Nine Inch Nails’ Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross will spotlight their fellow film and TV composers and also perform at the first Future Ruins festival, which will be held Nov. 8 at the Los Angeles Equestrian Center. “It’s about giving people who are, literally, the best in the world at taking audiences on an emotional ride via music the opportunity to tell new stories in an interesting live setting,” Reznor says of the event.
The stacked lineup includes Cristobal Tapia de Veer (Babygirl, Smile, The White Lotus), Ben Salisbury and Geoff Barrow (Ex Machina, Civil War), Danny Elfman (Batman, Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, Edward Scissorhands, The Nightmare Before Christmas), Claudio Simonetti’s Goblin (Suspiria, Profondo Rosso/Deep Red, Dawn of the Dead), Hildur Guðnadóttir (Joker, Chernobyl, A Haunting in Venice), a performance of Howard Shore’s score of David Cronenberg’s Crash, Isobel Waller-Bridge (Munich: The Edge of War, Emma., Black Mirror), John Carpenter (Halloween, They Live, The Thing), Kyle Dixon and Michael Stein (Stranger Things, Lost in the Night), Devo’s Mark Mothersbaugh (The Life Aquatic, The Royal Tenenbaums, Rushmore), Questlove presenting the score works of Curtis Mayfield, Robert Aiki Aubrey Lowe (Candyman, Master, Telemarketers), Tamar-kali (Mudbound, Shirley, The Assistant), Terence Blanchard (BlacKkKlansman, Malcolm X, Inside Man) and Hauschka (All Quiet on the Western Front, Conclave, Lion).
Reznor and Ross will also perform material from their numerous award-winning scores, including The Social Network, Soul, Challengers, Watchmen and Gone Girl. Tickets go on sale May 21.
“There’s no headliner. There’s no hierarchy. This is a stacked lineup of visionaries doing something you might not see again,” Reznor and Ross say.
Meanwhile, Nine Inch Nails’ first tour in three years will get underway June 15 in Dublin and run through Sept. 18 in Los Angeles. Reznor and Ross are also following in the footsteps of electronic music legends Wendy Carlos and Daft Punk by scoring the third film in the Tron franchise, Tron: Ares, which will be released Oct. 10.
To see our running list of the top 100 greatest rock stars of all time, click here.
Dan Schwarz, CEO of Futuresearch, recently shared insights from his company’s ongoing analysis of OpenAI and the broader Generative AI market. Futuresearch has recently focused on dissecting OpenAI’s revenue composition to forecast its growth prospects, publishing several analytic reports on the topic. What follows is a heavily edited excerpt from that conversation, covering both recent findings and previously unpublished projections from Futuresearch’s research.
What is your headline takeaway from your analysis of OpenAI’s revenue projections?
Futuresearch was the first to reverse-engineer OpenAI’s revenue streams before they were publicly disclosed, and we’ve been tracking them for over a year. OpenAI’s projection of $125 billion by 2029 is plausible in theory but highly implausible in practice. This relates to a recent report called AI 2027 that describes a scenario where a frontier lab experiences a runaway AI takeoff based on certain revenue projections. When we calibrate OpenAI’s projections against our expert forecasts, we find that hitting these numbers would require unprecedented exponential growth that doesn’t align with observed data or competitive realities.
What is your alternative revenue projection for OpenAI, and why is the range so wide?
Our 90% confidence interval for OpenAI’s 2027 revenue spans roughly $10 billion to $90 billion. This is an extraordinarily wide range because OpenAI is perhaps the most uncertain business possible to forecast. On one hand, they could monopolize multiple industries through rapid exponential growth. On the other hand, they could stumble due to ongoing litigation, talent exodus, and competition from other labs that already have better models in some categories. I personally lean toward the more bearish end of our internal forecasts. The uncertainty grows substantially when extending forecasts beyond 2027, making the 2029 projection even more speculative.
[Note: This forecast was later updated, reflecting new considerations; the revised figures ($11B −$70B, median $41B) are presented in the graphic below.]
How is OpenAI’s revenue currently split between different sources?
Contrary to early assumptions, API calls account for no more than 15 percent of OpenAI’s revenue as of mid-2024. The bulk comes from ChatGPT’s consumer tier and increasingly from ChatGPT Enterprise. When we published our first analysis, many people thought API was the dominant source, but we demonstrated that ChatGPT was driving most of their revenue, and this pattern continues today.
