Latest / Atmosphere with Emily Gracey / Forecasting D-Day: The Weather Behind PRESSURE

Transcript

Forecasting D-Day: The Weather Behind PRESSURE · Atmosphere with Emily Gracey

• Emily Gracey: This is the largest seaborne invasion in history. June 1944. The fate of World War II rests on a single decision. Thousands of lives hinge on this. But before soldiers could storm the beaches of Normandy, one small team had to answer an impossible question. What will the weather do? I need a forecast. Churchill tells me you're the best meteorologist in the country. A forecast so critical history itself may depend on it. We are faced with a succession of two aggressive storms. If D-Day is canceled, we will lose this war. Meteorology under unimaginable pressure. Science colliding with war, uncertainty, and human lives. If you invade tomorrow, they're going to be washed away. Why should I trust you? Today on the very first episode of Atmosphere, the science and the story behind the film Pressure. We must face the facts. The facts, however frightening they may be. A weather historian will break down the real D-Day weather setup and why this remains one of the most important forecasts ever made. Then, film director Anthony Morris joins me to talk about bringing this remarkable weather story to the big screen. And how through the process of making pressure, his appreciation for both meteorology and the power of the atmosphere deepened. The storms that I am talking about are real. And the wrath of nature is real. I'm meteorologist Emily Gracie, and this is Atmosphere, a podcast where science becomes conversation. Each week I sit down with the experts behind the forecasts, the research, and the headlines to explore not just the science itself, but the human stories behind it. Through natural curiosity, we're making science more understandable, more relatable, and hopefully bringing a little more comfort in how we experience the world around us. Hi everyone, welcome to the very first episode of Atmosphere. I'm your host, Emily Gracie. This podcast is built around something I've always believed. Science becomes more meaningful when we understand the people behind it. So each episode will explore not only the science shaping our world, but also the stories, the decisions, the emotions, the human experiences connected to it. Sometimes that means talking with researchers and forecasters. Sometimes it means diving into major moments in history. But the goal is always the same: to tell compelling science stories. And what better way to do that than through film? Today's episode centers around the movie Pressure. It tells the story of the meteorologist responsible for forecasting the weather conditions ahead of D-Day during World War II. We'll start with the science. I'll chat with weather historian and meteorologist Sean Potter to unpack the atmospheric setup surrounding D-Day. We'll talk about the forecasting challenges of 1944 and why weather became such a critical part of one of history's most important military operations. Then later, I talk with director Anthony Morris about his journey making pressure, balancing historical accuracy with storytelling. and how he enlisted real meteorologists to bring the story to life. I'm so excited about this first episode because it has three things I love weather, history, and movies. And if you were a listener of Off the Radar, my former podcast, I think you're gonna love Atmosphere even more. The conversational feel is still here, but there are now no limits on who can join the show or the stories that we can explore. I have some great episodes coming up every week this month. We'll be tackling topics ranging from severe weather research to hurricane hazard communication to earthquake science. Please give the show a follow or subscribe so you don't miss those brand new episodes every Tuesday. Now let's get into the weather behind D-Day with Sean Potter. Sean Potter, thank you so much for joining me today on this episode of Atmosphere. We're talking about D-Day weather. And you're the guy because you're a weather historian. So I can't wait to hear all about the weather at D-Day. Let's pretend our listeners know nothing about D-Day. Can you give like kind of a very basic like what part of World War Two are we at and what was happening at D Day historically? Yeah, so the D-Day, what we know is D-Day, occurred on June sixth, nineteen forty-four. And it really proved to be a turning point in World War II. This was a a major assault by the Allied forces. So this is, you know, primarily British, American, and other allies who were involved in fighting, you know, primarily on in that theater, as it were, of the Germans. And German-occupied France at the time. And so the plan was to surprise, have this surprise attack, sending thousands of troops across the English Channel in what was known actually as Operation Overlords. It was a major assault on German-occupied France by British, American, and Canadian