Jeff Nichols is not only one of cinema’s foremost chroniclers of the American South, but is doing his damnedest to revitalize the film scene in his hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas.

When he brought his acclaimed film “Loving” — about the landmark Loving v. Virginia case that legalized interracial marriage nationwide — to Little Rock back in 2016, he surveyed the scene and didn’t like what he saw.

“I wanted to bring it to my hometown and show them what I’d done and there was no email list or any central grouping of anyone interested in film,” recalls Nichols.

So, over drinks with his former high school classmate Kathryn Tucker, they hatched a plan to start the Arkansas Cinema Society and its film festival Filmland in order to foster a film community in Arkansas. Nichols was inspired by what Richard Linklater had accomplished with the Austin Film Society and its impact on the local film scene in Austin, Texas, where Nichols resides.

“For me, some of the biggest barriers to being a filmmaker were confidence-related and not being able to set eyes on anyone that had done it before; it puts up this invisible wall that makes it seem unattainable,” explains Nichols. But landing an internship with The American Pavilion during Cannes made being a filmmaker seem possible.

“I started to break down those barriers and think, ‘There’s no reason why a kid from Little Rock, the son of a man who ran a furniture store, couldn’t be in the film business.’ A big part of the Cinema Society is bringing people here who make movies so people can listen to them and lay eyes on them,” he adds.

The 2026 edition of Filmland, which ran Aug. 12-16, saw a number of actors and filmmakers descend upon Little Rock, including Matthew McConaughey, the star of Nichols’ riveting film “Mud,” which helped kick-start what came to be known as the McConaissance. McConaughey was on hand to screen his latest film “The Rivals of Amziah King,” participate in a career-spanning conversation with Nichols and receive Variety’s Legend & Groundbreaker Award.

Variety sat down with Nichols — the man behind films such as “Take Shelter,” “Midnight Special” and “The Bikeriders” — to discuss the unfortunate state of independent film production in America and the rumors swirling around Margaret Qualley and Drew Starkey, the stars of his upcoming thriller “King Snake,” out next year.

You shot your recent film, “King Snake,” down here in Arkansas, right?

“King Snake” wouldn’t have been able to be here without the work of this whole film community, and honestly, the work of the governor and different legislators to push film subsidies and make it happen.

Now, shooting in America is—

Nearly impossible, and especially independent film. We scouted Vancouver just out of necessity.

So why are we seeing so many productions move to Canada or England or Eastern Europe? Because that’s obviously hurting jobs and the film community in America.

It’s devastating. Studios negotiate contracts with these guilds and unions, and I suppose when they make agreements that they don’t ultimately want to pay for the results of they take production elsewhere. I’ve been in Georgia, and from what I’ve heard it’s been a pretty devastating blow with Disney taking everything to London; the work there has been challenging since this last round of strikes and everything else. The thing is, American independent filmmakers do have to abide by those contracts — and they weren’t built for us. We really need to look, as an industry, at independent film production — what it provides, what it costs — and we need more flexibility in those contracts, and more flexibility from our unions and our guilds in order to make things at different price points so that as independent film producers we have a fighting chance to keep things in the U.S. The truth is, as state-based subsidies continue to change and move, that’s not enough. We have to find ways to have independent film producers stay in the United States, and it’s a massive challenge, so that in between the big studio films there’s a thriving ecosystem of film.

What are some other concrete steps that could be taken to bring independent filmmaking back to America besides rethinking those guild and union contracts?

A federal tax incentive would be a pretty fascinating thing to look at, which has been floated, that you could layer on top of state incentives. You’re competing against places that offer various tax incentives, but the reason why productions are going to these other places is because of the exchange rate and incentives, sure, but they’re not taking American crews and getting cheaper labor. So, at some point, that issue has to be addressed. Everybody needs to make a living and inflation is crazy, but we have to find flexibility in the budget level. You have different-tiered films and those budget levels haven’t changed in a really long time.

What do you make of “Obsession,” which has made $500 million worldwide against a budget of $750,000? You also had “Backrooms,” which was made for $10 million and is now A24’s highest-grossing movie.

I think it’s great. I actually visited the set of “Backrooms” when I was scouting Vancouver, and the director [Kane Parsons] seemed really nice. I hope it’s a couple of things: Those films are good, and those filmmakers are good filmmakers, and they’re being rewarded for sticking to their guns and making something that spoke to the audiences they were targeting. And I don’t want to diminish any of that at all, but I really hope it’s a reflection of where society is right now in terms of watching movies. I ran into an older guy in Wimberley, Texas, in 2020, and in 2015 they’d had a massive flood there that was tragic and several people died. We were taking about that community specifically, and it seemed like in 2020, even with the start of the pandemic, that community was finally starting to bounce back. He said, “Five years — that’s how long it takes for a community to get over a tragedy.” I was really struck by the broader idea of that and here we are in 2026, five years out of [the Covid pandemic], and the world is opening back up. Look at “The End of Oak Street” and how that’s performing. Yes, you have “The Odyssey” and you “Spider-Man,” but there’s a healthy ecosystem that seems to be building for cinemas and theatrical exhibition. What’s really interesting to see is: Are these other films that aren’t horror films or blockbusters starting to show promise? And can the studios, and indie studios, start to invest in a broader spectrum of films to put into theaters? That’s what I’m hoping is happening.

I hope so too.