Ready for more? Upgrade to premium for exclusive content!
What data sources and methods underpin your forecasts?
A good forecast blends data extrapolation with judgmental forecasting, adjusting for factors not captured in historical data. We start by extrapolating OpenAI’s initial revenue ramp (from $1B to $3.5B annually), but this provides only a crude baseline given the limited data points.
More importantly, we track competition closely by evaluating how good OpenAI’s models are compared to alternatives (Claude, Gemini, Llama, DeepSeek, etc.). This is challenging because benchmarks change constantly and don’t necessarily reflect actual user experience or specific use cases.
We also use judgmental forecasting techniques similar to prediction markets or Tetlock’s work for questions with limited direct data, such as lawsuit outcomes. This approach naturally yields wide intervals rather than spurious precision.
How do OpenAI’s growth projections compare to other tech giants historically?
Looking at historical data: Microsoft took 28 years to reach $100 billion in revenue, Amazon took 18 years, Google took 14, Facebook took 11, and ByteDance just 6. When you model a roughly 40% decade-over-decade acceleration, it implies that a frontier lab could theoretically reach $100 billion within four years—consistent with the AI 2027 scenario—but that would require outpacing even ByteDance by a wide margin. Achieving that level of growth would require monopolistic dominance, which is far from guaranteed given the competitive landscape.
Why are you skeptical that ChatGPT can continue as the primary revenue driver?
I don’t believe in ChatGPT as a long-term driver for massive revenue. It faces the most competitive pressure. Free tiers from Google (Gemini), Meta (Meta.ai), Anthropic, and others are already excellent, sometimes better for specific use cases, and often multimodal. Meta, in particular, is aiming squarely at ChatGPT, potentially making it an open-source commodity.
It’s hard to imagine tens of millions of people paying $20/month long-term when comparable or better free alternatives exist. While subscriber numbers were estimated around 23 million paying users (as of April 2024), churn is reportedly high. Every time you use ChatGPT, they’re likely losing money due to inference costs. Both Google and Meta have massive war chests compared to OpenAI, which has had to raise stupendous amounts of venture capital just to get this far.
What about API revenue? Can that become a significant growth driver?
I don’t believe in the API as a source of massive, exponential growth either. The API market is intensely competitive – it’s a race to the bottom on price. Google appears to be winning on the frontier of quality-for-cost right now. Models from Google, Anthropic, and open-weight options (Llama, DeepSeek) are excellent and often cheaper or better for specific needs.
Customers can switch providers “on a dime” – it’s easy to stop spending with OpenAI and move to Google or Anthropic, as my own company has done. The idea of API revenue growing into a “ten billion behemoth” seems very implausible. This dynamic makes it hard for OpenAI to preserve margins on either API or consumer tiers.
If neither ChatGPT nor API will drive massive growth, what could?
Agents represent the only credible path to scaled revenue that I find plausible, though still uncertain. If OpenAI reaches the higher end of our revenue projection ($60-90 billion by 2027), at least one-third would likely come from agent-based revenue – and they barely generate any agent revenue right now.
Success would hinge on OpenAI launching products specifically for software automation and ramping them to billions in revenue within 1-3 years. This could involve automating complex white-collar work through systems like their “operator” concept that can control a computer to perform tasks. Examples include financial analysis, software automation, or general computer operation.
The recent release of o4, despite delays, represents a step-function improvement in agentic flows, particularly web research. It shot to the top of our leaderboards for complex tasks requiring reasoning, tool use, and overcoming gullibility, surpassing even Gemini 2.5 Pro and Claude models on those specific tasks at that time.
Does OpenAI have a sustained technical advantage over competitors?
No – there’s no single “head and shoulders” leader. The advantages appear extremely fleeting right now. An edge gained one month (like GPT-4o in web research) could be lost the next. DeepSeek in China, Meta, Google – everyone is iterating rapidly.
The definition of “foundational model” gets tricky. OpenAI would need a decisive advantage in the capability that drives revenue. If agents are the key, they need the best agentic capabilities. o4 looks like reinforcement learning applied over a base model to perform tasks (tool use, search, code execution). Is the underlying base model the best, or is the agentic layer on top the key differentiator? It’s not entirely clear.
Unless a lab achieves a true, defensible breakthrough, the current state feels more like a continuous leapfrogging race where leadership changes frequently. This makes long-term revenue projections based on current leads very fragile.
