MC: I know that the movie uses different directors. What did your part focus on? Did your parent’s economics background help you?
SG: My sections were focused on (the book authors Stephen) Levitt and (Stephen) Dubnar. I know that the way that I approached the interview was with years and years of talking about that stuff (with my parents). Regression isn’t a normal conversation in most homes.
MC: Freakonomics is serious compared to your more lighthearted, but incredibly enjoyable King of Kong. Do you change mindsets from project to project?
SG: I think King of Kong is incredibly serious. A lot of the social science that drives my approach to Kong is in Freakonomics. The pursuit of the video game score might seem inherently dynamic, but the social dynamics that occur, like backstabbing and cheating, are serious. We tried to reach deeper themes that anybody could relate to.
[youtube id =”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMJZ-_bJKdI”%5D
MC: What about adjusting for your work on television, like on Modern Family, to your documentaries?
SG: For me the two types of work are sort of the antidote to each other. Documentary allows me to get into a different story telling style that is very rewarding creatively. The more commercial stuff… sometimes it’s just great to go to a movie and laugh.
MC: What’s next for you?
SG: I just finished Horrible Bosses for Warner Brothers.
I just follow my gut. If it’s something I find interesting, if I pursue it rigorously enough, it will work out.
MC: That sounds like it could be a documentary.
SG: It’s not, but it’s certainly based on real world stuff!