forces, ⁓ primarily that led to the liberation of Western Europe and ultimately the surrender of Germany. So major, major turning point. in the war. And there was also an a huge air component as well. So weather obviously played into that. And they needed specifically to know what day or days, like a range of dates within ⁓ I think it was May, June, and July 1944, that they were initially considering for the invasion. And what what days in those during those months would they have an opportunity ⁓ to undertake this this invasion looking at some very specific ⁓ criteria. So they actually wasn't just the weather. They needed the day to fall within a period of either before one day before to four days after a new or full moon. They obviously needed to have skies relatively clear for the aerial component for the bombing and reconnaissance. And Winds were a very critical component of this. They measured winds during ⁓ at that time using the Beaufort scale. So they they were looking to have ⁓ winds less than force three, which is eight to twelve miles per hour onshore, and less than force four, thirteen to eighteen miles per hour offshore. And for as far as clouds, they were looking for cloud cover of less than three tenths ⁓ sky cover below eight thousand feet with with bases no lower than than 3,000 feet. So like generally, do you have an understanding as to like what a typical weather pattern might be ⁓ late spring, early summer in this part of the world? Like what what do they normally experience? So they they they looked at they settled in in June because it wouldn't climatologically, historically, experience the rapid procession of storm systems across the North Atlantic that say you might in more of an April or May timeframe during the spring. And it turned out that that is exactly what was occurring during the month of June. It it it had weather in that part of Europe that maybe was more typical of spring, of earlier in the spring. So it it it wasn't as ideal as as they would have liked. And that sort of set the stage, if you will, for the the drama that unfolded in terms of forecasting. Okay, before we get into the forecasting part specific to D-Day, what was meteorology like in nineteen forty-four? Because we're talking about pre-computer bottles, pre-radar, pre-satellite imagery. how did they do this? It was it was primitive. It was by all by all accounts. I mean, just to to jump ahead a little bit, it was in ⁓ nineteen sixty when Kiros one, the first weather successful weather satellite was was launched. And I wrote about this for ⁓ Weatherwise as well for my retrospect com. And I love this quote that I I used by a Weather Bureau official who said we went from rags to riches overnight. And and it's that's not an exaggeration because before that, you couldn't get that big picture overview. And and think about how you know that that statement was made in 1960 with and if anyone's seen What a T Ros one, you know, visible satellite image looked like compared to what we get today from the latest ⁓ generation GOES or or polar orbiting satellites. It's is you know night and day. So without even that, it was ⁓ it was really relying on on surface data and upper air data, which was being used more and more at the time, and hand-drawn maps and plotted and analyzed charts. And then a lot of it came down to the forecasting technique. And this was ⁓ this was a critical component in as we get into more of the discussion of the forecast for D Day, because traditionally, ⁓ let's just call modern meteorology, ⁓ you know, which say is starting from the late 19th century into the early 20th century, like we've if we consider that sort of the the dawn of of modern meteorology and weather forecasting relied a lot on analog techniques. And and rules of thumb. So what the analog forecasting technique does is it has the forecaster look at the synoptic weather situation, again, based on these hand-drawn, hand-plotted maps, and try to compare that with similar situations from the past. And especially if you can look, you know, maybe go back several days and see how the situation has evolved. And then go, okay, well, here's we found something similar, maybe around the same time of the year. So we know it's, you know, maybe the same of the same factors at play that evolved into where we are today. And then let's see where that situation in the past, how it developed beyond that analog comparison, and then use that as the basis for creating a forecast. I was gonna say this sounds kind of like AI. Me. Is there not comparisons? Like this is what Google Deep Mind is doing. They're taking all these old scenarios and throwing them into a model. Yeah. And it's it is interesting you mentioned that because I think I think there maybe are some some apt comparisons that could be made, at least in the sense of you can't just rely on that blindly. You can't just say, Well, this is this is what you know, what the model says or what AI says. And