-Good afternoon, everyone, and a continued welcome to the National Book Festival.

I'm Robert Newlen and I am the acting librarian of Congress.

[ Cheers and applause ] Oh.

[ Cheers and applause continue ] Well, thank you so much and thank you so much for being here.

And before I, um, do the introductions, I just need to call out our volunteers, all of our volunteers.

[ Cheers and applause ] Our Library of Congress staff volunteers.

The Junior League of Washington, who brings 300 volunteers.

We could not do it without them.

So we're so grateful.

[ Cheers and applause ] So this year marks an exciting expansion of the festival as we celebrate not only the written word, but also more of the extraordinary collections of the Library of Congress.

Today, we are pleased to bring a guest whose work is closely tied with the Library's vast motion-picture film collection.

They're a part of the Library's National Audio-Visual Conservation Center, where we preserve and provide access to more than 10.1 million items representing our nation's cinematic, television, broadcasting, radio, and recorded sound heritage.

It is my great honor today to introduce one of the most influential filmmakers in the history of American cinema... a director, storyteller, preservationist, and passionate advocate for the motion-picture film -- Martin Scorsese.

[ Cheers and applause ] [ Cheers and applause continues ] In addition to almost six decades that make up Mr.

Scorsese's filmography, his commitment to preserving our cinematic heritage goes far beyond his own extraordinary body of work.

He was an important advocate for the creation of the National Film Preservation Act of 1988, which established the framework for the National Film Registry and the National Film Preservation Board, which he has served since its inception.

He has perhaps been the most vocal and visible filmmaker to introduce the notion of film preservation to the American public, and continues to support these efforts through his remarkable Film Foundation and the World Cinema Project.

His lifelong commitment to film preservation and film history has helped ensure that films that define our cultural history will remain available for generations to come.

Five of Mr.

Scorsese's films have been added to the National Film Registry since its establishment in 1989.

Films selected for the registry are recognized for being culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant, and for their enduring contribution to American life.

While he is here with us today, we presented him with certificates for "Raging Bull," "Taxi Driver," "Mean Streets," "GoodFellas," and "The Last Waltz."

They are on -- Oh, they're on-screen for you to see.

[ Cheers and applause ] First, I want to welcome someone I know will be very familiar to you -- our guest who is joining Mr.

Scorsese today in conversation.

And that is Ben Mankiewicz.

[ Cheers and applause ] Mr.

Mankiewicz is someone who is also deeply connected to the history and appreciation of American cinema.

Many of you might know him as a contributor on "CBS News Sunday Morning" for many years and the host of Turner Classic Movies, where he has introduced generations of viewers to the great films and filmmakers of the past.

In fact, he's helping the Library of Congress introduce visitors of all ages to the legacy of the infectiously charming and legendary Bob Hope in a new exhibit at the -- to open at the Library in March 2027 titled "That's Showbiz: Hollywood, Hope, and Fame."

Indeed, Ben comes from a family with a remarkable legacy in American motion pictures, giving him a particularly personal connection to the history of filmmaking in this country.

The list of Mankiewicz film screenwriters, directors, and producers is long, but the one I want to share is that his great-uncle, Joseph Mankiewicz, directed my favorite film of all time, "All About Eve."

[ Cheers and applause ] If you haven't seen it, please see it.

If you don't like it, I'll give you your money back.

[ Laughter ] So please now join me in welcoming Ben Mankiewicz to the stage.

[ Cheers and applause ] -Mankiewicz: Thank you.

[ Cheers and applause continue ] -And a drum roll, please.

Our special guest, a filmmaker whose artistry is unparalleled and whose commitment to film preservation has been unwavering -- Mr.

Martin Scorsese.

[ Cheers and applause ] -Scorsese: Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Good to see you.

Thank you.

[ Cheers and applause continue ] Sit.

Sit.

Oh.

My, oh, my.

-That's pretty good.

-Yeah.

-A standing ovation.

Although I think mostly that was for me, but, you know... -Oh, I saw that.

I saw that, yes.

Mm.

Okay.

-Thanks for doing this.

Thanks for letting me be the person who talks to you.

That means a lot to me.

I appreciate it.

-Scorsese: No, thank you.

-So let's get going.

So in -- You created The Film Foundation in 1990, uh, to preserve cinema history and to preserve, literally, these movies, though your work on that started in the 1980s, right?

-Prior to that.

-Scorsese: Yes, it did.

Yeah.

You've worked steadily with the Library, uh, since then.

Some memorable projects with the Library of Congress preserving films, including one of my, I think, three favorite Hitchcock movies -- -Scorsese: Oh.

"Saboteur"?

-"Shadow of a Doubt."

-Scorsese: Yeah.

-"Shadow of a Doubt."

-Scorsese: Shadow of a Doubt" is the one I think -- Yeah.

That still holds up so beautifully.

-Great.

-"Saboteur."

