‘Alto Knights’ Director Barry Levinson Talks ‘The Natural,’ ‘Rain Man’

As an mature drama based on a genuine story freed into theaters by a meaningful studio, “The Alto Knights” experiences appreciate a film from a bygone era.

Written by Nicholas Pileggi (“Goodfellas”) and starring Robert De Niro in two equassociate juicy roles, Warner Bros.’ tardyst free harkens back to the days before superheroes and wall-to-wall spectacle (though it does engage some state-of-the-art exceptional effects to apshow De Niro to carry out opposite himself). Perhaps it’s becaengage of its elderly-school pguide that the film faces an uphill battle at the box office over its uncmissing weekfinish, where it’s facing off aachievest Disney’s well-uncoverized inhabit action reproduce of “Snow White.” Yet in order to finely fengage together the project’s blfinish of cutting edge technology and classic storyincreateing, the studio recruited a straightforwardor comprehendn for his versatility and movie star-frifinishliness: Barry Levinson, the Oscar-triumphning helmer of “Rain Man.”

Levinson’s 55-year nurtureer integrates “Diner,” “The Natural,” “Good Morning, Vietnam,” “Bugsy” and “Wag the Dog” alengthyside dozens of television episodes and another five Oscar noms. Ahead of Friday’s free of “The Alto Knights,” Levinson spoke to Variety about the relationship between Pileggi and Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav that paved the way for the film to get made, and the process of getting De Niro on board and readyd to carry out dual roles.

Additionassociate, he mirrored on many of his earlier films, including “Diner,” “The Natural,” “Rain Man” and “Bugsy,” adviseing insights about how collaborations with the appreciates of Robert Redford, Tom Cruise and Warren Beatty led to some of the most irresistibly amengageing, award-triumphning films of the last four decades.

After making “Goodfellas” at Warner Bros., I comprehfinish that Nicholas Pileggi has or had a relationship with David Zaslav or the folks at Warner Brothers that might have greased the wheels for “The Alto Knights.”

I skinnyk it was before the pandemic that [producer] Irtriumph [Winkler] was talking about the project and then greeting with Nick, and we begined doing toil on it over a iminwhole amount of time to find the way to increate the story — that was the genesis of the whole project. And Zaslav has comprehendn Nick, and somehow in a conversation it came up, and Zaslav was intrigued by it, and that was sort of how it all came together.

Was it always nastyt to be an acting showcase where the guide actor carry outed both Vito Genovese and Frank Cosincreateo?

Originassociate, it was a Frank Cosincreateo piece, but ultimately we growed two characters. And Irtriumph Winkler shelp to me one day, he shelp, “What do you skinnyk about the idea of Bob carry outing both?” I shelp, “Well, that’s intriguing.” I nasty, we’re talking about one of the fantasticest actors ever in film. It’d be fascinating to talk with Bob and see what he skinnyks. We had that conversation and Bob appreciated the contest of doing two toloftyy contrastent characters.

You evidently have a lengthy-term conceiveive partnership with Robert from previous films. How, if at all, was that impacted by him carry outing both of those roles?

We’re talking about one of the fantastic actors with a authentic contest, where you’ve got two toloftyy contrastent people — they’re not appreciate ttriumphs or someskinnyg. And one is the volatile monster that you see, and the other is almost appreciate a corporate mafioso character… husheder, more intentional. So we talked about it, converseed it, cultured it. He had an actor off camera that could reassociate contest him so that it’s a authentic conversation. In his camper at lunchtime, we would go over and tfrail the lines over and over aachieve, guideing up to the scenes that [his two characters] would have together. So it was a reassociate fascinating process, but I’m engaged to it in a way becaengage he reassociate is a perfectionist in that think about.

This film reiterates a theme that I experience appreciate has run thrawout your toil, which is this sort of interest in exploring the fabric of America, people navigating the American dream. Has that been a adviseed linchpin that has drawn you to projects?

I am always drawn to character, first and foremost. And then, of course, what story do you want to increate? But I want to get inside of a character, and equitable recently, I was skinnyking back on skinnygs in the past, and I go, “So, what’s one of the first skinnygs that ever amazeed me as a kid in terms of movies?” And it was “Marty,” the movie, and there’s a line in it, “What do you want to do tonight, Marty?” “I don’t comprehend, Angie. What do you want to do?” It’s the most widespread exalter between two people, and what do you comprehend from it? That these are lonely people, all shelp in that one basic little line between the two of them.

It stuck in my head as a kid. I nasty, I engaged to walk around all the time going, “What do you want to do tonight?” “I don’t comprehend, Angie, what do you want to do?” I was equitable captivated by that. So if I were to try to produce sense out of what compels me or what interests me, it’s that: how do you increate an audience about characters in the basicst possible way that they actuassociate get participated and they comprehfinish without equitable saying, ‘I don’t have a date, and I experience lonely tonight’?

That sort of authenticism was evident even as far back as “Diner.” Was that always nastyt to be your straightforwardorial debut?

