I think that's an incredibly overwhelming reality that is really at the basis of how we're going to deal with this. Looking at the film, people will say, "Oh yeah, you're criticizing the police." I say, "No."

And with the Occupy Movement, it's really ironic how the police come as representatives and enforcers of the powers that be, even though the people in the Occupy Movement are really on their side - not in terms of their behavior, but in terms of their economic status, in terms of who the police are in society and how much they're paid, and if you boil it down to the economics of it, the police should be out there marching with the Occupy Movement.

I think everybody came into it with the understanding that they would go through an experience that is literally not by the book, that is not executing the script and then going home, but living and breathing these characters and being in the moment with each other, and improvising and creating a lot of present-tense intensity between characters.

If you look at it that way, then you start thinking about the basic things, which are jobs not jails, and education not incarceration.

So the only problem that you have is actually switch things in the department, changing things, controlling things, putting it maybe under federal supervision, and if you fix the department, you'll fix the problems - with police corruption, with brutality, with evidence tampering, all those things.

The first view is "bad apple." Bad apple is excusable. It's sort of like, something went bad with this man. But the second option is police corruption, so it's a problem with the department.

The damage that we do in the service of whatever motivates us in life has a direct effect, mostly on our kids.