And look: I’m from Little Rock, Arkansas, so it always seemed insane to me that movie theaters wouldn’t do well every weekend because there’s not that much to do! You know? If you’re a teenager and you want to go out with your friends, there just aren’t a lot of options other than going to the movies. I would like to think we’re reforming back into a culture that watches films. There was a period there where people were talking about how films in theaters “needed your support,” and that’s never good and not why people buy tickets. “Please come support us!” I think we’re moving away from that and it speaks to our industry as a whole.

What do you think about the pending Paramount Skydance takeover of Warner Bros.? I know the DGA basically came out in support of the merger.

Well, I think they’re in support of reality. I think they have to be in support of reality, and the reality is, this thing is going to happen, and if you wanted to stand in the way of it, you should have done it a lot sooner. Now, all you’re doing is delaying jobs. It’s not to say, “I really support this merger because I want it to go through!” I think it’s a done deal, and of course the AG of California definitely disagrees and thinks it’s not a done deal, and I’ve read his op-ed, but… did Warner Bros. or Paramount have any of the biggest films of the last few months? It’s been Universal, Focus (through Universal), A24 and Disney. How can you argue it’s anti-competitive when the biggest blockbusters are from four different studios?

And Warner Bros. lost Christopher Nolan during the pandemic by putting their whole slate on streaming as well as their handling of “Tenet.”

They made horrible, horrible choices with that filmmaker and didn’t treat that filmmaker with respect and got exactly what they had coming to them. I could tell you a horror story about having a big film at Fox, a sci-fi film called “Alien Nation,” and Disney absorbed it and it didn’t make it through that merger. So, I had a very personal, up-close look at it. I worked on it for four years, and it’s still something I want to make, so it’s hard to put me in the camp of, “Sure, mergers!” But I think you have to take David Ellison at his word when he says he wants to release more theatrical films through both of those studios.

You don’t think his promise to release 30 movies a year in theaters is a bit unrealistic?

I don’t think it’s unrealistic at all — not with two studios. That’s 15 films per studio, and it should be 40. I think audiences are going to be there to receive all kinds of films. I don’t think it’s insane at all and it’s actually needed.

I guess the issue is that there’s no way to really enforce that if he reneges on it.

There’s no way you’re going to legislate or negotiate that, but there needs to be some reality that comes to bear in this conversation and we need to get back to making movies. That’s where I’m at.

What was it like to make “The Bikeriders” with Tom Hardy? He plays a tough guy in that film.

What I found interesting was how not alpha his performance was. The A storyline of that film is a love story between the three characters, so by definition he’s in love with Austin Butler’s character. How he portrayed getting his heart broken by this young man, the same way Jodie Comer’s character gets her heart broken, I was really fascinated by. You write these roles on the page and then these actors pour themselves into them and I’m always fascinated by what they bring. And I’ll say this: There was never a take of Tom’s where you weren’t paying attention, and that is a real gift. He kind of vibrates. There’s an energy kicking off that guy that’s extraordinary.

What happened to “Yankee Comandante,” your film about Che Guevara and William Alexander Morgan starring Adam Driver?

I love that film and I would really like to make it. It’s hard to take a movie out in March of 2020. That was a rough year! I love it so much and David Grann’s article that inspired it is so good. I’m loath to ever say movies are important, but it feels like something that’s important. Adam was going to star as William Morgan, and now that won’t happen, but we’ve got another project that we’re going to do together. It’s an important film not only about our relationship with Cuba but also our relationship with the Southern Hemisphere and whether we’re able to export our ideology. I love what the film talks about and I love that it’s a true story that’s a little bit gonzo.

Is the project with Adam Driver the two Cormac McCarthy books you were adapting, “The Passenger” and “Stella Maris?”

It’s not. Those two books would become one screenplay, which I’ve written, because the books are connected. But that was with New Regency and I don’t think they’ll be moving forward with that one. It’s a challenging story and it made for a challenging screenplay. Ultimately, they were looking for a more commercial story and I think I was a little too faithful to the books.

Can you tell me about your next film, “King Snake?” I’ve read it’s a psychological thriller, which sounds a bit different for you.

In a way, it’s a return. It’s the first original piece I’ve made since “Midnight Special,” which came out 10 years ago, so it’s really exciting in that it’s something that’s cut from whole creative cloth and completely out of my mind — and sometimes I feel a little out of my mind. I really go for it in this one, and I’m really excited to see how it plays.

It sounds like Southern Gothic horror.

There are definitely horror elements to it, for sure, and more forward-facing horror elements than I’ve ever done. You’ve found me at a sensitive time in the process because I’m there in the editing room right now putting together my first pass, and to be brutally honest, I’m still figuring the film out. One thing I’ll say is: Margaret Qualley and Drew Starkey are phenomenal in the film. They are so good in this film and they are so good together. I guess I’m always making relationship dramas, but it’s fascinating to me how central it is to this movie. “Take Shelter” was made by a guy who’d just got married and wanted to find out what makes a good marriage, and “King Snake” is made by a guy who’s been married 18 years and we’re on the flipside of that conversation because they play a young newlywed couple and they’re still nascent, but it’s written from the perspective of someone who’s been married for a long time. There are parts of it that feel like “Loving” in terms of the intensity of the relationship.

You spoke about Margaret and Drew’s chemistry in “King Snake” and they apparently got so close during the making of it that it has sparked romantic speculation.

I didn’t see any of that. But making a film is a really intimate thing, and you’ll understand it when you see the film, but they just really depend on each other in this film. But it’s also intimate with me. I’m sharing songs, books and films that move me, as well as personal moments from my life. To make a film like this you really have to open yourself up to the people you’re making it with. I didn’t see anything specific related to that beyond the frames of the film, but there’s definitely a lot of energy there between the two of them and I think it’s going to make the film really special.