What’s the path to a potential “winner takes all” dynamic in AI?
The most plausible path to that kind of scenario involves a positive feedback loop in research automation. If any frontier lab (not necessarily OpenAI – could be DeepMind, Meta, Anthropic, X.ai) can significantly automate its own software engineering and research processes (coding, running experiments, analyzing results), its researchers become vastly more productive.
If they can make research 3x or 10x faster, they could gain an insurmountable advantage. They use that advantage to further automate their research, getting faster and faster. This positive feedback loop is where a winner-takes-all dynamic could emerge, leading one company to pull years ahead of competitors who were previously only months behind. This seems to be the path towards the kind of monopolistic advantage OpenAI would need, and labs are likely working on this explicitly.
How significant is the talent exodus from OpenAI?
The talent exodus from OpenAI is an underrated problem. The number of great researchers who have left to directly compete with OpenAI is probably unprecedented for a leading tech company. We’ve tracked key departures – most have gone to competitors like X.AI, Anthropic, and Ilya Sutskever’s Safe Superintelligence.
In AI, having the right brilliant people in the right place might be the deciding factor. Companies like Anthropic are attracting top talent from both Google and OpenAI, and I don’t see movement in the opposite direction. When brilliant graduates from top CS PhD programs choose between offers from frontier labs, there’s a good chance they might choose Anthropic over OpenAI, which could prove to be a decisive advantage in the long run.
How important are multimodality, coding, and robotics for future revenue?
Multimodality: For web-research agents, multimodal abilities (reading screenshots, extracting tables, parsing infographics) are crucial. However, Google appears to be leading in this area currently. Multimodal capabilities are critical for agents working with knowledge workers, including customer service agents who need to handle calls, talk, listen, and potentially join video calls.
Coding: This represents a multi-trillion-dollar opportunity that doesn’t strictly require multimodality. If OpenAI could create armies of superhuman coders, that’s a path to revenue. However, they aren’t clearly the best now – engineers have flocked to Claude for coding, while Gemini and GPT models remain competitive.
Robotics: Despite decades of high expectations, warehouse and manufacturing automation remain largely manual. Amazon’s robotics is limited, and Boston Dynamics has yet to deliver widely adopted commercial robots. Modern generative-AI techniques might ignite a new robotics wave, but history suggests we should brace for potential disappointment over the next decade. The analogy to self-driving cars is relevant – Tesla’s Full Self-Driving promises haven’t materialized as advertised, while Waymo’s more incremental approach led to slower but real deployment.
futuresearch’s May 2025 Deep Research Bench: ChatGPT-o3+search (default o3, not OpenAI Deep Research) leads in agentic web research. Click HERE to enlarge.
How does Anthropic compare in this landscape?
Anthropic faces similar challenges to OpenAI but with a more concentrated risk profile, being heavily dependent on API revenue, much of which comes via AWS. As API becomes increasingly competitive with pricing pressure, this creates significant vulnerability.
However, Anthropic has potential advantages. They focus heavily on interpretability – understanding and tweaking the internals of their models – possibly more than any other lab. If they can make breakthroughs in understanding why these models are so capable and how to better align them, they could gain a decisive technical edge.
Anthropic also seems to be winning in talent acquisition. Many brilliant researchers who left Google and OpenAI have gone to Anthropic. If safety and reliability become critical differentiators – if other models start engaging in problematic behaviors – Anthropic’s focus on alignment could become a major competitive advantage.
What’s the key takeaway for teams building AI applications?
Don’t assume OpenAI’s current or projected dominance is guaranteed. The market is fiercely competitive, and advantages are temporary. Design your systems to be model-agnostic; avoid locking yourself into a single provider.
Experiment with models from Google, Anthropic, Meta (Llama), DeepSeek, and others – you might find better performance or cost-effectiveness for your specific use case. Be prepared for rapid shifts in capabilities and pricing.
While OpenAI could achieve massive success through agents or a research breakthrough, their path is far more uncertain than their projections suggest. Focus on the practical utility and cost of different models for your application today, while keeping an eye on the potential for disruptive agentic capabilities in the near future from any of the major labs.
If anything, Sister Midnight will destroy preconceived notions of arranged marriage on film. From The World of Apu (1959) to Monsoon Wedding (2001), American audiences have seen Indian brides exist without agency, floating in a strange demure stasis. But not Sister Midnight, an offbeat and often profane fantasia that looks to break both social and cinematic conventions.
