe and costly delay in the provision of aid in 2024.
All I want to say is, at the end of the day, it was still the Biden administration in charge, but Trump certainly deserves a share of the blame
for the situation that we're in right now.
AMANPOUR: As I said, now in the full light of day, some of his designated officials are talking about, you know, what actually Trump intends to do.
Here is Keith Kellogg, who's -- his incoming Ukraine envoy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEITH KELLOGG, INCOMING TRUMP UKRAINE ENVOY: He's actually trying to save Ukraine and save their sovereignty, and he's going to make sure that it's
equitable and that it's fair. And he said that repeatedly. And I think they're going to come to a solvable solution in the near term. And when I
say by the near term, you know, I would like to set a goal on a personal level and professional level. I would say let's set it at a hundred days
and move our way back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[13:20:00]
AMANPOUR: OK. So, another timeline of 100 days. Talk about that. But also, most importantly, lay out the stakes for saving Ukraine for those who may
not think that it matters a damn.
KAGAN: Well, to answer the second question first, I mean, if Russia is in control of Ukraine, it -- Russian forces will then border directly on a
number of NATO countries. Ukraine is not the end of Russian ambitions, it's not the end of Putin's ambitions, it's the beginning of those ambitions.
Putin doesn't regard Ukraine as a real country. I don't think he regards the Baltic States as real countries. They used to be part of the Russian
Empire, not just the Soviet Empire. I think he believes that Russia should have a sphere of influence that extends into Central Europe that includes
Poland and other countries.
So, as many people have pointed out, we are then going to be in the position of having to defend those countries amongst -- against a much more
serious Russian threat than we currently face. And the cost of that defense is going to be much greater than the cost right now of helping the
Ukrainians keep the Russians at bay. And so, from a pure cost perspective, it's foolish.
But also, it'll be a very much more dangerous world. We will have a Russian, aggressive Russian state that has already conquered one country
and is looking to see what it can conquer next. I think we had this experience in the 20th century, and I think it's worth trying to prevent it
from repeating itself in the 21st century.
AMANPOUR: Indeed. And, you know, in that interregnum period, America laid the rules of the post-World War II world, and it's essentially been an
America led world for a lot of it, in all spheres.
Do you agree that this Ukraine dilemma poses a real threat, depending on how it turns out, to an American led liberal democratic order? Certainly,
China and Russia would like nothing more than to see America's leadership diminished and theirs, you know, extended.
KAGAN: Look, all I can say is, look at how the countries of the world are behaving. The countries that are opposed to the United States and the
security order that the United States has upheld for decades, Iran, North Korea, China, as well as Russia, are all in this.
North Korea has sent its troops, 12,000 troops at least have gone to Ukraine. China is financing this war and providing surreptitiously the
capacity for Russia to wage this war. Iran has turned some of its industries over to war production for Ukraine. Why are they doing that?
They're doing that because they do see Ukraine as a central and perhaps decisive battlefield at -- for the continuation of the very peaceful and
prosperous world that we have known for many decades. They see this as a deadly blow to the United States.
By the way, so do all American allies. That's why Asian countries who are far away from this conflict, Japan and Korea and Australia, are also
helping Ukraine because they also see what a critical conflict this is for the general state of world order on which they depend for their security.
You know, we can't pretend here in the United States that this doesn't mean what everybody else in the world sees it as meaning.
AMANPOUR: And finally, just to swerve a little bit into another lane, but one that's incredibly important because it's about truth and actually
telling the stories in an accurate way. You left The Washington Post as a columnist. Partly -- well, I suppose I think because they declined to do
their traditional support for any presidential candidate in their editorial. And now, we're seeing -- should I use the word stampede? I don't
know, but some very, very top-notch reporters, executives, columnists are leaving that paper. It's a great paper.
What is this going to have in terms of impact, especially on a press unfriendly Trump administration coming to Washington?
KAGAN: Well, I think we're seeing it all over the place. We're seeing it at the Los Angeles Times. We're going to -- I think we're going to see it
in other media organizations. This is the problem when very rich people and -- or business conglomerates are the owners of the media because they are
vulnerable to pressure from Donald Trump. And I think it was -- I don't think anybody doubted for a second that when Jeff Bezos decided not to
endorse this year, and there was already an endorsement of Kamala Harris prepared, that he was bending the knee to Trump in the hopes of currying
favor so that his business interests, which go way, way beyond The Washington Post, would not be damaged by a Trump presidency. And we're
seeing this across the board.