Not to be confused with "Sabotage."

-Not to be confused.

"Saboteur," though, with my great friend who lived to be 106 years old, -Norman Lloyd.

-Scorsese: Norman.

I know.

-Yeah.

Yep.

-Yeah, yeah.

And "The Road Back."

Well, we did "All Quiet on the Western Front" with the Library.

Um, we also did -- I mean, everybody -- so many people involved, but "The Road Back," which was the sequel -- directed by James Whale -- of "All Quiet on the Western Front."

-Mankiewicz: Also Erich Maria Remarque... -Remarque's book.

Yeah.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah.

-And so, uh, when that was made, um, they re-edited the film and reshot it for the comedic elements in it because they didn't want to offend -- it was Universal at the time -- didn't want to offend the German audience at that time.

The government, apparently, of National Socialists, who were, like, you know, Nazis.

-Yeah.

That's right.

-Yeah.

-[ Laughter ] -Mankiewicz: It was not the... -Not good.

They didn't want to offend them, though.

So we got the actual footage.

It was all saved and the whole thing has been restored.

Um, one of my favorites.

"Hallelujah," King Vidor, which was the first one of the -- I think one of the first sound films to be done down South -actually on location, you know.

-Mankiewicz: That's right.

Yep.

That's an Irving Thalberg-produced film, -too --"Hallelujah."

-Scorsese: Who did?

-Thalberg produced "Hallelujah."

-Scorsese: "Hallelujah"?

-Wow.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah, yeah.

-It's a very moving film.

-Yeah.

-Yeah.

Beautiful.

But, um, there are so many.

I think they've done, eleven-hundred, or 1,100 films, I think.

At that point.

-Yeah.

Something like that.

-At the Library.

Yeah.

-And how many has The Foundation done, all told?

-I don't know.

How many have we done?

[ Laughter ] -How many?

-Woman: Over 1,100.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah, over 1,100.

-Over 1,100.

-And many of those with the Library.

All right.

So... So... Well, I'll tell you what.

So relevant to what we're gonna to talk about today, So we're gonna take a look at a clip here.

This is a short clip from a film from... -1903.

-...1903.

And you're gonna to see about 45 seconds of it, which is about 50% of it.

[ Chuckles ] [ Laughter ] But it is really -- It is really quite something.

So let's take a look at this first clip.

Scorsese: [ Chuckles ] That's wild.

[ Laughter ] Mm-hmm.

-Yeah.

So I think something was wrong with the sound.

[ Laughter ] -Scorsese: Actually it was a silent film.

-It was silent.

-[ Mankiewicz laughs ] -Um, so that is called "At the Foot of the Flatiron."

-Mm-hmm.

-And why is that significant?

-Well, because it was one of the first films that were made -- It was made for Edison, I believe.

And, um, that was used in the -- what's it called -- the kaleidoscope?

The -- The... -Mankiewicz: The crank.

-Yeah.

You crank your nickel in or whatever and you'd see.

And it was a series of films made.

They're, like, one minute each.

Um, and the camera was just -- They found an angle, went around the city, you know, got the waterfront, you got that, you got... This was very interesting because, um, in some of these one-minute films, uh, they were basically location, shooting -- showing that part of Manhattan that was famous, et cetera.

But in this, they're showing the Flatiron Building.

Now, the Flatiron Building apparently at the time may have been the tallest building in New York -- in Manhattan, I should say.

And what you have on 23rd Street, where it is, is that, uh, it was so flat open that the winds from both rivers would hit.

And it was the most windy corner in New York and Manhattan.

And so kids would go there to see the dresses of the women.

[ Laughter ] Only to show their ankles.

Only the ankles, okay?

And the cops would come around, and it became that whole thing -- "23 skidoo."

"Come on.

23.

23 skidoo."

23rd Street.

-Mankiewicz: Oh, 23rd Street.

-Yeah.

-I thought 23 was, like, a call sign for "get away," but that's probably why it's a call sign for "get away."

-Okay.

-"Get those kids out of there."

-Right.

-And the thing about it is imagining that city at the time flat with the winds hitting, buildings -- no buildings breaking that -- that force.

And so, um, I wound up -- It stayed in my mind because the way the people are moving, their faces, their hands.

All of these one-minute films are almost like the Lumière brothers, where the composition becomes a narrative, where they place the camera.

And then, particularly if you see people in it.

For example, I'm looking at -- Yes, we're seeing the people, I'm seeing their faces.

I'm thinking of their lives.

I'm thinking of, uh, the shoes, how they're walking.

I'm thinking of, "Oh, look at that jacket.

Look at that guy's hat.

Look at -- Look at the woman trying in the corner -- trying to get -- get some relief from all this -- uh, the windiness of the area.

Uh, the little girl that's being pulled around with her hat and how the hat looks, how the hat pulls.

So all of these details -- the doors, uh, the nature of the concrete, all of that -- really is like a time machine.