In a star-making performance, Radhika Apte plays Uma, a woman sent off to be with her new husband in Mumbai, a place that is alien to her. Uma has no friends or family in this swirling metropolis. Her husband, Gopal (Ashok Pathak), lives in a grimy one-room apartment where Uma is confined during the day, expected to cook and clean. Gopal is always at work and comes home drunk late at night. He also has no interest in sex. Life basically sucks for Uma and she’s not happy about it.
Writer-director Karan Kandhari turns Uma’s predicament into a dark comedy, in more ways than one. On a basic level, Sister Midnight is a domestic comedy. Uma doesn’t know how to be a housewife. She can’t cook or clean. She is also coarse and loves to swear, something frowned upon by the other women in her orbit. Her sexual frustration is palpable and played for laughs. At one point, she tries to seduce Gopal, but he responds with a handshake.
But then something strange happens. Bizarre cravings overtake Uma at night. These vampiric appetites start small—a goat here, a bird there. Soon, Uma is thirsty for human blood. This tonal shift threatens to derail Sister Midnight and much of its second half is devoted to the fallout surrounding these impulses including a neighborhood witch hunt that puts Uma in the crosshairs.
This slide towards horror isn’t the only offbeat thing about Sister Midnight. Soundtracked by Paul Banks of Interpol fame, songs skid from the Stooges to Howlin’ Wolf to Marty Robbins, off-kilter anachronisms for a film completely in Hindi. Yet, Sister Midnight exists to break conventions, break Uma free from the hell of arranged marriage and us from our preconceived notions of what Indian cinema should or shouldn’t be.
If a Western comparison exists for Sister Midnight, it could be the films of Aki Kaurismäki. Much like in the Finnish director’s work, the characters here exist in a liminal, deadpan state, almost as if in a daze. This flatline existence makes each swear Uma utters even more powerful. She is a woman boxed in by society’s constrictions and she is not happy about it. Hear her curse.
To see our running list of the top 100 greatest rock stars of all time, click here.
Billy Idol’s punk credentials are impeccable. As a member of the infamous Bromley Contingent, he was there for all the major Sex Pistols set-tos, before stepping up to front Generation X – one of the first punk bands to appear on Top Of The Pops.
Moving to America in the early ’80s, he spearheaded the ‘second British invasion’, racking up solo Top 10 hits on both sides of the pond. And evidently his brand of playful rebellion still resonates: next month he’ll headline Wembley Arena, playing songs from his recently-released ninth solo album, Dream Into It.
But before that, he’s kindly submitted to a gently grilling from you, the Uncut readers. So what do you want to ask a genuine punk original? Send your questions to audiencewith@uncut.co.uk by Monday (May 19) and Billy will answer the best ones in the next issue of Uncut.
Snowfall’s Damson Idris is set to play the young Miles Davis in a new film about the jazz legend’s first trip to Paris in 1949 and his subsequent romance with the actor and singer Juliette Gréco.
Miles & Juliette will be directed by Bill Pohlad – the man behind Brian Wilson biopic Love & Mercy – and produced by Pohlad’s own River Road Entertainment and Mick Jagger’s Jagged Films, in association with the Miles Davis estate.
Juliette Gréco will be played by Anamaria Vartolomei, while Robert Glasper has been signed up to compose and produce the film’s soundtrack.
“Though much of my work has centred on music, I’ve always been drawn to the intimacy and complexity of a great love story,” said Pohlad. “With Miles & Juliette, I feel incredibly fortunate to explore both – through the lens of two artists whose connection was as fleeting as it was life-changing. This story isn’t just about Miles Davis and Juliette Gréco – it’s about the universal rhythm of falling in love, of being transformed by it, and of carrying its echo with you long after the moment has passed.”
“So thrilled to be a part of a film that celebrates the early days of Miles Davis and his great love, Juliette Gréco,” said Mick Jagger. “Miles is inarguably one of the most influential and important musicians of the 20th Century.”
No release date has been set, but Miles & Juliette is launching international sales at the Cannes Film Market this month.