that's where the human element really comes into play, of course. And of course, these were humans, forecasters making these forecasts at the time, regardless of the methods. But as anyone who has studied really anything about the history of meteorology, 20th century meteorology knows there was a major shift and a revolution, if you will, that took place beginning in the 1920s out of the town of Bergen, Norway. In fact, it was called the Bergen School. It basically gave us the understanding and the concepts that we still rely on today. In terms of air masses and fronts. And and so knowing that, understanding that, I think at that time really gave some of the forecasters an edge in being able to predict what would happen. And and again, ultimately that became the basis using the frontal air mass concepts really sort of won out from over the analog forecasting process. Mm, okay. ⁓ so I'm understanding now the Crickstagged battle a little bit more and what the background was there. Okay, so the the days leading up to D-Day, can you take me through what Eisenhower was trying to battle with here and then what things could have been like and then what how things did turn out? So Eisenhower was the supreme allied commander and it was ultimately his responsibility to determine When this invasion was going to take place. And so they had assembled these teams of forecasters. There were two British teams, one civilian, one naval. And they were led by Captain James Stag, who was of had been pre-war times at the UK Met office, and then was chosen not just because of his meteorological expertise, but also for his administrative and leadership skills. basically be the ⁓ the chief meteorological coordinator, if you will, between the various teams. And he would be the one who would eventually would ultimately be presenting the information and the ⁓ recommendations to General Eisenhower and his senior ⁓ commanders. And then there was one team that was consisted primarily of American forecasters, and that was led by Irving Crick, who Had really made a name for himself before the war, even as somebody who could take, let's say who could take forecasting in a direction that it hadn't really gone, at least commercially. There's a famous story about him providing a forecast for the filming of the scene in Gone with the Wind. So this was 1939, I believe, ⁓ of the burning of Atlanta. And this, of course, took place in a back lot ⁓ in Hollywood and ⁓ and they needed a forecast where you know the wind especially wouldn't wouldn't be too high because they wanted this to be very, very controlled. And so they got this call and and and did this. And it kind of made a name for him, but it also sort of it's worth mentioning because I think that also underscores there's that sort of glamour element of it that sort of underscores his personality and his sort of ⁓ demeanor, if you will, in that That permeated even after the war. It would want me to be sort of a showman. It boosted his ego a little, is that what you're saying? Right. They're definitely, if you look at at ⁓ Crick, Skag, and then I think the third major player in ⁓ in terms of ⁓ the forecasting was a Norwegian named Sver Pettersson, who worked with the British. And he had been a student of the Bergen school. So he relied heavily on those techniques that I described of looking at conflicting air masses and the boundaries between them, which we know as weather fronts and using that as the basis for his forecasting. Whereas Crick relied primarily on the old school analog techniques of comparing the current weather situation with ⁓ with situations in the past. Okay. So what was the weather pattern setup leading up to D-Day? Well, it wasn't it wasn't good. And Eisenhower had initially selected June fifth as D Day, but conditions across the Atlantic, the North Atlantic in particular, started to deteriorate. And and there were, I believe, two major storm systems that were threatening the area where this invasion was going to take place. And so by June third, Stag brought his concerns already at that point to Eisenhower that that the various teams were predicting things like rough seas, strong winds, low cloud cover, all of which would would hinder both the the aircraft and and landing operations. And and so there was this intense set of meetings, these weather conferences that were taking place over about a two to three day period from June 2nd to the fourth, where Stag was was called before Eisenhower and Montgomery and the other senior commanders, and having to update them and in sometimes defend what he believed he is based on the varying teams was going to happen. And eventually he did convince Eisenhower to postpone the invasion by 24 hours. And This was after Stag essentially told Eisenhower that he and the his well, his fellow forecasters believed that conditions on June fifth would not meet those those requirements, those operational requirements that they needed, and that there would