[13:25:00]
And what does it mean for a free press? It means that the alarm bells should be going off. I think our free press is endangered, partly by as --
by what we've seen, which is sort of voluntary submission to Donald Trump.
AMANPOUR: Robert Kagan, we remain on guard, on watch. Thank you very much for particularly your important analysis and watching the Ukraine
situation. Thanks so much.
KAGAN: Thank you.
AMANPOUR: Next, to a bold new film that has shocked and delighted audiences in equal measure. It's called "Babygirl," and it tells the story
of a high powered female tech executive, played by Nicole Kidman, who embarks on an office affair with a much younger intern. Check out this
clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey.
NICOLE KIDMAN, ACTRESS, "BABYGIRL": Hey. We need to have a conversation. You're very young. I don't want to hurt you.
HARRIS DICKINSON, ACTOR, "BABYGIRL": I think I have power over you. Because I can make one call and you can lose everything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Now, beyond the age difference and the power dynamic, it's prompting conversations about female sexuality with The New York Times
noting that, quote, "Women really want to talk after seeing 'Babygirl.'"
Now, it's written and directed by Halina Reijn who joins the program live now from New York.
HALINA REIJN, DIRECTOR AND WRITER, "BABYGIRL": Hi.
AMANPOUR: Halina Reijn, welcome to the program. OK. Is this the kind of conversation that you intended your film to spark? What did you intend?
REIJN: Absolutely. No, I really made it as a conversation starter. I was well aware of what I was doing, but I wanted to tell a story about things
that I was struggling with as a woman, as a feminist. Things that I was ashamed of. Things that I didn't dare to talk about, even with my
girlfriends. And I kind of made this movie to be very honest with you as a means to connect to other women and as a tool to even talk about all of
these subjects.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, as we said and you can, you know, lay it out better than I can, it's essentially a powerful, married, mother, CEO, a woman, played
by Nicole Kidman, who has been essentially stalked into being the mentor of a much younger intern, who seems, in my opinion, to be in charge of this
power dynamic, no matter his youth and his, you know, professional, much lower status. How did you work that out and what are you trying to say?
REIJN: For me, this is a comedy of manners. My movie is a fable. In the beginning, we do play with these tropes, these kind of sexual thriller
tropes from the '90s that were all directed and written by men. And I always found that the people in those movies, the characters were punished
at the end if they would cheat or if they would explore their darker inner beast. And I wanted to create a movie that was more humans.
In the beginning, we play with these thriller tropes, but in the end, you just see two people. And even though they are in affair. So, they're
morally not doing something right, they are both in a crisis. They are both in an existential crisis.
Nicole Kidman plays Romy and she is in a crisis in the sense that she's in a midlife, you know, and she sees the end nearing and she thinks she has to
be perfect and she has to play all these different roles in life, the perfect leader, the perfect wife, the perfect lover, has a perfect body,
the perfect face. And she meets this young man that is also taking his first steps in life. He is quarter life crisis, if you will. And they kind
of connect in their inner wounds, and that's when they embark upon this journey of an exploration of masculinity, consent, femininity, sexuality,
power, shame.
AMANPOUR: I want to play a clip, and it is obviously with Romy and Samuel, the two characters that you've just laid out. This is one of their first
meetings.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KIDMAN: After five years, I started my own company. I wanted to automate repetitive tasks and give people their time back by limiting.
DICKINSON: Power hungry personalities?
KIDMAN: You think that's what I am?
DICKINSON: No. No. I think the opposite.
KIDMAN: You think I don't like power?
DICKINSON: No, I think you like to be told what to do. Sorry, I didn't mean to -- I'm sorry. That was inappropriate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: I mean, really inappropriate. Oh, OK. For me, I'm like, are you serious? A young intern is going to say that to the female CEO in the
workspace? But I'm really interested in what you say about what they're working out, their traumas. What is Samuel's trauma first? And then, we'll
go to Romy's.
REIJN: I think Samuel's trauma is also, like, we keep it a little bit hidden, I don't like to, like, go into the backstories too deep because I
think it is amazing for an audience to be able to use their own imagination and relate to certain parts of these characters, but he is very much a Gen
Z kid.
You know, my movie is also very much about generations, and again, it is a fable, it's a comedy of manners. But he very much represents that
generation that doesn't have that idea of hierarchy that I as a Gen X woman had.
[13:30:00]
You know, they are very different with the structures that we are used to and how we feel like we look up to a CEO and he treats her very differently
and that is what attracts her to him.