It takes us back in time and we learn about the -- We learn about what people really looked like at that time.

They're wearing clothes.

They're not wearing costumes.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-You know?

So even when I did "Age of Innocence," I said, "I don't want this to look like some people wearing costumes," you know, and I kept showing this clip and a few others to everybody.

The clothes have to be lived in, you know?

-And this was preserved -- Like, this is what's called a paper print, right?

-Well, that's what happened.

Yeah.

Because the light-sensitive paper, they would -- The early film producers, in order to get their copyright, they would donate a print, a one-minute print, but on paper, so that the paper reel itself with each photograph -- Each frame was photographed -- Each frame was a photograph of the frame from the nitrate.

That would -- actually lasted -longer than the nitrate.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-So we have to thank the paper prints for these glimpses of what it was like 120-some-odd, 130 years ago.

And they did that in order to get their copyright here -- donate a paper print.

-But without that paper print, we don't have "At the Foot of the Flatiron."

It wouldn't exist.

-No, you wouldn't even know.

We wouldn't know anything.

You wouldn't know about the -- I don't know.

There's something about the way that city, New York itself -- the way it was put together over the years.

.t's fascinating.

-I like that the guy who lost his hat... -Yeah.

Yeah.

-...got a laugh.

-He came back.

-Yeah.

-And he's at the door checking the camera out.

But he's like, "I'm not gonna lose my hat again, -like an idiot."

Yeah.

-Scorsese: [ Laughs ] But this is the thing about that.

We're doing research and... Yes, we do a lot of research with the written word, you know.

But on the other hand, to see it is -- I don't know.

There's something about living at that time that you feel, mm... Uh... In a way, seeing people, mm... ...in their original location and their lifestyle and what they're doing -- You can read about it, but seeing it somehow seems to immerse you into it more, 'cause, really, you actually see the people creating history right there.

They're living it, you know?

The reading is very important of it.

But then to see an image and the image moves... it's stunning.

-Well, so, in case you think that Marty is overstating the importance of that particular clip that you just saw, that particular film from 1903, we'll take a look at our second clip now, which is a little bit from his 1993 film "The Age of Innocence."

-Narrator: [ Southern accen t ] He would see her again at the theater or a reception.

Perhaps he might be seated next to her.

Perhaps they might have another time alone somewhere.

But he could not live without seeing her.

-♪ But I also dreamt ♪ ♪ Which charmed me most ♪ ♪ That you loved me still the same ♪ ♪ That you loved me ♪ ♪ You loved me still the same ♪ ♪ That you loved me ♪ ♪ You loved me still ♪ ♪ The same ♪ [ Wind blowing ] -It's funny.

That's nice.

-[ Applause ] -Yeah.

Um... -I haven't seen that since I ma-- For many, many years, I haven't seen that.

-Well, it's a lovely film.

And, uh, I probably thought then, as a 26-year-old who knew better, by the way, um, that... "Why is every man holding his hat?

That's not realistic.

Some would not be."

-Scorsese: You have to.

-No.

We saw it.

-Literally.

-You have to hold on to your... -One guy didn't hold his hat.

It blew away.

-And there's the old phrase "hold your hat."

-Right.

"Hold your hat."

That's right.

That's right.

That's where it all -- not just "23 skidoo," but "hold your hat."

I mean, they all had to because it would fl-- -You've got to, you know.

-Yeah.

And... -They stopped wearing hats when?

The early '60s with the Kennedy administration.

-That's right.

After John Kennedy didn't wear it -for his inauguration.

-Yeah.

Yeah.

-That's, uh... But so, now, when you start researching "The Age of Innocence" -- When you decide you want to make this film, and you do research, right, and you were very -- You've got people doing it and you're doing it.

You're reading yourself, though.

Do you -- Had you -- Did you because you're Martin Scorsese -- Did you know about "At the Foot of the Flatiron"... -Scorsese: No.

-...or did you find it -while researching?

-Well, research.

That's what makes this so unique and so inter-- I mean, the Library of Congress -- That's why it's so essential, you know, to continue to, uh, protect and, uh, you know, to have this.

You need the collection here because it's such a -- -It's a treasure.

-Mankiewicz: You came here.

You came to the Library of Congress to look at this stuff.

-Yeah, yeah.

-To find stuff.

And just in case we didn't make that clear, that's where that was preserved -- by the Library.

-That's why I'm saying it's essential and it can't -- At this point -- At this point, we're in a situation where anything could be happening with our past and rewriting of the past and a -- That's always been a danger, but even more so now.

So here are the original elements.

Right here.

And, uh, you know, aside from doing research, the Library itself just is one of the -- as I say, the treasure of this country.

[ Applause ] -So how then -- How critical is it for you, and in what way is it useful to you, to have our history inform you as you move forward in making these films?

-Well, I mean, for me, uh... ...it turns out I've done a lot of films -- A number of the films I've made -- A number of them really are period pieces.