be a brief window on June sixth. And if it hadn't happened then, they would have had to wait about two weeks for the tides again and other. factors to sort of ⁓ coincide. And so they would have been looking at about ⁓ the 18th to 20th of June for the invasion. And there was ⁓ there was also the concern that the Germans would have discovered the plans by that period. They were worried that they might have already known what was being what the Allies were planning. And in fact, I think there's you know evidence that the Germans were aware, but they didn't take it very seriously, at least in terms of when the invasion ultimately took place because the Germans were also monitoring the weather and and they didn't think that conditions would improve enough even when they did. And again, we're talking about a marginal improved to the point where they were marginally acceptable on June sixth. So do you think this level of meteorology, this good forecaster, this decision made just like this very pivotal role in world history? ⁓ without a doubt. I mean, this this was, I think today remains probably one of the most critical forecasts ⁓ in in world history. And certainly probably one of the most heavily studied and dissected forecasts in world history. It's wild though to think about these guys were kind of like the original consulting meteorologist, you know, like you're a a C CM today, a certified consulting meteorologist. They were doing this back then. But I mean, the movie named it correctly, pressure. Like that is some crazy pressure to be under to pivot the outcome of a world war based on this one day and this one forecast. Do you I mean, can you imagine as a consulting meteorologist feeling that kind of pressure? I I cannot. And you know, having worked a little bit in the operational realm on the operational side of things as well. It's really it's more pressure than I would like. Let's put it like that. I don't even like doing weddings. Like, you know, yeah. It's I mean, it's ⁓ yeah, it's one thing to have ⁓ to to ruin somebody's wedding day. It's another thing to to end up losing a war because or a major ⁓ invasion because you got the forecast wrong. And so that's why, yes, so much was put into it. And it was actually, I think, very in a way, very smart. You know, we can look back historically and you know, hindsight is always 2020, of course, and look back and just kind of, you know, look at it from a broad brush perspective and say, well, you know, Stag and his team and and and Pederson, those those guys, you know, they got it right. And, you know, Crick, even though he would probably would have tried to convince you later on that that You know, he did get it right and he did to some degree get it right. I've met some meteorologists like that. Exactly. I think we all have. But I think there's something to be said for having differing ⁓ viewpoints when you have such a a huge decision, ⁓ you don't end up with I think what you know, what psychologists might call ⁓ groupthink, you know, kind of mentality where especially, you know, maybe maybe you had somebody like ⁓ Crick with his ego and his history. Could have perhaps convinced others if this had just been one team. So ultimately, I think pitying in some degree, maybe indirectly pitying these differing groups of Allied forecasters against each other ultimately led to a a better outcome. Interesting. Yeah. Everybody's gonna bring their A game. Exactly. All right. ⁓ yeah, we're throwing Crick under the bus, but maybe he's a a very important part of the puzzle. Sean, is there anything else that you want to share about the weather at D-Day or the role of these meteorologists in World War II? I alluded to this earlier that if things had not worked out when they did for an invasion on June 6th, they would have had to wait two weeks. And Stagg actually, after D-Day was over, he decided to go back and look at what the weather ended up being like on, let's say, that that next period of ⁓ Possible ⁓ the like the next possibility for a D-day. He actually wrote up a little memo that he ultimately sent to Eisenhower. ⁓ and that he said that there was had they waited two weeks for the next opportunity to launch the attack, the results would have been disastrous. And so it turned out that this storm that that did occur was the worst to strike the English Channel in four years. And so this was really played heavily in Eisenhower's mind, and he actually Scrawled a note at the top of that memo and sent it back to Stag. And the note that Eisenhower wrote said, Thanks and thank the gods of war. We went when we did. Okay, now that we know the history and the weather behind D-Day, let's get into the film Pressure. The title says it all. Even forecasting an ordinary rainy day can carry weight as a meteorologist. But imagine forecasting the fate of one of the most important military operations in world history. Bringing the story of Captain James Tagg to the big screen was no small task, but