And they both are dealing, I think, with similar things. She comes from cults and communes. She says I was named by a guru. She comes from a sexual
revolution. She comes from chaos. And her whole life is an answer to that. She loves structure. She loves organization and she suppresses is her inner
beast. And through Samuel she is able to let it out.
And my film is a cautionary tale for everyone of what happens when you suppress these dark sides of yourself. If you let them come out, if you
dare to talk about it, if you dare to talk to your partner about it, the whole movie wouldn't even have to take place if she would have set Antonio
Banderas down before the movie started, he's her husband. And she would have actually took the time to explain it, but she can't, she's not able,
she's full of shame. And she has this perfect image of what a woman should look like, be and act like. And that is what my movie is trying to say.
AMANPOUR: You know -- and I mean, I don't know, watching it, I thought Banderas played a very sympathetic husband figure.
REIJN: Yes.
AMANPOUR: And I'm not going to give a spoiler, but all throughout. I want to know about her trauma, and I'm really interested that you say you didn't
want to go too deep into the backstories, but I want to know, as a viewer, what are the backstories, and what is her backstory, because she just
alludes to this trauma she suffered as a child, she alludes, as you said, to being brought up and named in a commune/cult.
You have said in a way that you were brought up by radical hippies, I don't know whether any of your experience is translated onto this script, but
tell me about that and how that fits into the story.
REIJN: Yes. So, we see -- my film is also very much about performance and we see Romy, Nicole Kidman, do all these forms of therapy. We see her
taking ice baths and laying in oxygen chambers and cryochambers and she's doing all of these things. But also, she's doing EMDR therapy. And this
form of therapy makes you go back to your childhood memory. So, here you get your back story a little bit, or at least you get some idea of it. And
there you see some flashbacks to the commune.
And yes, I grew up -- my parents were radical hippies and we were part of a spiritual movement called Subud. And I was named by a guru. So, yes, I use
that in this story. Absolutely. The whole film is very personal to me. But at the same time, I'm not a CEO of a robotics company. I am not a mother. I
don't have a partner. So, it's also very different.
You know, I'm trying to make a universal story that hopefully speaks to everyone. And so, I thought this would be an amazing theme to give her that
kind of backstory to create a story about order versus chaos. And I think - - again, I think a lot of women -- and I will speak for myself, I struggle with the fact that I think I should be this creature that has almost no
blemishes, not in my body, that has a certain way, that looks a certain way, but also on my soul, you know, on my sort of like existential DNA, and
she's trying to get rid of all of that through therapy, through Botox, through ice baths, through the whole shebang. She's trying to become this
perfect, almost robotic creature.
So, throughout my whole film, there's constantly the theme of the animalistic, the primal against the civilization to organize the structure,
chaos versus order.
AMANPOUR: And I'm going to play another clip. It's where they're dancing and I'm going to -- we're going to chat outside.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: OK. Sexy. But he then really gets up -- gets on my nerves when he says to her at some point in a car when she's having an emotional
crisis, because he's ended up, you know, boldly as what you said, what is it, a Gen Z, you know, taking -- you know --
REIJN: Behavior.
AMANPOUR: Yes, behavior at his -- at her family house.
REIJN: Yes.
AMANPOUR: And he says to her, you look like a mother, I'm not into that. I mean, how much more humiliating can you get?
REIJN: Everything they are doing, the whole movie, in that way, almost plays as a sexual fantasy. It starts with a performative orgasm and it ends
with a real orgasm. It's a happy ending, figuratively speaking and literally speaking. And everything in between you can almost see as a
sexual fantasy. So, everything they are doing, even if the stakes are very high, is a power play. Everything they are doing is part of the sexual
dynamic, and they're challenging each other.
And of course, this is not a documentary, right? This is a dark fairy tale and hopefully, a funny fairy tale with humor, but that is what he's doing
there. He's like humiliating her but that is all part of the game They're constantly challenging each other and the risk has to be real. That's what
she says to her husband. That's what she's embarrassed about. That's the addiction.
[13:35:00]
AMANPOUR: And, Halina, talk about the bigger picture. Because frankly, there's a lot of reporting, of storytelling in documentary, in real-life,
as well as in the world of culture about younger women claim -- sorry, older women claiming their personhood, claiming their sexuality, even post-
menopausal women.
REIJN: Yes.
AMANPOUR: Look at Miranda July's recent book, "On All Fours," and a lot of the, frankly, parts that Nicole Kidman has played over the last couple of
years. What's going on, in your view, in society around women of a certain age?
