Well, maybe if he/we just substituted the word(s) depressed with "disappointed," or "let down"...
It is certainly of value to point out his probable misuse of the word depressed. But since so many of us use it so casually colloquially, all the time, and have for so long, I think he can be forgiven, right?

We know what he means.
I suppose it's something like, his projects are like his babies, and this baby wasn't ready yet. And like it's been said, someone or someone
s screwed up...or outright betrayed his trust.
Not to mention that he's a pretty intense kind of guy. Maybe even a bit melodramatic?
I kind of wonder how much it can really matter? Like you said, Josh, it's only circulating among agents. Though I suppose it's only a matter of time before they share it beyond themselves?
I sympathize with him regarding his love for film. But when it comes to his "it's TV in public" dismissal of digital, I think he's being a luddite. I think he should get over it. I think he should learn to
stop worrying and love digital. Digital is only going to get better, probably. What about RED's
Dragon sensor, for instance? Even if it
isn't really better than film (I suspect you might have some thoughts on that, Jax,

), how long before someone
does create a chip that betters film overall? And I suspect he
will grow out of it. I'm not putting any money down on that bet. I think he just needs to vent a little, maybe lash out at it a bit. But maybe he'll come round after he gets that out of his system.
I heard him say in another interview (Charlie Rose) that he didn't intend to be an "old man director," as though there's something distasteful about being an old man director. Sounded a bit like ageism to me, so I didn't care much for the sentiment. But maybe that's not how he meant it.
Anyway! I'm not counting on either Tarantino or Soderbergh being able to
really wash their hands of filmmaking...at least, not in the long run. =D