director Anthony Morris handled it beautifully. Balancing tension, humanity, and the science at the center of it all. I'm honored that he took the time to join me today. Here is my conversation with Anthony Morris. Anthony, so excited to talk to you today about pressure. I saw the movie, it's fantastic. And the weather community is very excited about this. We always love when a weather movie comes out. So I want to go back to kind of the beginning because this has been a work in progress for a while, right? When did this whole process start? Well, I came on it ⁓ just before COVID broke. So I was going back to Australia to get my ⁓ you know, US visa pace paper stamped and ⁓ I've just come onto this. You know, great new project called Pressure, which had been a stage play that was recently ⁓ shown to me as a screenplay. And I thought I'll get my visas paper stamped and then we'll, you know, work on the script for a you know, a couple of weeks or months and then we'll shoot it later this year. That was in twenty twenty. And ⁓ you know, life ⁓ you know, changed for many people, including myself over that time. We spent a lot of COVID the blessing in disguise actually really you know, getting into the depths of the script and just sort of filing it back and just sort of sort of refining it and stuff. And ⁓ you know, the ultimate conclusion is that now, many years later, we we have our finished film. And kind of ironic too, when you think about, you know, like the themes of the movie and believing the scientists and then, you know, COVID kind of happening parallel to all of this. Well it's it's funny because when I when I had read what JFK had asked Eisenhower at his inauguration, of course. Eisenhower is the outgoing president, JFK was coming in. And he said, What was it that gave us the edge on D-Day? JFK was a soldier in in World War II. Not in D Day, but in World War II. It was the first question he asked Eisenhower, and he just turned around and blanked and with a very ⁓ very casually just sort of said, Well, we had better meteorologists than the Germans. And that line really stuck with me because I thought, wow, you know, here you had a man of science who was willing, and not even willing, who was intent on telling. you know, some of the most formidable leaders on this planet. Not something that they wanted to hear, but something they needed to hear. And yeah, they trusted the scientists then and it was helped them win the biggest conflict that the world's ever seen. So maybe scientists do know something after all. Well thank you for elevating our field even more. Did you know anything about the weather story behind D-Day prior to reading this? No, I had had no idea. You know, I I knew what, you know, perhaps most people knew about D-Day. I was aware though that the weather had played a major role in many not only in other battles, but just obviously in civilization generally. ⁓ I remember as a teenager reading ⁓ Guns, Germs and Steel and looking I don't know if you've ever read ⁓ Jared Diamond's book, ⁓ but talks about how geography and weather systems have had a massive influence on, you know, how civilization has un has flourished or not flourished across the world. And ⁓ But yeah, no, I I had no idea ⁓ about the specifics of what happened at D-Day ⁓ or in the lead up to D-Day. And I was I became very quickly obsessed with this idea that ultimately the fate of so much rested on this one binary decision where you know it was a decision to go or not go, but it was about a lot more than that. And and that concept of not having all the answers, of being plagued by uncertainty. of having to make a decision in that in that context, ⁓ I thought I think is a timeless ⁓ problem that we always face. And I think Stag's kind of ⁓ Stag's example of saying, look, I cannot give you a certain answer. I cannot say one hundred percent it's gonna be good or it's gonna be bad, but I can tell you one thing with certainty. Based on what we know now, this is what we should do. And if not for that, How else would you bring yourself to a decision like that? Like if not for the scientific method, come up with another way to face these problems. I'd like to hear it, you know, other than yeah, have a hypothesis, test it, verify it, or just keep testing new hypotheses. Without that, find another way to do it. There is you know, we haven't come up with a better way. So That part really like I connected with that part so much that the fact that they kept asking him, like, are you certain? And he kept saying, No, like we're predicting the future because that is that is my life and a nuts. Everybody wants an answer, but it is literally predicting the future. So no, you you can't get you can't get the certainty. And it's and I I love the way Andrew Scott plays that almost with an insolence. It's like, no, of course not, you fool. There's something there's something funny about that. Yeah. He was fantastic. ⁓ so I love I I read a quote of