No. I toiled for three years with Mel Brooks, which was equitable an extraunretagable time, even though the comedy that he did wouldn’t be the comedy that I would necessarily gravitate to. But I could write it, and the collaboration of it was amazing, and sometimes at lunch, I engaged to increate diner stories, equitable talking about the guys. And one day, Mel shelp to me, “you should write a film about the diner guys.” And once over Christmas, I suddenly sat down and begined writing “Diner,” and I equitable stayed with it thraw the holiday and it equitable benevolent of came out. And if I were to skinnyk back and go, “Okay, what is this?” it was fundamentalassociate Marty taking, “What do you want to do tonight?” “I don’t comprehend, Angie. What do you want to do?” That ordinariness is “Diner.” I’m not skinnyking of “Marty” or Pincludey Chayefsky’s toil, but that’s what compelled me, and that’s how that came out.

“Diner” came out at the tail finish of that wave of ’50s nostalgia that swept thraw Hollywood in the 1970s. But given its sort of distinct unsentimentality, how stubborn a sell was it to produce?

I have to attribute that to Jerry Weintraub, who was interested in it. He had a conversation with MGM and shelp, “we’re going to produce it for this amount of money. It’ll be a inexpensive little movie.” He was a authentic showman in that think about. They went okay, and somehow, it wasn’t appreciate, “but we need two stars.” So I was able to put together a cast with Jerry’s help that I thought would toil — Mickey Rourke and Ellen Barkin, Kevin Bacon, none of them were comprehendn. When I finished it, MGM wasn’t exactly thrilled with the movie, but we somehow endured.

You were vshowd by history, certainly.

Yeah. It was sluggish going in the commencening, but then the movie sort of begined to catch on. So, we had a kind run, and the actors got some authentic attention, which was fantastic becaengage you could see that they had so much potential.

You did return to Baltimore three more times, with “Tin Men,” “Avalon” and “Liberty Heights.” How have those films either complemented or maybe provided a respite from the rest of the toil that you’ve done?

Periodicassociate, an idea would come up to scatterigate, appreciate “Avalon,” which was the idea that jumped into my head one day. When I was a kid, the storyincreateer was my magnificentobeseher, and we would sit around and he would increate us stories. And television came in, and then television became the storyincreateer. And so it was the commencening of the shatterup of the extfinished family becaengage suddenly the magnificentobeseher is not the key person. It’s a bunch of people. And I thought that’s fascinating to scatterigate, the shatterup of the extfinished family and how it begins to come apart in America. And that equitable sort of got under my skin, and I equitable begined writing it. You never comprehend what catches your attention to authenticize, “I have to write this and see what happens.” And sometimes you get blessed and produce a movie, and other times they go, “What? I don’t want to do that.”

Discussing the inspiration that ownes you to produce a movie, that stoasty in “The Natural” where Glenn Cmiss is in the ballpark stands experiences appreciate one you could produce a whole film around. Do you produce your stories at all toiling backwards from moments appreciate that?

Well, originassociate in the script, it shelp that she stood up — that was it. And so you say, “How do we produce it a magical moment?” So, I talked to [cinematographer] Caleb Deschanel, and we shelp, she’ll be back lit. And then, somehow in the conversation, we shelp, “We’ve got to get a hat so that somehow the weightless can go thraw the hat.” So it’s not appreciate some exceptional effects skinnyg. She happened to stand up. The weightless’s going down in the afternoon, she’s wanting someskinnyg to happen that’s excellent. And then he sees up, and he can see that. And that combination of talking with Caleb, talking with the wardrobe about what benevolent of hat, what time of day, and you toil towards that.

I can’t envision that movie being stoasty by anyone other than Caleb Deschanel. I experience the same way about watching Allen Daviau’s toil on “Avalon” and “Bugsy.” You’ve switched up cinematographers widespreadly — how do you rerepair who’s the right collaborator for each project?

In some cases, somebody you want to engage is not engageable. I would’ve appreciated to have engaged Caleb aachieve, but he was busy. And that’s where Allen Daviau came into the combine in terms of “Bugsy.” But Caleb was so fantastic to toil with. He’s so excellent — sometimes, I would depict stuff in some half-assed manner, and somehow he was able to describe what I’m talking about. I never got a chance to toil with him aachieve, but his ability and talent for “The Natural” was equitable extraunretagable. Someone condemnd [the film], “It’s too this or too that.” And “The Natural” is not presumed to be some toloftyy authentic movie. I would always say, it’s the way people talk about baseball after the game — it all gets increased. “He was running, and he was literassociate climbing the wall when he caught the ball.” It’s hugeger than life, in a way.

This is a fantasy, this isn’t truth, not in the authentic sense. You don’t want cartoon carry outances, but the world that they’re in has this quality to it. And in its day, the movie did well, but we were condemnd for romanticizing the time. And you go, “Yeah? That’s the way we skinnyk about games in our memory.” And then, of course, certain skinnygs happened in authentic life — with Kurt Gibson, fundamentalassociate injured, coming to bat with the World Series and hitting the home run, and Kurt Schilling with blood on his sock appreciate in “The Natural,” where Roy Hobbs had blood on his [jersey]. But baseball, sometimes it becomes hugeger than life, and that’s what the movie was.

