Imagine you are an aspiring filmmaker, still learning your craft and wondering what the future might bring. Imagine also that one day and pretty much out of nowhere you are confronted with the fact that your great-grandfather invented the most iconic camera of motion picture history, paving the way for today’s independent filmmaking. Too much of a fairy tale for your taste? You might be surprised to hear that this is exactly what happened to Alyssa Bolsey, great-granddaughter of the man who developed the first camera to turn everyone into a potential filmmaker – the Bolex. It was in 2004 that she found out to what a profound extent cinematic history was rooted in her family and decided that this was a story to be told. And so Jacques Bolsey became the unknown protagonist of her first feature documentary which she is in the midst of putting together right now. Despite her tight schedule, Alyssa took the time for a little conversation and talked to us about the project, the circumstances of her discovery, dual citizenship, Steve Jobs, „Hugo“ and working 18 hours a day.

screen/read: Lucky us, we finally succeeded in matching our schedules. It’s easy to see how busy you are with this project and how much work there is to be done. Since when are you working on it in general, especially as intensely as now?

Alyssa Bolsey: I’ve been working on it for years off and on, but it’s been about this active for, let’s say, eight months.

screen/read: But you found out about the whole issue about six years ago, is that right?

Alyssa Bolsey: Let’s see, that would be more than six years ago. It’s been 2004 that I discovered all of this while I was in filmschool. I didn’t learn about it there, but that was the time period that I found out.

screen/read: That’s quite some time now. You must have done a lot of research since then.

Alyssa Bolsey: Oh yes, I’ve done so much research, and no matter how much research I do, I feel like there’s always a heap more coming my direction. The story is just so big and so complex and a lot of it has been lost or I’m still trying to find out who I can find that will be able to answer my questions. It’s very difficult right now.

screen/read: How did you come across the whole story in the first place? Did you find it in the attic or what?

Alyssa Bolsey: Well, what happened was, in 2004 my grandfather, Jacques Bolsey’s son, passed away. And following that the family went through the basement which was his work zone where nobody was allowed in for decades. They found that he had kept all of his father’s belongings, probably ten to twenty boxes filled with everything from 1895 through his death in 1962. They found cameras, prototypes, plans, drawings, pictures, even his first loan certificate from 1915. You name it, they found it. When I went to the memorial, they knew that I was in filmschool and that I might be interested in the story behind my great-grandfather who no-one for whatever reason had really mentioned to me in the past. And so I started to go through all of these boxes and came across his paper work about the Bolex, mentioning that he invented it.

screen/read: It must have felt like a major coincidence for you as a filmmaker to find out how filmmaking has been running in your family for ages and you had no idea.

Alyssa Bolsey: Yes, I had no idea. I was running around with video cameras since I was eight years old, making movies with my friends and in filmschool, and no-one had mentioned it. I left school for this memorial, and when I came back I told a few professors, „hey, guess what!” It was a really surreal time.

screen/read: So the fact that your great-grandfather had invented such an important tool in cinema history, a predecessor of the modern digital camera actually, was that the trigger that made you decide to turn the whole story into a documentary? Or what was the motivation behind it?

Alyssa Bolsey: It was a little bit of everything. I think mostly I just was looking into it out of curiousity because I’m a naturally curious person. And once I started looking into it, I realized that there really isn’t much information, but a lot of interest. I didn’t know that I could google his name and find pages about him. But then I found out that many of them conflicted with each other, dates were different, information was different, there was confusion. People on message boards were interested in who invented the camera, asking questions about him but the answers were wrong or different. And I realized that this was a subject that needed to be told, yet nobody could tell it because all the information had been in our basement for that many years. And the other thing was, the story thus far had been very one-sided. All the information about the Bolex had been distributed through the company that manufactured it. And from what I hear now there was some bad blood between them and my great-grandfather. So I wanted to research and understand really what that relationship was. I wanted to see the complete picture basically. Now the Bolex is a huge important camera. It is still used in filmschools today. Actually it’s been used since he invented it in1924. In my childhood I was using cameras that were the equivalent of it. And I knew it was very important. But when I started looking into it, I realized that there was so much more than just the Bolex and from there on I really wanted to tell his whole story.

screen/read: Right now is a time where documentaries are more popular and probably a little easier to be sold than, say, ten years ago. But with this being your first feature, were documentaries something you always wanted to do or did it happen more or less coincidentally?

Alyssa Bolsey: I’ve always been more interested in fictional features, yet I find myself making documentaries. I had made short documentaries before this. Something has always drawn me to them but it was never a thought or an intention. It just happened. I get thrown into them [laughs]. So I’m not surprised that I’m making this documentary and I wouldn’t be surprised by making more in the future. Like I said, I’m a curious person and documentaries are perfect for channeling that.

screen/read: The project has an interesting concept. Part of it is of course the story of your great-grandfather, but then it is also about your research and has you as a character in it. Was that the initial idea or did you originally want to go for a straight documentary approach and things shifted during the process?