And I go back and find it and go back and hopefully, like, there are photographs.

Like, in "Killers of the Flower Moon," we had photographs for our costume designer -and Jack Fisk on, you know... -[ Applause ] I mean, and the Osage people helping us -- I mean, it was a joy.

And the more I found, the more I wanted to put in, was the probl-- [ Laughs ] You know?

But even to the points of the design of a shirt, everything, a tie.

And so, for me, the research is really -- Research is kind of one of the most -- I don't know -- the most enjoyable part of making the picture.

You know, "The Irishman," I didn't need much research.

I know it's a hotel room.

I got it.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-You know what I'm saying?

-In Chicago, maybe.

Okay.

1950.

Well... We'll figure -- Look at it.

I know.

I know what it is.

Um, "GoodFellas," we had some fun with that.

Oh, "Casino" was crazy.

-That was a wild, um, epic.

-[ Cheers and applause ] Re-creating the '70s in Vegas at that time was pretty, pretty wild.

So, but even then, the research there was amazing.

You know the costumes that Bob is wearing in it?

-Bob De Niro?

-Mankiewicz: Yeah.

-They're so outrageous.

"Lefty" Rosenthal's real -- the character he's based upon -- his real clothes were more spectacular.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-We had to take it down.

-You took it down a notch.

-Scorsese: We took it down.

-Yeah.

[ Laughs ] -Yeah, yeah.

Wow.

-Hard to believe.

-So, really, it's key.

I mean, um, you know... Also, you know, it's an issue where you say just because something is accurate doesn't mean it can be art.

So then one has to be able to, mm, blend it and mold it in a way, um, that -- The impulse is from the reality, but then it's got to be transferred into some kind of art that you're making, which is -- Okay, let's say it's a costume, let's say it's a car, whatever, but it has to fit with the whole picture you're making.

So you may take some liberties, you know, and even to the point of, well, this didn't happen then, and, you know, um, it was two years earlier.

I said, "Well, if we can squeeze it in this way and move it around," 'cause you're making a work of art.

You're not re-creating the object, so to speak.

I mean, who killed Jimmy Hoffa?

-We don't know.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

I thought you answered that question.

-No, I don't know.

I don't know.

I mean, you believe it?

I have no idea.

You know?

So, but he got killed and but that's the lifestyle.

-Allegedly killed.

We don't know.

-Allegedly.

We don't know.

We can't -- There's no body.

So -- But the point is that that's the lifestyle, that's the philosophy.

Those are the conditions in which you take on a life like that.

At a point, you have to pay up.

And that's what the story is.

-The -- The -- The... The extreme attention to detail is... Who is that for the benefit of?

'Cause I used to think, like, if you're -- For an -- I don't want to get too deep into it, but, like, on "The Age of Innocence," we've talked a lot on TCM about the -- about the invitations, the place settings.

-Oh, yeah.

-And so... And obviously most audience members, maybe nearly 100, they're not gonna notice it.

But then I've decided maybe that's not really for them.

-It's for you.

Yeah.

-Scorsese: Yeah, yeah.

-It's for me, but also primarily for the actors.

-Yeah.

For the -- I meant for you, the crew, the company.

-Yeah.

They have to know.

The actor -- For example, Visconti on "The Leopard" -- this is one of the great films with Burt Lancaster, Claudia Cardinale, and Alain Delon -- he had -- For Burt Lancaster, he had the underwear made in Paris just the way the count would have had\ it done.

And it was kept in drawers.

-You never saw it in the movie.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah.

-But Lancaster knew it was there.

-[ Laughter ] -Okay?

You see it in his face.

[ Laughter ] He knows he is the count.

Okay?

There you go.

And that's Visconti -- "Just do it.

Just get it in there."

"But it costs this much."

"It's gonna work."

You know?

-Uh, that's quite so.

But, again, I think we're misreading it.

Like, you know, when I think, "How much money did they spend and the audience isn't gonna notice it?"

but they notice it in different ways.

It's not that they notice the detail.

-It's not -- Yeah.

And sometimes it's enjoyable to see the detail of how a machine works.

-Like in "Hugo," for example.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah.

Some of those things really were working.

I mean, you know, the cranking and all this.

It was beautiful.

In 3-D.

Um, but it's not really -- It's -- Remember, the whole thing is that you're trying to make a work of art, or as close as possible to a work of art.

And it has so many elements when you're making a film.

There's so many things that come into play.

And some things give and some don't.

You can slip and slide a little bit here and there, you know.

Again, even, like, the scene in "Irishman" where he -- Supposedly he kills Joey Gallo at the Umberto's.

If you look at the film, he's at the Copacabana that night.

Then there's something else that happens.

And the next -- That same night, he's downtown killing Joey Gallo.

-How did that happen?

-Right.

-I got you.