REIJN: Look, I think we are still exploring each other and ourselves. We have such a long road to go. We just basically got the right to vote. In
1987, we still had to take a male guardian to a bank in order to get a business loan, you know. So, what does that mean for feminism? We have no
idea who we are yet. So, I'm so grateful that finally we're getting a little more space.
And if you look at the scientific facts about the orgasm gap, it is very, very sad. It takes a woman, you know, on average 18 minutes to come at the
hands of a man. That's a long time. A lot of women struggle with that. Some women don't even know how to have an orgasm with the man, and we are not
talking about these subjects.
And looking around me right now, seeing Miranda July telling stories about this, older women embracing menopause, talking about all these taboo
subjects that still -- you know, it is in a way incredible that they are still taboo, but also looking at Demi Moore, Pamela Anderson, all these
actresses that are really in a moment right now, having a moment right now, I think it's amazing.
And I hope -- you know, again, I still think we have a long way to go. We're not there yet, unfortunately.
AMANPOUR: You were an actress yourself. We've only got 30 seconds. How does -- how did that inform this script and the directing?
REIJN: I think I have been a stage actress all my life. So, I was educated by Shakespeare and Ibsen and O'Neill and all these genius men, and Jean
Cocteau. And they teach me how to write and they teach me how to construct my script. But they also teach me how to make other actors feel safe. You
know, I think that's my full priority, to keep them safe physically with intimacy scenes, but also mentally when they have to do very hard emotional
scenes.
So, that is what informs me when I direct. And I direct in a collaborative way. I don't sit in a high chair with a North Face jacket eating pizza
telling them what to do. I love to collaborate with them. So, that's what I'm trying.
AMANPOUR: Halina Reijn, thank you so much indeed.
REIJN: It was such an honor. Thank you so much to talk to you. Thank you so much.
AMANPOUR: Thank you. Next, a very different conversation about the importance of art. The acclaimed documentary, "Porcelain War," has reached
the Oscar shortlist. It's about the Kharkiv-based artists Slava and Anya Leontyev, who specialize in making delicate porcelain figurines, even
amidst the raging war that Russia's inflicted on their homeland.
They kept producing this art despite rolling blackouts and Slava's new job training recruits for the Ukrainian front. Now, in this conversation with
Hari Sreenivasan, Slava Leontyev, who co-directed the documentary, and filmmaker Brendan Bellomo, discuss why they think art is vital to Ukrainian
resistance.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Christiane, thanks. Brendan Bellomo, Slava Leontyev, thanks so much for joining us.
Your film, "Porcelain War," gives us a different kind of look in life in Ukraine today, in the middle of now a three-year long war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): For as long as I remember, I always been making art.
SLAVA LEONTYEV, CO-DIRECTOR AND SUBJECT, "PORCELAIN WAR" AND UKRAINIAN ARTIST AND MILITARY TRAINER: It was just a matter of time until we were
collaborating. We're ordinary people in an extraordinary situation.
In Ukraine, it's a war of professional assailants against defenders who are amateurs.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): They hit, and more are coming.
LEONTYEV (through translator): Among them, writers, musicians, teachers, artists.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SREENIVASAN: Slava, let me start with you. So, you're an artist and you've been working as part of the Ukrainian effort. You -- what do you do in the
Ukrainian army? What type of work were you doing that, you know, kind of juxtapose that to me by what you do with your art?
LEONTYEV: I was in Ukrainian special force. I drive a car. I was in few battle mission. But also, I trained civilians how to use weapon, how to
defend their homes. It was time when thousands and thousands of our people came to army as volunteers to defend their families and their homes. But we
-- my wife and me, we are porcelain artists, and we continue our art at that time. And one day, Brendan Belloma called me and asked me about can we
-- how we are, and what we're doing.
[13:40:00]
SREENIVASAN: Brennan, how do you stumble across this story of someone who's training civilians to defend their homes and how to shoot guns by day
and making porcelain figurines by night?
BRENDAN BELLOMO, CO-DIRECTOR, "PORCELAIN WAR": Similar to Slava and Anya, who are subjects in the film, my wife and I are filmmaking partners, and
she actually grew up under Russian oppression in communist Poland.
And about eight years ago, she discovered Anya and Slava's porcelain figurines, and she was so moved by them because they really reminded her of
her home. And the four of us actually began to collaborate on an animation project together. And then, Russia invaded Ukraine.
And so, we called up Slava and Anya to say, when are you guys leaving? Are you OK? And Slava had told me, you know, as you just learned, but I had
never, never heard this before. I'm in the Ukrainian Special Forces, and by day I'm training civilians, and by night we continue making our artwork.