Alyssa Bolsey: Originally I was thinking of a straight documentary approach. His story is just so big, I didn’t feel like I needed myself in it. But after speaking with a lot of people I realized there is something very intriguing about a filmmaker having found out that her great-grandfather was this man who set the stage for the world she’s living in. I realized that me and the process had to be part of it. And I followed that path and I think it’s improving the story.

screen/read: Pretty much. The film will have some sort of narration that is close to a fictional feature and that makes it an interesting concept. It is something that keeps appearing here and there for a couple of years now. Do you think that in the future documentaries will be more narrationally structured?

Alyssa Bolsey: I could see that happen. People like to connect with someone on screen, they don’t really necessarily want to see a history documentary without having a protagonist or character to connect with. So I feel that’s why a lot documentaries these days have the documentarian within them leading the story. I’m really happy that documentaries are becoming so popular. One thing that I feel is missing right now is, there aren’t as many historical documentaries anymore. I love social issue documentaries, but at the same time I feel historical documentaries are important too. And right now I feel like in the US we’re in a social documentary world and it’s very very difficult to get a historical project like mine off the ground. Because a lot of the grants out there and fundings specify social documentary only. So I feel like in a way historical films are maybe not the rage at the moment. But I hope that they make more of a comeback [laughs].

screen/read: Now you’re co-producing with a Swiss company. How did that come about? Of course, your great-grandfather worked in Switzerland but still, it’s an unusual approach.

Alyssa Bolsey: Yeah, well, I’m Swiss myself, I’m a dual citizen. My grandparents are Swiss. The funny thing is, my great-grandfather, who did so much in Switzerland, never received citizenship. But well, how did I get involved with our Swiss partner? I really wanted this to be a co-production between the US and Switzerland. He spent a lot of his time in Switzerland, he made his most important invention there, the Bolex, and so I started looking for production companies. At some point we came across respected producer Werner Schweizer of Dschoint Ventschr and he was interested in co-producing. It turned out that he would be in Missouri a couple of months later. So my L.A. producer Camilo Lara and myself flew there for a 24-hour trip to meet with him and after having done so we decided that yes, we do want to work together. And immediately we flew from Missouri right to Kingston, Massachusetts, to shoot the development teaser that we have online now. It was just myself and Camilo shooting that entire teaser on our own. He was the cameraman. It was a process [laughs].

screen/read: So with an international production at hand, distribution will probably be much different. Is that something you’re already thinking about?

Alyssa Bolsey: We have a little bit worked out, but we need to work out more. Producers will be responsible for territories prorated according to the funds they raise. As of now, Dschoint Ventschr will handle German-speaking countries and most of worldwide while my US producer will handle the US and Canada and various other countries. We’ll do the festival routes and we have interest from Shoreline Entertainment, a company that has distributed and coordinated film sales for films that have won awards at top notch film festivals such as Sundance. We have a letter of interest from them, so we’re considering that. Other than that we’re still really figuring out where we want to take this, how best to sell it. We just won IndieWire’s project of the week, and the prize was digital distribution consultation from SnagFilms. So we’ll be speaking with them soon and getting their take on how they feel we should distribute this.

screen/read: You mentioned funding before, which is a very difficult thing these days for every indie filmmaker. What is your approach there?

Alyssa Bolsey: There are many approaches that we’re taking at the moment. Of course grants. Whatever grants there are we’re going for that. We’re doing IndieGoGo right now where we have a campaign running and there is only a few days left for people to contribute to our campaign and becomes involved. Also our co-producer in Switzerland is working on funding. Then there’s fiscal sponsorships in the US, which means that anyone in the US or Canada who donates to our documentary can get a tax write-off on that. So we’re hoping than some donations can come in. It’s a battle but we’re working on it [laughs].

screen/read: So it’s constantly researching, shooting and funding at the same time. A parallel process.

Alyssa Bolsey: Yes, that’s the thing. It’s a documentary about discovery, about the process, so we have to be shooting while we’re in development basically. And we’re shooting in pre-production, we’re shooting in production and we’ll probably be shooting in post-production. In general we’ll be shooting a lot [laughs].

screen/read: Let’s talk a little bit about the different steps and stations you’ve been through so far. Where did you start your journey, where did it lead you?