Yeah, you know, but... -It's all -- One has to be -- You know, one has to be cognizant of trying to create something that is, uh... -But you know, I think, better than anyone that -- What I find is that if there's something incongruous like that in a film, and if it comes in a film where for some reason, I don't believe or emote with the characters, then I'll pick apart, "You could never get from these locations that quickly."

-Scorsese: I know.

-But if we're vested, if we care about these people, then some -- You don't even have to consciously say, "I don't care."

Your brain just lets it go.

-It accepts it in a way because you have to care about... It's all about the emotion and the emotion and the psychological connection you have with the characters in the film.

And I do think, you know, there are things that happen sometimes that take you right out of a film, and that's something else, you know.

Where, you know -- There was one film back in the late '60s... [Coughs] Excuse me.

...that was a Biblical epic.

It wasn't very good.

And it was made by a great director, though it was his last film.

It was Borzage's last film.

And the critics complained about a vaccination mark on one of the actors.

[ Laughter ] Yeah.

Okay.

-Robert Kennedy Jr.

outrage.

-Okay.

Yeah, yeah.

I know.

-[ Laughter ] -He really got mad on that one.

Yeah.

Oh, boy.

"Look, you could see it, and in ancient Rome, they didn't have that."

How do you know it's a vaccination mark?

It could be a birthmark.

What do we know?

-Mankiewicz: What do we know?

Right.

So we have one more clip to show... also from 1993, "The Age of Innocence."

-What is this?

[ Laughter ] -You'll like it.

It's good.

-Oh.

Okay.

[ Applause ] [ Orchestra playing ] ♪♪ -Narrator: It invariably happened, as everything happened in those days, in the same way.

As usual, Mrs.

Julius Beaufort appeared unaccompanied by her husband just before "The Jewel Song" and, again, as usual, rose at the end of the third act and disappeared.

New York then knew that a half-hour later, the Beauforts' annual opera ball would begin.

[ Man and woman singing operatically ] ♪♪ [ Singing continues ] Carriages waited at the curb for the entire performance.

It was widely known in New York, but never acknowledged that Americans want to get away from amusement even more quickly than they want to get to it.

[ Singing continues ] ♪♪ The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ballroom.

Such a room, shuttered in darkness 364 days of the year, was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.

Regina Beaufort came from an old South Carolina family, but her husband, Julius, who passed for an Englishman, was known to have dissipated habits, a bitter tongue, and mysterious antecedents.

His marriage assured him a social position, but not necessarily respect.

[ Classical music plays ] ♪♪ -Scorsese: Ooh.

Pretty wild.

-Mankiewicz: Yes.

[ Applause ] Scorsese: Yeah.

Mankiewicz: So I'm curious about narration, which is frequently derided, right, as, "Oh, you could write your way out of a scene, so..." -Exactly.

-But first of all, that's Joanne Woodward -- carefully chosen.

Like, the narrator mattered.

And then you worked with her -- one of the great actors of her generation -- to find the right tone.

But there, it serves this incredibly valuable purpose, to talk about how something from that period that mattered was important, -that the precision mattered.

-Scorsese: Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

-I mean, it's a big subject, particularly in light of this film because, um, in the narration, um, we are then alerted to all the signals and the signs of the tribe.

-It's a tribe.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-You know, the aristocrats of New York, or the aristocrat of whatever it was.

The earliest families, that sort of thing.

And they have signals.

The fact is that she always gave the signal by getting up and everybody could see her get up.

She waits till they're at a certain point in the opera where she gets up and they see her get up.

She then leaves at that time.

They get there and they realize that now nothing has changed.

They could certainly, um, feel assured that life will go on with no disruptions because the next thing will be the ball begins and that begins the season.

And without her getting up in that box, there would be, you know, in the whole place, a revolution.

-Mankiewicz: Chaos.

-Chaos.

-Chaos, -Chaos will ensue.

And it's the right fork at the right place.

I mean, you see all the utensils, you know.

And so in a way, for Newland Archer, too.

I think it's fascinating because, ultimately, it depicts a prison for a free soul, a free spirit.

And the beauty of the whole thing, or I should say the irony of it all, is that a generation later, it didn't matter.

His son is marrying the daughter -of Beaufort... -Mankiewicz: Right.

-...who had, uh, you know, dubious antecedents.

-Mankiewicz: Dubious antecedents.

-Yeah.

And I like how Joanne Woodward, she gave a little Southern drawl.

-Scorsese: She certainly did.

-Yeah.

Yeah.

-But the thing about about the narration is that I've always felt that narration also gets a bad -- a bad rap because of -- Well, you're right.

You couldn't explain, you couldn't show it, so now you're explaining it on the screen.

Well, here... I fell in love with narration as storytelling watching "Kind Hearts and Coronets" and, um, I just found that the narra-- and the irony Dennis Price's character -- of how he... And the restraint of it.

That.

The Albert Lewin films -- "Dorian Gray" and "Moon and Sixpence."