And we felt that this was an absolutely remarkable form of resistance.
When you hear about people in a war zone, you never think that they're going to stay. You never think they're going to take it up -- take a charge
themselves as everyday people to defend their lives, but also to keep creating something. And Slava felt while there was so much deeply important
journalism from the western world, taking an outside view on Ukraine, there was an untold story from within.
So, we wanted to empower them to be able to tell that story through their own eyes as artists. And we actually taught them how to use cameras.
SREENIVASAN: Slava, why is it important to try to tell this story through film and help us, I guess, see it? What do you want us to see?
LEONTYEV: For us as artists and the soldiers, our film is amazing opportunity to share our experience. Me and my friends in my unit, we're
all are regular civilian people who came to army as volunteers. And we was forced to defend our country and our homes, but also, we felt
responsibility in the face of history, because it's so important to defend our democracy, defend our independence when totalitarian government trying
to take away our free choice, how to think and how to create.
And also, we were focused on our culture, and on beauty, because evil is attacking beauty. Our culture and our identity is the main target of this
invasion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEONTYEV (through translator): During this genocidal war, the aggressors at the first opportunity try to destroy people who contribute to culture.
Among them, writers, musicians, teachers, artists. When they erase these people, they erase Ukraine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SREENIVASAN: Slava, you said target of the invasion. What gives you an idea that it is the target? Why do you think the Russians are targeting
culture?
LEONTYEV: Idea of this aggression is take away our own culture, our own language, and our identity. And reconnect Ukraine to Russian empire. So,
since the start of big war, so many our museums was destroyed. So, many our university was damaged and so many our artists was killed. Killed on
frontline, killed as civilian people on their own kitchen and bedroom, because Russia shelling districts of apartment buildings. And also, killed
especially on occupied territory.
All these people who contribute culture, artists and writers and actors in Ukraine, they was killed and nobody can bring these people back to life.
Because this is our responsibility, rebuild future of our culture.
SREENIVASAN: Brendan, there are this kind of beautiful scenes where you layer animation on top of Anya and Slava's artwork, their tiny pieces of
porcelain. Describe what that's about, why that's there?
BELLOMO: Animation is an extension of Anya's, what she calls her language. The paintings on their figurines, not only are they incredibly beautiful,
they're deeply autobiographical. They're really personal.
[13:45:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): Each picture, each image I've created is stored in my memory. As a result, of course, none of them leave
me completely. Basically, like everything that's over happened in my life. I hold onto every memory.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BELLOMO: And they actually allow us to bring the audience to places that you could never bring a camera. We don't have a time machine to bring a
camera back to their peaceful past in Crimea before the annexation. But yet, Anya created a figurine that depicts their life, you know, what they
wish Ukraine could be.
And her language is something that could actually share more than if we were to use archival footage or to look at the news, what it was like
emotionally to experience the first days of the invasion. And because this is a war that continues to occur, there's no end here. And yet, we're
looking at a story of their lives. There's no conclusion at the moment.
I mean, this is the largest conflict in Europe since World War II, but Anya and Slava are hopeful. They're so incredibly powerful in their art. They
actually looked at this is the future that we want to have in Ukraine.
And the surface of these figurines was brought to life through a deep international collaboration. It was actually a collective animators in
Poland in Warsaw that worked for a year drawing 7,000 hand drawn images to bring Anya's stories to life on the figurines, and it was absolutely
remarkable to just see how people across different cultures can work together because there was this shared experience as artists that personal
stories truly matter.
SREENIVASAN: Slava, there are scenes where you and your wife are out going for a walk and you are, I guess, on a hiking trail where people would
traditionally be looking for mushrooms, but you're also clearing mines, I mean, or you're at least marking where landmines exist. And I've got to
wonder, like, why are you doing this? I mean, why are you taking the risk in the first place?
LEONTYEV: It is our situation in Ukraine. We are surrounded of this kind of danger. Ukraine now is most mining but -- by landmines country in whole
world. And our farmers, they have this horrible issue. They cannot work on their fields because of this fields are mining from air. And also, our
nature, not only landmines, this horrible fire after shelling. (INAUDIBLE) our national parks and our national forests.
And at least if something is still here, it -- mining, and it's important issue. We'll never fix it completely, because it's a huge amount. It will
take maybe hundreds of years. But we are trying to do something right now. It's our life. It's our country.
