Why making Bruce Springsteen documentary ‘Road Diary’ was like ‘dancing in the dark’

You can’t start a fire without a spark…

In the case of director Thom Zimny, that spark is Bruce Springsteen and the legendary E Street Band. Zimny, who has been working with Springsteen since 2001, directs Road Diary: Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band, a new documentary that follows the Boss and his band on the road over the course of their latest tour.

It also tackles some of the inevitable truths about mortality, Springsteen’s reckoning with his own aging (he recently turned 75), and the history of the band, who have spent over 40 years on the road together.

But even though Zimny has been a longtime collaborator of Springsteen’s and a fan even longer, he says that figuring out the story of the film and editing it together was still akin to “dancing in the dark.”

“The analogy of enjoying it, and then also, you’re detached from the world, and you’re looking at yourself in it — it’s completely dancing in the dark,” he says of the editing process. “Putting it back to the film — this film, I wanted to be that mirror where you stopped, and you went, ‘Oh wow, these guys are talking about age, and this is how they looked young.’ If you’re a casual fan, you could step into it.”

He continues, “It’s asking questions, and it’s discussing themes that we are all forced to deal with. And at the same time, it’s a celebration. A celebration of a moment of music, and there’s humor and there’s history. The thing I always hope for is that within all these storylines, just like at a Bruce concert, you leave thinking that you’ve experienced something, and you feel different about yourself, and you carry that into the next day.”

The documentary, which hits Hulu and Disney+ on Oct. 25, grants fans an unprecedented look into Springsteen’s creative process when it comes to putting together a tour. We caught up with Zimny at the film’s Toronto International Film Festival premiere back in September to talk about everything from Springsteen’s setlists to why the Europe shows are particularly special to why he chose not to include anything about the icon’s illness and canceled shows.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: At what point in prepping this tour did you all decide that you wanted to make a documentary? Did you already know during those rehearsal shoots or were you just there because you often capture footage?

THOM ZIMNY: When these projects come about, there’s no declaration that they’re going to be a movie. There’s no set POV. I just filmed three or four rehearsals. I didn’t do any interviews. I just watched. So that’s a very typical process with Bruce because we’re letting the film talk to us. What I mean by that is we’re seeing what’s going on and there’s no forced POV. So it took, I would say, up to the first show in Tampa. That was where we started to talk about it as a film. One of my favorite things working with Bruce is, and with [his manager] Jon [Landau], is that no one ever says the film is done. They never say, ‘We made it. It’s over.’ And no one ever officially says it’s a film. I always look at it from day one as a movie, but I don’t force anything.

There are a lot of sequences where you seamlessly mix the story of now with archival footage. Particularly in the opening, when you were showing footage of Bruce in different eras superimposed against the song titles when they’re building the setlist. Where did you get inspired to do that, or how did you decide that that was how you would use this older footage?

I’m always looking at the archive as a tool to tell the story, but I’m really particular about how to use it and when to use it. Archival footage in the Bruce Springsteen world brings you back to a place of memory, like a dream world. When I saw Bruce in the rehearsals going through all the songs, in my mind’s eye, I could say, “Oh, that’s 1975, that’s 1984. That’s every chapter. Look at the body of work he has.” I knew right away that when I got back to the edit room, I would have to do a sketch, and I started taking the sound of him saying these songs and placing them together. I was starting to hear, “Wait a minute, there’s a theme going on in that listing of songs.” I was seeing the writer unpack a narrative that would be in the show itself later. So, I use archive to enhance the story. It’s never B-roll. Every frame counts.

I also believe in the magic of archive, which is for me as an editor, you will want something sometimes, and you have to will it out of the vault. I have a strange belief that there are film gods that throw you these images, but I have looked at the vault and studied it. The shot of Bruce walking around the stadium. I’ve had that shot for 24 years. It’s the younger Bruce, who was trying to find a sound and also starting to build a team of people that he could use both in the studio and then on the road. That shot of him in the archival footage sums up everything. And I didn’t waste that shot. I didn’t use it for other films. Sometimes when I’m witnessing something happening in real time, it’ll trigger a memory of viewing something. And I want to go back to the edit room and see if it’ll work.

At the end, there’s a credit for “Written by Bruce Springsteen.” Since it’s a documentary, what exactly does that mean?

It means that Bruce has spent time looking at footage and writing voiceovers, explaining his POV, and giving this voice of narration that gives so much soul to the film. So, the writing credit is really about the voiceover.

This tour goes all around the country and the world. How do you decide where you’re going to shoot and then what footage from all of that to use?