FRANK SINATRA That’s Life REPRISE, 1966 I don’t really remember my parents ever going out to buy a record, but somehow there was a collection of battered albums under the record player. They would often have nights when drink was taken and fun was had, and this album would always go on. You’d never describe an album of Sinatra’s as lacklustre, but every song is compact, like they want to get it over with. But when he hits the groove of “That’s Life”, he’s kind of unbeatable. If “My Way” is about imposing your will upon life, “That’s Life” is a hymn to how powerless you are to deal with whatever fate throws at you, so the best thing is just to get on with it and have a laugh when you can. It’s the best shrug in popular music.
DAVID BOWIE David Live RCA, 1974 Like many things in life, I was quite late into David Bowie. In order to dig into his back catalogue, I bought this double album, which appeared to contain many of his hits. But of course, a lot of them are reworked and don’t really fly. I’ve subsequently discovered that they’d just had a big fight in the dressing room because the musicians didn’t know they were recording a live album. But I love all that angst. I love Earl Slick, who rips the whole thing up. But ultimately for me, it’s Bowie’s voice. There’s a kind of terror in it. The version of “Rock ‘N’ Roll Suicide” on Ziggy… is a bit Judy Garland, but on this one you really believe he’s not going to make it to the end.
SIMPLE MINDS Life In A Day ZOOM, 1979 I like a lot of Glasgow bands – that first Blue Nile album was great. And I used to really like Simple Minds. I actually like their first album that <they> don’t like. You can see a theme here: I like the albums that don’t seem to be very successful. I saw them in Glasgow at that time, in a tiny little place called The Mars Bar. They weren’t doing blues, they weren’t doing Status Quo, they were doing some weird arthouse stuff, and they had a great song called “Life In A Day”. It’s the first time I’d really seen a band that excited me, and also where I thought, ‘It’s possible to do that.’ Because they’re all just guys from Glasgow, although the world they were evoking was very different.
TALKING HEADS Fear Of Music SIRE, 1979 This album got me through a lot of all-nighters at art school, when I wasn’t as attentive to my studies as I should have been. It’s Talking Heads exploring a lot of the stuff that will become more finessed and polished later on. It confounded my expectations of what a song could be, because the narratives are so strange, but they’re not dislocated. The band are very concerned about making sure the songs have an engaging structure and that there’s a chorus that will work for you, but the narrative is shifting all the time. The songs are inventive and funny, but they’re also a bit scary. You’re never quite sure whether or not you’d be happy if David Byrne showed up at your door.
CRAIG ARMSTRONG It’s Nearly Tomorrow BMG CHRYSALIS, 2014 A lot of actors use music to help them get into the zone. For instance, when I was doing Malcolm Tucker, I would have “Scary Monsters” playing, because it’s quite jagged and hard to relax to. And It’s Nearly Tomorrow is the one that did it for me in relation to the rather well-known character of Doctor Who. I was keen to try and bring some kind of melancholy to the role, I guess because I was older, and this album provided a way into that. It seems to be about time, loss, humanity, love, confusion and fate. The music is infused with this dark, relentless power, like the forces at work in the universe, so it would help me think about how to be a strange, alien Time Lord.
ENNIO MORRICONE The Mission OST VIRGIN, 1986 It’s often said of Ennio Morricone that you know it’s him from the first note, and that’s absolutely true of this album. The film is about the European incursion into Latin America and how the Jesuit priests would set up missionaries in the jungle to try and convert the indigenous peoples to Christianity, which all goes terribly wrong, as you might imagine. Morricone illustrates that story by combining his typically heartbreaking European, classical, choral sound with these indigenous rhythms and voices. So it’s a little bit like world music, but not quite. He’s a master composer of soundtracks, so he evokes this whole thing for us in a very beautiful way. He’s the greatest film composer – apart from Bernard Herrman – because he infuses his material with so much emotion.
WILLIE NELSON A Song For You HALLMARK, 1983 Willie Nelson was huge in the ’80s, but I did have a fear that getting into him meant going the full Ken Bruce, and that easy listening would take me over like the fungal virus in The Last Of Us. So I dug deeper into Willie’s back catalogue looking for purer country stuff. There was plenty, and it sounded great. But so did the standards. I finally accepted this when we found the album <A Song For You>. My partner Elaine and I played it all the time on a battered cassette as our life together unfolded. His versions of these standards have everything – they’re moving, frank, wise and for the ages, all culminating in his version of Kris Kristofferson’s “Loving Her Was Easier”, the song that we danced to at our wedding.