yours that made me laugh, ⁓ where you said, How do you make a slow moving weather system terrifying? So, but you did somehow. So, how do you transform like this slow moving low pressure system into something so intense? My God. There I don't know why we choose to do the things we do sometimes, but after having made my previous film, which was also a thriller, it was also set in a relatively contained space. In that case, it was the Taj Hotel in India. But in that instance, you had ordinary people who came across this, you know quite overwhelming force that was men stalking the hallways with guns and with bombs. And it's something that we're kind of evolutionarily equipped to fear. Like we th you know, it's easy ⁓ to make audiences fear a predator because we biologically fear predators. When I read when I first read Pressure, the actually the the fires had just happened in LA and then I flew back to Australia and we had these massive bushfires in Australia and like they had killed billions of animals and like scorched, not scorched, like incinerated, you know, size such large areas of the Australian land masses, bigger than in entire countries. And I was like, wow, you know, the natural world is Awesome. It's complicated and it's terrifying in a way. And, you know, there's an anxiety that a lot of people have about what the natural world may or may not do now. But a lot of people can kind of put it off and just sort of say, ⁓ it's something that happens later, or people don't know about these models. And ⁓ you know, there's a lot of conjecture. You know, with with pressure, you had a really sharp ⁓ decision to make and the consequences would be immediate. But again, it was a slow moving amorphous weather system. And how do you make that terrifying? And unlike having a predator stalking the hallways that we're kind of designed to fear, we're not really designed to fear cloud systems that are moving across the Atlantic that are going to hit another country. And you know, more than anything, it's through the characters. It's through trying to put ourselves in the position of the characters who knew what the consequences of failure would look like, who knew what it would look like if they got it wrong. Who understood what that bloodshed and what that carnage would mean and what it would feel like. And my job was to revise the script ⁓ with David and also to direct the film in a way that ⁓ allowed the audience to get inside the heads of the people making the decision. So what you know, some of the techniques were like starting with Exercise Tiger, starting with the r the dress rehearsal for D Day, which went catastrophically wrong. And it was only intended to be a training exercise amongst friendly people. And yet more people died ⁓ in exercise tiger operations than they did at Utah Beach. Starting with that kind of allows the audience throughout the film to sort of realize, well, hang on a minute. If we get this prediction wrong, if the ISO bar is drawn in the wrong place and we muck up, it could look like the opening of the film, but on a scale that's a thousand times worse. And so it's a lot of those little techniques, you know, that e you just refine and hone in on ⁓ throughout. In you know, you're dropping lines like ISO bars. So I'm guessing you became a little bit of a weather expert in all of this as well. I became a massive weather nerd. Like, you know, if you test me, I'll probably flunk it. But yeah, no, I you have to learn about it all, of course. So tell me about enlisting like the real meteorologists in the process of how you found them and how you incorporated that into the film. Well, we ⁓ you know we were very intent on trying to make the film feel as authentic as possible and We had a blessing walk through our office doors in Martin Young and Jim Galvin. Martin Young is o I think over ninety years old, had worked in the same weather facilities as the chief forecaster that Stag had for 40 years. And he understood not just the bigger picture things, but the little the little things in the weather rooms before digital took over. You know, he'd talk about the ashtrays full of cigarettes. He'd talk about the The fact that there were ⁓ eraser rubbings everywhere, he goes, everyone's hands was filled with ink and erasers and you know, all these little details of how they use a double pen, two quills, a red and a blue one, so that they don't have to get another pen, they can just twist their wrist and draw the ISO bar. Now that might sound like boring as watching paint dry to most people. No, it sounds so fun. If you Well, if you incorpor I guess if you incorporate all of those little elements together. Audiences, even if they don't consciously know how an ISO bar was drawn or that there was the ashtrays or whatever, I do think that filmmaking is ⁓ it's not one decision, it's a thousand little decisions. And having someone like Martin who was able to say, This is what it felt like on a human level to work in