The hardest thing to do is edit these films because there’s a million moments. I really stay close to the story. I knew that I wanted a sense of the American audience. So, I filmed a bunch of that, and I knew that the European audience was a whole other character in the film. They’re a different energy altogether. I mapped out the places that I wanted to go and knew that the fan base was unique in each one. Also, the light is really important — the light in Europe and those outdoor arenas and those faces. I wanted that expressive light that we found in Sweden and Rome and all the places that I ended up going. So, I came back with this wealth of images, but I am okay letting something go if it doesn’t serve the story.

So, this film has a balance of concert footage, voiceover narration, interviews, and all of it’s a dance. You can’t go too long with the music. But you can’t have someone just sitting down talking because then it’s a dry approach, and you can’t be completely linear, but you can’t be confusing. A lot of it happens in the edit room, and a lot of it is just based on gut instinct. You put this together, and all of a sudden, you’re like, “Oh, I can totally go from Bruce’s history after this. I don’t have to keep going with the tour. I can take this segue.” I try to stay open to what the film is telling me.

The fans you talked to and included were all European. Bruce is such a quintessentially American artist, so why did you make that choice?

I was letting the band tell the story of the appreciation of American fans. [Vocalist] Curtis [King] talks about it being a religious experience. [Vocalist] Michelle [Moore] talks about the interaction of looking into the audience and seeing people cry. I didn’t want to interrupt it at that moment. We’re just beginning the journey. You get a sense of America, and then the film takes off in Europe. So, it made more sense to include the European fans. And I really looked hard at the fans. I didn’t want the uber fan. I wanted somebody that was projecting this thing of, “The music means a lot to me. It’s changed my life. It’s part of my life.” But it’s not a person who’s wrapped their whole apartment in Bruce memorabilia. It is not about celebrity; it’s about a community interacting. I wanted to honor that.

This tour was interrupted by illness. Was there any discussion of that being part of the storytelling?

Well, when you’re making these films, a lot of things happen that you see covered in the news, and I’m always chasing things that you can’t easily explain. The idea of the ticket sales or the idea of the tour canceling or Bruce having stomach problems, they’re covered in the news, and I feel like I’m not chasing the news. I’m chasing bigger ideas. I also love the idea of the film feeling timeless. We are talking about a tour in a moment of time, but the ideas discussed are timeless to me. And he’s talked about it. It’s almost too easy to go for those things. It is a lot harder to get to a place of Bruce saying, “These are my feelings about this song,” or “These are my feelings about this band, or missing Clarence.” That’s a lot stronger place for me to emotionally connect when I’m watching a film.

You have all these on-camera interviews with the band members. Was there anything they said that really surprised you after all this time?

There were tons of surprises when I was interviewing the E Street band. The beauty of getting to know them is that sense of trust. The early days of touring — I hadn’t heard those stories. When I was sitting across from Roy [Bittan] and Garry [Tallent] and Max Weinberg, I knew that this is material that needs to end up in the film. I would return to Gary and get some details, and then a couple days later, I’d see Max, and I wouldn’t say what Gary said; I would just ask him questions. And in my mind, I’m cross-cutting them already. I can hear the rhythms and the beauty of the E Street band. The guys have a brotherhood, but they also have this honesty on camera that conveys real-life struggles. That only comes from a place of them feeling comfortable. But also, the film itself is reflecting that with the band discussing Steven [Van Zandt] as a musical director and how it’s been happening for 40 years in the background, and now, it’s an official thing. There’s a beauty to this film because it’s emotional and stays in a place of honesty. There’s nothing being fabricated.

Did you feel like you saw a new side of Bruce as well?

Every time I do a film, it’s a new side of Bruce, and this one was really special because the voiceover that he included and would send to me was ideas that I hadn’t heard about. And hearing his voice and sitting across from him in the recording studio as he was reading it, that’s a side of him that I’ll never forget.

There have been plenty of fans who have not been thrilled that the setlist is not as fluid as it has been in the past. Was there any hope that this film could offer context for that and maybe get people to calm down?

I don’t get caught up with that. I have so many things happening in front of me by having this privilege to film the band, that there’s no need to get caught up in that. That would clutter the beauty of seeing Bruce’s intentions. To take on the online argument of it’s a static set list and put that into the film and have that conversation, I don’t connect to it as an idea. It’s far bigger to have Bruce talk about his mortality. I don’t feel a motivation to educate or change the opinion of a fan liking something or disliking something. I’m not in that space. What I’m doing is trying to unpack an invisible thing, which is a creative process. I’m trying to remind you that Bruce is an artist, and he’s had these journeys, and nothing is random. The idea of a static set — that means that every show is the same and that every performance would contain the emotional quality that locks it in. I have never seen any show that’s the same, so I can’t even relate to the concept of it being a conflict. The phrasing, the details, the vocal delivery, the ambiance of the room, the light, your drive over — all that adds up to an experience.