People like myself, who have good credibility in the game and played at the very top level, you'd think would get a job or at least be given an interview, but you're not even getting an interview.
It is harder to lie in an interview. A good interview - and it can be polite - is not a one way street like a candidate controlled ad. An interview is not programmed by the candidate and so the candidate can't be exactly sure what will be asked.
I was pretty good at studies and when I had come to NSD for my interview, I'd lied that I have got a scholarship to study abroad. I told my family that I had a visa interview, but I was actually here for the interview at NSD.
An interview is only as good as both parties are willing to give to the interview and that includes the interviewer.
If you interrupt somebody too early, if you miss it and don't interrupt at all - that's the difference between a good interview and a bad interview. It's about the absolute moment.
Hillary Clinton had scheduled an interview while I was at the height of the Weinstein reporting, and her folks got in touch and said, 'We hear you're working on a big story,' sounded very concerned, and tried to cancel the interview.
If you're coming to do an interview with me, you should know about me. It's not that it's 'cos I'm Wizkid; I'd even hate it if you were coming to interview my friend and asked him the same question. You're here for an interview, so you should know who you're doing the interview with.
If the interview was done in the studio, Frank McGee would automatically do it. But if I went out and got it, then the interview was mine. So I was considered a pushy cookie, because I would get the interview.
At least for me personally, I've always tried to do a really good job every day, with each interview, and treat each interview seriously, and make the person I'm speaking with feel comfortable, hopefully make it an ideal experience.
If someone is brought in for an interview, for example, and is asked about their views on things, but has posted things that are completely contrary to the interview, frankly I have much more faith in what they posted than what they say during the course of an interview.
Abu Musab al-Suri is someone I got to know pretty well because he's a Syrian. Very bright guy, lived in London. He actually was the person who took myself and correspondent Peter Arnett and the cameraman, Peter Juvenal, to interview bin Laden for his first TV interview.
One interview would lead us to another interview, which led us to another interview. We had the questions and the idea of chonicling this moment in time. But we didn't have a movie, per se. As we started interviewing people, it started to kind of define itself.
I figure no matter what interview I do, the real good 'journalists' are going to find the completely irrelevant quotes that will drum up some controversy and stick it on their page to get some clicks and completely miss the real context of what the interview is about. That's what we do nowadays and call it 'journalism.'
What I really mean is that actors do the interview process because they have to. It's a good bargain: If I can do this part then I'll sell it. I just wish it wasn't me who had to do it because it feels very unnatural.
I wish I could take back every interview. Over and over again, I read them later, and either I'm misquoted or I said something stupid. I'm just not very good at it.
This uses a lens system, which I have used for years in various different ways, but I've never used it in the context of an interview. This is the very first time that I've done that. It's a lens called The Revolution, so it allowed me to interview Elsa [Dorfman] and actually operate the camera. Well one of the cameras, because there were four cameras there.