one of these rooms, to hear the petty arguments, to hear the egos, to hear the over the smoke, all of these sort of ⁓ you know things being yelled out back and forth. It's gonna be this many knots and the wind is doing this and it's chaotic and all of this. To envelop the audience in that atmosphere is important. But we did other things as well. Like we used a lot of real life archival footage, which is of the period of the real life people, you know, both not just soldiers, which we got to, but, you know, we got, you know, w we weather teams out in the Arctic circle in the 1940s. braving sub-zero temperatures to light you know to send off these balloons and you know all of these different little elements we sort of put together the the net result was this how do we authentically put our audiences in the in the war rooms where these decisions were made that affected so many. ⁓ so you yeah we can weather nodes a little bit. So do you feel like the bar has been raised too when it comes to like film and TV, when it comes to accuracy of portraying some of these fields I'm thinking of like the show the pit and how how I've heard medical professionals say like this is so accurate and they're doing this to a T. I but I don't feel like it was like that 30 years ago. Do you think the bar has been raised and and it's expected now? I I do. And I think the internet has a large part to play in that. You know within a couple of weeks of our trailer, not the film, our trailer coming out, you know, we had so many experts everywhere who are niche ⁓ experts in one particular field. And you know, there are a couple of YouTube videos that came out that have had 50, 60, 100,000 views analyzing the accuracy of our of our film based on the trailer. So they're looking at things like, you know, is the mark on the side of the boat that's coming in accurate? ⁓ my God, look, it is, and it matches things on the guy's shoulders. We we went to extreme measures to try and to try and get that accuracy, not in anticipation of any of this stuff, but just we're in an ecosystem now. media ecosystem where things can be analyzed to the nth degree. so it's nice, you know, to be able to sort of have people come and say, ⁓ you know, you got this right or sometimes you got this wrong. But more than anything, ⁓ you know, it's about trying to create an authentic environment that feels real. I've tried to do that with all my films. So yeah. You were a writer, director, executive producer and editor on this? Is that normal or is that excessive? It's I don't know, it's it's what I've done on every one of my films, so it feels normal to me. ⁓ a lot of my favorite filmmakers you know, wore worn multiple hats on the film. I guess it was just born of, you know, ⁓ wanting to do a lot of stuff on the movie. I had a you know, had an incredible team throughout, including my editorial team. You know, they kind of moved into my house really because we edited at my place in Adelaide in Australia. became like family and you know film is not like painting you don't just you know you unlock yourself away and and paint by yourself it is inherently collaborative. Yes, I've worn a lot of hats. I've worn three or four hats, but there's thousands of positions on a movie. And, you know, I guess from a artistic point of view, you know, I I really do feel a film is kind of ridden three times, once when you write it. once when you are making it and then obviously in the edit, this is cliche to say it, like anyone will say the same thing. But to be able to have the consistency across the three, you know, has always been helpful to me and it's fun and I like to do it. So, you know, yeah. I get it. I do the same thing with the podcast. So I fully understand. Well I and and I think and it's funny you say that with the podcast because I I think the technology has allowed that. You know, in the past, just it it wasn't you couldn't do it. Like or you could do it, but it's To have an editing room in the past meant you physically were cutting film and it was like this whole thing. Whereas, you know, I think newer generations, we have it on our computers. It's not just about knowing the machine. That's the easy part. It's about the story. But I think yeah, it's fun to do. So if you like to do it, do it. If not, work with other people. It's all good. ⁓ or both. ⁓ my very favorite line in the movie was, ⁓ and this is like it I loved it because, yeah. I love it because it it w takes me back to this podcast and like the purpose of this podcast. And it was when Stag says, People ask when it will rain, but what about why does it rain? And why does the wind blow? And so I'm curious, did you write that line? Where did that line come from? Because I love it. My God. In the in the revision process, you know I wanna say between in those COVID, those ye years of COVID, I c I've lost literally lost count of the number of drafts w that were done. ⁓ there was a monologue in the original stage play and