And, uh, what was the other one I had here?

Um... Yeah, I mean, look, you can use narration that way.

I found that the narration in "Kind Hearts and Coronets" and in the Lewin films, they may have given you exposition, but they gave you something else, too.

There was a -- There was a kind of warmth and a complicity that took you into the story.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-And then that's different from Robert Bresson using narration.

Often you'll see a person get off a bicycle and put it against a door, and the narrator says, "He got off his bicycle -and put it against the door."

-[ Laughter ] And that means it's not about narration.

It's not about the story.

It's about, something else is going on in this movie.

And it's a whole other level, you know?

But I really -- You know, with the narration with Joanne, we had to keep redoing that first line -- "It happens as it always happens."

You heard it just now.

When Mary Beth gets up.

Mary Beth Hurt.

We had to find the right tone because, um, the first words felt like an intrusion in that world.

-Mankiewicz: I see.

-It just -- It was too... And I think we did it four or five times.

She kept coming back.

I said, "I'm sorry, Joanne.

It doesn't seem --" Not that she was doing it wrong, but I couldn't find it.

I couldn't find it.

And finally she has it there in her voice, you hear it, so that it becomes a person who is -- She's commenting on all this from within, right?

She's part of that world.

But she also was doing ironic counterpoint to it.

Um, so for me, uh, it worked out very well.

The key to the whole thing was when I read the book -- I was given -- My old friend Jay Cox gave it to me back in the early '80s, and I read the thing and I, you know -- Something about the way it was written and the narrator, the narrator's voice, and I wanted to re-create.

I don't think I did it, but I wanted to re-create the feeling and the experience of having that story told to me by this person.

And I wanted as if you're reading the book, and at the same time, you're making the film.

You're making it right there in virtual, you know, and you're part of that world.

And that had to do with the experience of reading itself.

The book takes you to another world.

But I really felt it in that one.

I said, "I'll tell you what.

Let's use the words.

Let's..." People said, "Too much narration."

I said, "There's not enough."

[ Laughter ] So I provoked it that way, but I'm not sure we got it.

I mean, the idea of seeing a film and feeling that you're experiencing the reading of the book -- I don't know.

I don't think it works that way.

But...you know.

-But this didn't -- This is almost -- You know, you got to get her to do it in a way where it sounds like she says "excuse me" first.

-Scorsese: Yes.

[ Laughs ] -But obviously she can't say that.

-Scorsese: Right.

-Right.

That's tricky.

That's a good... So when it comes to adapting something -- obviously people here at the -- uh, we're at the Library of Congress' Book Festival -- how much do you pay attention... Well, first of all, do you prefer to adapt from a novel or an original screenplay?

Or are is it all story-based?

Whatever story touches you, that's what you want?

-I think it's really character-based.

-Mankiewicz: It's really what?

-Character.

Character.

I'm fascinated by certain characters, like John Garfield in "Force of Evil," with the moral conflict back and forth, back and forth.

You know, you just see it.

That was a key film for me.

Again, on "Million Dollar Movie."

Twice a night, you know?

-Yeah.

Well, you'd see it when it was on TV.

You'd see it and you'd watch it again.

Yeah.

Yeah.

-So, um, for me, it's always character and where the character takes us.

That's why in "Color of Money," for example, where Fast Eddie would go -- .I didn't know.

It was a sequel.

But it was different from the book.

It's very different.

That Richard Price wrote.

So we had to find our own way with the character.

Uh, it's really great if you got the plot and everything.

That's really wonderful.

But for me, the plot, um, I find it -- I don't mean to be funny about it, but I always make the jokes about, you know, "Departed," I did everything I could to destroy that plot.

I said, "I couldn't"... But it was a joke because the plot was so complicated.

Um, and we went in.

There was all character on "Departed."

We built it up with, uh, Leo and Matt, and then, of course, Jack.

Jack Nicholson and Vera.

And so somehow the tension was the characters taking us through that world, but at the same time, we had to adhere to the plot that was so complicated.

[ Laughs ] -Mankiewicz: Right.

-That envelope -- I still don't know what was in it.

-[ Laughter ] -Mankiewicz: I... Yeah, but, again, it's one of those things -- Maybe it's just one of those things where I cared about the characters so much it didn't matter, but I never think of that -- I don't even think of it as complicated because I was so vested in every character.

-We had quite a time wrestling with it.

But the thing about it is, I find that if you slavishly follow the book... First of all, you can't ever -- You know, you can't ever re-create the feeling of -- or not the feeling, but the experience of what a book does to you.

It's so personal and so individual.

Okay.

I mean, we were crazy.

I tried in "Age of Innocence," but, you know.

But, for example, can you make a film of everything in a book?

-Well, von Stroheim tried... -Mankiewicz: Yeah.

-...with "Greed," which was "McTeague," which was Frank Norris, right?

Well, it was made in 1925.