SREENIVASAN: Slava, you mentioned, there's a line in the film, it says Ukraine is like porcelain, easy to break, yet impossible to destroy. I
guess, explain that.
LEONTYEV: Oh, when we choose porcelain to make our art, I have thinking about it's really something undestroyable. So fragile, but porcelain
survive after thousands of years underground. In fire everywhere. And I thought about Ukraine the same. It's so easy to damage the life of our
people by shelling, by this aggression, to take away part of our territory, but to destroy, completely destroy our culture, to destroy our identity.
It's impossible.
SREENIVASAN: Brendan, there are this kind of beautiful moments where we see the art being made and we see how this couple is kind of just living
and then, it's juxtaposed by these incredibly intense scenes of destruction and war. In fact, there are scenes where it's kind of a first-person view
on the frontlines. Why did you decide to include that?
[13:50:00]
BELLOMO: So, the juxtaposition comes from something very surprising. I mean, as an American who hasn't served in war you have this concept of the
frontline being something separate from life. You go to war. But in Kharkiv, in Ukraine, the war is right outside Slava's doorstep. As he says,
they had no other choice.
And so, what I think is important about this film is it's an opportunity for people around the world to not only see that there is -- you know,
there's no choice but to defend their lives and their culture, but to also really, I think, humanize this experience.
You know, a lot of times, if you look at something from the news footage, or if you look at something from, you know, a different perspective, you
know, we see almost a labeling that can happen. You know, inadvertent dehumanization. This is a soldier. This is a refugee. But we try to give
these people a voice by giving them the camera and saying, here's how you can share what's happening in your own lives that we can get to know them,
to be able to step into their shoes and hopefully understand what they're experiencing and how it actually really affects all of us.
SREENIVASAN: Slava, you mentioned in the film that you're so thankful that you are meeting the type of people that you are. I mean, it's kind of
people from all walks of life who come to your training on weaponry and how to defend themselves. What -- how has your life changed in these couple of
years?
LEONTYEV: All my friends they're amazing. They're still the same peaceful people and nobody wants to fight extra minutes. They want to return to
their own life. They're all successful in their civilian life, but they came to army to defend their people.
They are so brave and so intelligent. And they're really amazing. And they supported our project a lot. I was serving in Ukrainian army at the time.
And I was able to film "Porcelain War" only because when I picked up my camera, someone picked up a rifle in my place. They trusted us and they
thought about how important is to share their experience, to help us make something about culture and make something beautiful.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEONTYEV (through translator): What are the virtues and flaws of patriotism? If it's about your willingness to protect your way of life, the
patriotism is somewhat paradoxical. If you value your free will and you are ready to stand up for freedom, you have to partially limit your own freedom
to do that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SREENIVASAN: Brendan, what have you learned about this entire war and the people there in this process over the past couple of years as you've been
working on this? I mean, what do you hope people get out of the film?
BELLOMO: I hope people take away that even in situation as absolutely dire that there is hope, that creativity matters to continue not only a record
of what you're going through from a personal perspective, but to also ensure the continuation and the survival of culture.
But also, while this story takes place within the borders of Ukraine, it truly affects all of us. And as I said earlier, it's the largest conflict
in Europe since World War II, but also have other authoritarian governments that are looking at the outcome of this war. If Russia wins in Ukraine, it
might embolden China, for example, to attack Taiwan where they have their sights set.
I mean, and Ukraine was a sovereign, democratic, peaceful nation. This was an unprovoked attack. And so, I urge anybody who sees this film to see that
as a perspective of everyday people that are going through this, that this could happen in other places in the world. And that the outcome of this
conflict really affects all of us.
I mean, democracy is at risk now around the world more than ever. So, we need to understand what's happening and how things are interconnected. We
can't just view things as this is in a box. This is here in this country. We're all on this planet together.
SREENIVASAN: Slava, what's your hope for the future?
LEONTYEV: I hope our movie is not about Ukraine and Ukrainians only. And I hope we were able to bring inspiration from the middle of this destruction.
[13:55:00]
And I'm thinking about our future through our movie. These people, these regular people around me, even in the face of this aggression, they are
able to defend independence, to develop culture and keep humanity, even in this dark time. I hope everywhere kind people can won.
SREENIVASAN: Slava Leontyev, Brendan Bellomo, the filmmakers behind the film "Porcelain War," thank you both for joining us.
BELLOMO: Thank you so much for this conversation. We truly appreciate it.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Standing up for the identity and the culture of a sovereign Ukraine.
And that is it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always
catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media.
Thank you for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