JAN GARBAREK & THE HILLIARD ENSEMBLE Officium ECM, 1994 In 2004, I went to make a film in Iceland. It’s one of the strangest and most haunting places I have ever been, and I loved it. The film was low-budget so I was not put up in a hotel, but lodged in the Reykjavik basement of a fabulous bohemian couple named Sverrir and Eda. They left me a CD player and a number of CDs. This was the first one I put on. The Hilliard Ensemble is a vocal quartet devoted to early music; Jan Garbarek is a Norwegian jazz sax and clarinet player. The combined sound is haunting, medieval, yet kind of jazzy. The track “Parce Mihi Domine” plays like the theme music to some lost Icelandic noir movie. Heard once, it stays forever.
Peter Capaldi’s new album Sweet Illusions is out now on Last Night From Glasgow
Plenty of music biopics are unable to use songs by the artists they depict. Some, like the 2020 Bowie-related movie Stardust, struggle as a result; others, like Backbeat or Nowhere Boy, find ways to tell a more introspective tale. “For me, it was a beautiful obstacle to overcome,” says Ido Fluk, the Israeli writer and director of Köln 75, which dramatises the events surrounding Keith Jarrett’s famous Köln Concert without being able to feature a single note of his music. “It’s about this legendary concert where a pianist has to improvise for an hour on a broken piano. As artists, the creative process is often about dealing with obstructions and obstacles. Telling this story without using any of the original music was our broken piano.”
Plenty of music biopics are unable to use songs by the artists they depict. Some, like the 2020 Bowie-related movie Stardust, struggle as a result; others, like Backbeat or Nowhere Boy, find ways to tell a more introspective tale. “For me, it was a beautiful obstacle to overcome,” says Ido Fluk, the Israeli writer and director of Köln 75, which dramatises the events surrounding Keith Jarrett’s famous Köln Concert without being able to feature a single note of his music. “It’s about this legendary concert where a pianist has to improvise for an hour on a broken piano. As artists, the creative process is often about dealing with obstructions and obstacles. Telling this story without using any of the original music was our broken piano.”
Fifty years ago, the American jazz pianist Keith Jarrett turned up to play a solo gig at the Cologne Opera House and, instead of the 10ft-long, half-ton Bösendorfer concert grand that he was expecting, he was given a weedy, 6ft rehearsal piano with broken pedals. A furious Jarrett wanted to cancel but ended up reluctantly playing the gig, using the instrument’s limitations to improvise in a completely different way. Against the odds, a live recording of the show ended up shifting more than four million copies, becoming the biggest-selling solo piano album in history and turning Jarrett into a star.
Köln 75 explores the chaotic events leading up the concert, with John Magaro playing a spiky Keith Jarrett and Mala Emde playing Vera Brandes, the feisty teenage promoter who ultimately talked him into playing the show. Fluk says that his aim was to “move the focus away from Jarrett, the brooding artist, and instead look at the people who help to facilitate art. Vera Brandes was 16 when she started booking concerts. She’s a legend in Germany, and her story is as important to the Köln Concert as Jarrett’s. When I decided to make the film, I tracked her down and found her living in Greece. She said she’d been waiting 50 years for someone to tell her story!”
Switching between English and German dialogue, Köln 75 often breaks the fourth wall and uses an elliptical narrative approach that goes off on entertaining tangents. “Many music biopics are very formulaic,” argues Fluk. “The origin story, the tortured genius, the excesses of addiction, the triumphant comeback concert, etcetera. I wanted something more freewheeling. My spirit guide was Michael Winterbottom’s 24 Hour Party People: fast, energetic and fun.”
The famously reclusive Keith Jarrett had no input into the film, but his brother Chris – also a renowned pianist – was a script advisor. “We wanted to make sure we got our portrayal of Keith right,” says Fluk. Help also came from the film’s producer Oren Moverman, who co-wrote two of the more impressively unorthodox music biopics of recent times, I’m Not There and Love & Mercy.
The Köln Concert is the subject of another upcoming film called Lost In Köln, a documentary that forensically interviews dozens of people involved in the show. Brandes was involved in both projects, and Fluk sees them as complementary. “But my film certainly isn’t a documentary,” he emphasise. “I also didn’t really want it to be a jazz film, just as The Köln Concert isn’t really a ‘jazz’ album – it’s as much a piece of country-rock, blues and classical music. I wanted to make something similarly genre-free, something that wasn’t gatekeepy, something accessible to everyone.”
Köln 75 will be released in the UK later this year