He's doing every scene.

He's doing every page.

Right?

There's the wedding scene with ZaSu Pitts, and -- I forget his name -- the lead actor.

Anyway, they get married, and in the book, there's an indication that -- There's a symbolic indication in the novel at that point that there's gonna be a disruption in the marriage.

It's not gonna be a very good marriage.

And the way Norris did it was, there was a guy working on construction, sort of a buzz saw of some kind of that period.

And the noise was really interrupting or was discordant with the wedding.

Now, "Greed's" made in 1925.

-There's no sound.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

Yeah.

-[ Laughter ] -So what von Stroheim did, he had a funeral at the same time as the wedding.

-Mankiewicz: Hmm.

Oh.

-He translated it that way.

So it really isn't -- I mean, can't say it's the book.

What can one do?

But, um... -So, like, because you love the written page and you don't want to, you know... I know you're beholden in some way to the book, but it's not replication.

-No, it can't be.

Also, it gets boring to do that.

It really is.

Like, oh, you know, it gets boring.

I mean, the point is, you have to really love those moments and love those things that the characters do and enjoy re-creat-- or creating them.

It's not even re-creating.

You know?

You have to go with it, I think.

-Mankiewicz: But it's a different.

You were creat-- It's the -- The mistake everyone makes, myself included, is, don't compare it to the book.

-These are... -Oh.

Well, that's the problem.

-These are their own pieces of art.

-I don't think we'll ever get past that.

I think, you know, verbal literacy is a priority.

Visual literacy is as important.

It really is.

And, uh, I can understand it not being the priority.

I understand the nature of... Books, for example.

I've been reading really more in the past 35 years 'cause I grew up in a house where -- it was an apartment -- where my parents were working in the Garment District, but they'd never read.

They could read.

They were literate.

But they'd never read books.

So I brought the first books in, you know.

And I had to learn how to read a book.

Um, but in the sense of that, you talk about structure and staying with the book.

Well, if you read "Moby Dick," why don't we stop the movie and make a 100-page -- Or let's say, the novel.

He stops the novel.

Or maybe it's part of the novel.

I don't know.

But he does 100 pages on the anatomy of a whale.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-Okay, I'm with you.

-This guy's out there.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-You know?

Where is this going?

-[ Laughter ] Where is this going?

And it's pretty good, you know?

And I was, like, 24, reading it.

"What the hell?"

And I thought that, "Wouldn't it be great in a film to have a kind of 'documentary' element to it?"

Like -- Well, you know, the key man was Rossellini -- "The Taking of Power of Louis "XIV" that he made for television in 1968.

That is the film that has a kind of almost didactic way of dealing with the, uh -- telling you that -- For example, the opening scene, a woman is sleeping in a room, she's sleeping on straw.

She gets up, she opens a window, takes a breath, walks over to a bed that is covered.

She opens the curtains on the bed.

There's a man and a woman in there.

And then she opens up a door and all these people come in.

And then this guy sits up in the bed -- Or she sits up in the bed with the man, and she applauds.

And there's a guy there who's with the group.

He says, "Why is she applauding?"

"'Cause the king has performed his marital duty last night."

-Mankiewicz: Right.

Yeah.

-[ Laughter ] -And the whole thing is that way, until finally the whole movie comes down that the power of Louis XIV -- and he was so important in what he did, controlling people, especially in Versailles -- The power comes down to the choice of a plate of food by the end.

And the way it's -- I always wanted to do something like that.

So "Age of Innocence" has a lot to do with that.

Um, the power is through the objects and the handling of the objects.

-When you gave the Jefferson Lecture in 2013, you talked a lot about, uh, visual literacy.

Like, we're all behind the idea of literacy.

But that we -- especially now.

-More so.

13 years later.

-Scorsese: Yeah, yeah.

-How valu -- Why is it so important that when it comes to preservation, and then just when it comes to teaching kids?

All these young people coming up, um, whether they're gonna be filmmakers or not, are inundated with images.

-Scorsese: Yes.

-Right.

-Scorsese: Well, yeah.

That's the problem now.

That's why the visual literacy is in jeopardy.

-And so -- Right.

And why is it in jeopardy?

What is the... -Well, what's happening is that, of course, now there is no truth in an image.

Now, that always maybe has not been, because you could take an image and say -- you know, a shot of a person walking across the street and you say, "Murderer leaves building."

You don't know, you know.

So now, with AI and with -- well, more than the fabrication of images.

Um, and let's go back on that.

The glut of images.

Um, what's happened is that the glut of images, the intercutting, the flash cuts -- The image no longer has a meaning.

So what the only meaning seems to be -- to sell you something or to absorb it, consume it, and let it go.

Go to the next, go to the next, go to the next.

And so, for me, what is important in the, um... Hmm.

...how you determine what has value or not.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah.

-What is the value?

Does this image have a value?

And if that's the case -- Or this story have a value.