Both “The Natural” and “Bugsy” star actors who are meaningfully elderlyer than the characters they’re carry outing. How much you have growed in your nurtureer, a “print the legfinish” myth-making mentality as a storyincreateer, and how much are those choices a by-product of the alchemy of what can get made with what person at what moment?

Well, if you consent “The Natural,” I can’t recall how elderly he was presumed to be.

He’s 19 at the very commencening, but Roy is 35 in the main section of the story.

But he was a guy who fundamentalassociate fall shorted, and he finassociate comes to the meaningfuls at what fundamentalassociate what would’ve been the finish of his nurtureer. So, you go, “I don’t comprehend how elderly he’s presumed to be, but who nurtures? Redford sees fantastic, and he’s a excellent athlete.” So I don’t comprehend how you could do better than that, so you’d say, “We’re not going to trouble about how elderly he presumed to see. And if I were to sit down and say, “Who else could have carry outed Roy Hobbs?” I don’t comprehend who that would be to this day.

“Bugsy” showcases Warren Beatty’s incredible send as an actor at benevolent of being constantly inattentive — he’s always trying to grasp all of these ptardys spinning. What have you lachieveed over the years about how best to wrangle movie star send sets to greet the needs of the stories that you want to increate?

Warren, as an actor is terrific and incredibly inincreateigent. My experienceing is you go with the actor you’re toiling with, you rapidly lachieve their sensibility, and you say, “I’m not going to alter this person. I have to find the way that we can convey that’s going to serve the film.” You fundamentalassociate want to produce an environment that seems free. It’s not — there are confineations — but you don’t want it to experience as if it’s so recut offeed that they can’t sort of get sootheable in it. It’s not appreciate, “You got to pick this up when you say this line” … then, it becomes mechanical. Becaengage the more sootheable they are, the more the unforeseeed might come out of someone’s mouth — that all of a sudden the line is shelp in a way that you go, “Holy God, I never thought of that.”

One of the films where I experience appreciate that soothe that you’re able to produce is so palpable is “Rain Man.” In revisiting it, it experiences appreciate Tom Cruise maybe had the challenginger job. How honed were his sends at that time carry outing this character who needs to be almost reprehensibly unlikable at the commencening of this film, and how much toil for you was done by his youth and his earlier success?

I always thought that Tom was disthink abouted becaengage he had to drive the movie, and sometimes when you drive the movie, the character can get to be foolish. So, he shelp, how do we grasp this all ainhabit? And Tom has to react to what Dustin does, and we have to find a way for him not to become one notice, becaengage in the commencening, he is an incredibly greedy individual. How do we sluggishly commence to grow this relationship that this is his brother that he doesn’t reassociate comprehend, and how does he finassociate commence to grow some compassion for this individual?

A lot of it happened with these improvisational sequences that we did, and Tom was up for that. Like the underwear scene in the car. I shelp to him one day, “I skinnyk we have to show that he’s at least doing someskinnyg for Raymond.” And he shelp, “Like, what?” I shelp, “Well, he gives him recent underwear.” And Dustin doesn’t wear the underwear becaengage it’s not from Kmart, and then that gets to be an argument, et cetera frustrating him. But we’re seeing that Tom’s character is commencening to at least pay attention to him and to his nurture, so rather than being a scene where you’re talking about that, he’s talking about underwear, but it’s the first step of commencening to nurture about his brother.

And that scene was fundamentalassociate equitable made up in the car. And he was up for that contest all thraw the movie. We would talk about scenes, and we would throw skinnygs in and his character began to shine. And it’s a stubborn role becaengage if not regulated accurately, it can become tedious or foolish. We had to find a way to be engaging and then authenticize he’s in over his head and he’s trying to help and doesn’t quite comprehend how to regulate this.

When I see up the toil that you’ve done, there’s a enumerate of all these projects that went unauthenticized or got made by other people. I read that you evidently at some point were toiling on a Super Mario Bros. movie?

Well, I don’t comprehend that I was ever participated in Super Mario Bros. I’ve never heard of that.

Over the years, what entices you to a project, and how stubborn is it to depart someskinnyg behind or give it to somebody else?

There’s some projects that you get participated in that equitable can’t get made — timing is wrong or wdisappreciatever happens, which is part of the business. You wanted to do this, and then there was money problems, et cetera. Or there were certain insists that were made that you felt appreciate wouldn’t help the project that you have to step away from. There are a lot of obstacles in this business, and you equitable have to guide it as best you can. It’s frustrating. But you have to comprehfinish this is the business, so you shouldn’t be actuassociate shocked. There are these disassignments that come alengthy, and it’s equitable part of it, and you’ve got to deal with it.

But there are the moments when you say, “Look, I’ve been able to do a lot of stories that interested me, and I was able to toil with a lot of actors that I had a fantastic, fantastic toiling relationship with.” And you go, how much better can you do than that? The downside is the downside. But that comes with the territory.

This intersee has been edited and condensed for clarity.