screenplay, which encapsulated some of that. We worked over it so many times in in screenplay form, but again with Andrew. What grabbed me about that line was something very personal. Like as a kid, I was that kid, you know, like I was always driving everyone nuts. But why does the air conditioning happen like that? And hey, why is it we're going to the market on Sunday and not Friday and like it was just driving everyone nuts? But I I think, you know, a lot of ⁓ the scientific endeavor is built on that question and as is the creative endeavor, you know, which is we w we're compelled to find out why. And it's at the heart of who Stag's character is. And it's kind of why I want to make films, because you when you make movies It's hard work and a lot of it is way less kind of glamorous than a lot of people would imagine. But the benefit is you get to see slices of life and parts of the world and stories that there's no other way I f that I know of to see those things and to understand those things. Whether it's, you know, nineteen forty four meteorological office in ⁓ you know, the outskirts of London or whether it's, you know, a fictitious world but it's human in some way, like we get to kind of temporally travel through time and space and keep asking why. And and then, you know, the the actor said something really interesting as well about that, where he's like, ⁓ people talk about there being good weather and bad weather. And he's like, what is good weather? What is bad weather? Like, is it bad that it rains? He's like, I love when it rains. And I love that that the natural world and the weather in particular is this awesome, all-consuming force. But at the same time, it's invisible. But it's also this thing which kind of mirrors our lives. You know, you have your highs and lows, you have your good days and your bad days. And I I think that that it's funny you mentioned that little passage because that's one of the things that I found you, you know, most profound throughout the whole story, which is why this man does this. And it's a celebration of the natural world. And I love Andrew Scott because Fleabag season two was like my favorite season of TV ever. ⁓ my gosh, he was so good. He's so good. ⁓ Evanny, does this make you want to tell other weather stories? I mean, you're kind of known at this point for like these short term real life events. Is there any other stories you you have your eye on? I I've got my eye on a number of stories, but really I don't have a grand plan with it. It's it's more just you finish one and then you, you know, you look and see what else what else there is. I don't know if it'll be weather in particular, but I am very interested in characters who ask why and ⁓ you know I'd like to follow that impulse for sure. Anthony Morris, is there anything else you want to share with our listeners about the movie pressure? You know, just if they want to see a great movie, I'll plug it, go out and see it. The actors are phenomenal. It's one thing to see something on the small screen, but if you can get the chance, go see it on the big screen because ⁓ it's a pretty good film. I agree. I loved it. Thank you so much for your time today. Thank you, Emily. Appreciate it. Pressure is in theaters now, and I highly recommend it. Whether you're a meteorologist, a history buff, or just someone who loves a great film, it's absolutely worth seeing. A big thank you to Sean Potter and Anthony Morris for joining me on this episode of Atmosphere. And thanks as well to Kelly McDonald and the team at DDA for helping to make this conversation happen. If you have questions about today's show or weather in general, you can always find me on social media. On Facebook, I am Meteorologist Emily Gracie. On Instagram, just search Atmosphere Podcast. If you enjoyed today's episode, be sure to follow Atmosphere on YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts so you never miss a new conversation. And if you have a moment, leaving a rating or review can really help support the show. If you're looking for even more weather content, check out Weekly Weather Brief, a quick roundup of the week's biggest weather and science stories hosted by me and fellow meteorologist Karen Jerriman. New episodes drop every Friday on YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts to get you caught up before the weekend. Atmosphere is a production of Mike Burst. It's produced and edited by me, Emily Gracie. And before we go, I also want to give a huge thank you to all my friends and family who I've been constantly texting, calling, and sending drafts to over the past few weeks while building this show. From music choices to artwork to branding, messaging, and episode feedback, your support, honesty, and encouragement have met more than you know. I truly value all your opinions and this podcast is better because of you. I'm meteorologist Emily Gracie. Thanks for taking the time to slow down, stay curious, and explore the atmosphere.