If that's the case, then that is a, uh, you know, uh... That has -- let me put it this way -- critical thinking, dare I say, because there isn't any anymore, you know?

There just isn't.

Maybe -- I've had -- we were talking earlier about it -- where you've had critics who don't like your films.

And I don't necessarily like their reviews, their bad reviews about my film.

But on the other hand, it's critical thinking.

You know, there are those opposed.

They are those for it.

And these are the reasons why.

And the reasons have to do with, what's the value of these things?

What's the value?

What does this make you feel?

"Well, it's funny."

Okay.

Then what?

Well, do you keep going back to it?

We talk about, you know, um, how can you have critical thinking if you're constantly bombarded with this information where people are trying -- "Look at this, look at this."

For what?

To buy it?

-Mankiewicz: Mostly to buy it, right?

-Then what?

You use it.

Then you go to do the next, you know.

The soul is missing, is what's happened.

-And that in your mind -- I think correctly -- makes the art that much more important.

-That's why we have to protect it.

And that's why we have to -- particularly, like the Library of Congress, the original forms, because I got to tell you, I've seen it happen.

Look at what happened with "The Road Back."

You may like the film or not.

Doesn't matter.

But it was manipulated to say something else.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

-Now, in the times -- You know, at a certain point in time, we never thought we'd be in a position where our culture might be in danger in the sense that whatever we've done, art and everything, could be manipulated by another group, another way of thinking... and our generation -- The younger people or the next generation will never know the original.

You follow?

And a picture could be manipulated.

You can do new scenes for classic films, which make it seem the opposite of what the film was about.

You know?

These images are so important.

The images of the concentration camps, uh, you know, uh, changed everything when those images came up 'cause it was concrete, it was there, it was real.

-Mankiewicz: Right.

And it was true.

-And it was true.

You knew it was true.

Um, you know?

So this is why the, uh... You know, you can get a film, you know, a war film, and suddenly the Americans in the war film are the... They've lost, whatever.

You change the entire story, you know?

-So I'm gonna wrap up with what you said at the end of the Jefferson Lecture -13 years ago.

-Scorsese: Uh-huh.

-You said that, "We need to say to ourselves that the moment has come" -- 13 years ago -- "when we must treat every last moving image as reverently and as respectfully as the oldest book in the Library of Congress."

-Yeah, I still feel that.

And I feel that now it's complicated by, as I say, a glut of meaningless images.

Yet even that reflects who we are.

-Mankiewicz: The meaningless images reflect?

-Yes.

Yeah.

And for a generation after us to say, "Look, you want to change something?

Look, this doesn't mean anything anymore.

What does it mean?

Over here, there's something that has lasting value because it makes you feel this way.

It makes you think.

It makes you whatever.

You want to be with it.

It's a work of art."

But I still -- Yeah, there's, uh... Even -- The hardest part is making a value judgment as to which film or which book should be kept.

I mean, how can you make -- It's like, you know, how can you make a choice?

Um, invariably, as we know, many films that came out when they were released were panned.

Nobody saw them.

Look at "It's a Wonderful Life."

-Mankiewicz: Right.

Yeah.

-How many years did it take before it became a classic?

-It came out in 1946.

-Mankiewicz: Television.

-Television made it a classic with commercials in it.

-Yeah.

"Wizard of Oz," too.

-Scorsese: "Wizard of Oz."

-Yeah.

-You know, my film, "The King of Comedy."

And people can't believe it.

I said, "No, when it came out, it died so quickly."

It was -- died and brushed away.

Nobody -- People hated it.

And, um, suddenly people are talking about it again.

-Mankiewicz: Yeah, 'cause it's fantastic.

-Well, yeah, it's just an interesting thing.

What it is, is that it's great to have the film re-evaluated or mean something to a new generation, but it's that the generation doesn't remember because they weren't alive.

They don't know.

They don't know what the zeitgeist was, as they used to say.

You know, at that point, you know... So for me, it's, uh, for now, uh, the respect for cinema and it's a little bit of a problem in that, as I say, there are a lot of meaningless images out there now.

We're inundated with it.

But the respect for cinema has to be as -- as severe and as strong as the respect for the written word.

-Yeah.

Um, so we got to go.

I just want to say this on the way out the door to you -- With the creation of The Film Foundation, Marty, in 1990 and for your work a decade before that, you have made the preservation of film and the critical significance of film as important as "Taxi Driver" and as "Raging Bull" and as "The Aviator" and "The Departed" and "Hugo" and "Killers of the Flower Moon," all your wonderful films.

You stood by Turner Classic Movies, where I work, when we needed you most.

You are looking at a man here who has used his talent... -[ Applause ] -...his name, his money, and his political clout for the good of this art form.

And everybody here is thankful.

-Martin Scorsese, everybody.

-[ Cheers and applause ] -Thank you.

Thank you, Ben.

Thank you.

♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