Alyssa Bolsey: Oh man, where did I start? Well, like I mentioned, I started the moment I found out about this in 2004. I was still in filmschool at the time that I decided to just jump right in. So for the next year and a half year or so I was working on it, I even went to Switzerland, I interviewed a lot of historians and people at museums and just got a basic idea of what information was out there. And then I came back and did a lot of research, actually as much as I could by reaching out to people around the world who were interested in contributing. I put up a website so people could find me because I knew it was something people would google. At some point I put the documentary aside for, let’s see, about four years. But when I did so, I knew I would return to it one day when I was ready. So when I picked it up again about a year and a half ago, I was working in the corporate entertainment world as an assistant at a talent agency in Los Angeles. I just didn’t feel complete without having a project and creativity in my life anymore. So I jumped right back in and I immediately just started reconnecting with all my past contacts, looking for new contacts and trying to find a team. Because I realized there was way too much information and way too much work for me to do all by myself. It’s a passion project and no one’s getting paid right now and it takes a lot of time, so it’s really difficult to find people that can do that. And pretty much no-one can, but after going through several producers I found a really good team now and we’re working around all the difficulties. And there’s always just so much to do for this project every day. It’s so broad, there’s so much information, you could make several documentaries on him. He was a Russian immigrant who wanted to study medicine and so he went to Switzerland and then studied art at the same time and then ended up inventing, and then – his life was just so convoluted. So I made a timeline, starting from his birth to his death and I’m constantly updating it. Anytime I have new information, a new film he made, a new invention I didn’t know about, anything to do with his personal life, I update this timeline. This thing has been able to help me keep track of his life in a way that I wasn’t able to before as the amount of information is just overwhelming.

screen/read: It’s interesting that right now there are quite a few movies around exploring the infancy of filmmaking, thinking of „The Artist“ of course and „Hugo“ to only name the most popular examples, while the latter even shares a few remarkable similarities with the story of your great-grandfather. Do you think it’s some sort of zeitgeist phenomenon and will you probably discuss it in your film?

Alyssa Bolsey: I actually hadn’t thought about it but that’s a great idea. I may just do that. I mean, I wasn’t expecting this at all. I hadn’t read the book „Hugo“, I just found out like everyone else did when the movie came out and I was told I should see it. And people started tweeting me, saying „Wow, your documentary is just like Hugo“. Of course I went to see it and I got chills. There are so many parallels. And then I read about „The Artist“, so I had to go see that obviously as well. And it just is another sign that the timing is perfect for this documentary. Since digital and HD is taking over and film is not going to be the main format anymore, people are interested in the history of it. And this documentary is going to be exactly that, it is going to be near origins to present day and seeing how the amateur everyday filmmakers were able to get a camera in their hands and shoot. Because before my great-grandfather invented the Bolex, it was really a medium for professionals and today everybody has a camera on their phone or in their purse or in their pocket. Everybody can make movies, everyone can take pictures. His story is a real inspiring one as well, and I think this is the perfect time for inspiration.

screen/read: The existence of the amateur camera is also a tool for filming history like we experience every day through clips from regions that wouldn’t even allow official video journalism. The Bolex was part of that development as well.

Alyssa Bolsey: Exactly. Being self-powered as it was you could take the camera anywhere and you could document anything and that’s actually something that I’m looking for. I’m looking for footage people have taken on that camera, recording important historical events ever since the camera’s creation, 20’s through now. I’m interested in anyone who’s taken footage on the Bolex. I would love to see it, especially if there’s some historical references within it. Because that camera probably tells our history in the last 90 years just through its footage.

screen/read: Did you get a lot of material from people that you didn’t know before?

Alyssa Bolsey: Not too much footage yet. But I’m only starting to really publicize this project now to the extent where I think that footage is going to be coming in. But we have reels and reels of Jacques Bolsey’s personal footage from the 20’s, 30’s, 40’s, 50’s. He was basically doing back then what we do now, documenting his everyday life. We have footage of him and his friends, snowball fights, ice-skating, dinner parties in the 20’s and early 30’s. He already had that idea of how important it was to turn the camera on yourself. I find that ahead of his time. Generally speaking, I think there should be a worldwide clean-out-your-basement-and-attic day once a year, so people could find what’s there [laughs]. So much of our history is probably in everybody’s basement.

screen/read: Looking a little bit into the future, how long do you think it will possibly take you to finish this project or screen it as a work-in-progress version?

Alyssa Bolsey: My goal would be early 2013 but we’ll see. It’s pretty close, I kind of shoot high. It might be a little later though.

screen/read: It’s pretty likely that when the documentary is out and gets noticed widely, someone might get interested in a feature version of this story as there is a lot in it that makes for a great biopic, especially with the current interest in cinematic history as mentioned before. Let’s pretend that will happen, who would you want to direct that movie, and who should play the lead?

Alyssa Bolsey: Oh man, wow, that would be great. Well, hopefully I’ll direct it [laughs]. I don’t know who would play him, I don’t completely know him yet. I’m still learning about him. I’ll have to get back to you on that but it would have to be someone who could play a very charismatic person. He wasn’t the eccentric inventor type. He was the everyone-stops-what-they’re-doing-and-look-at-him-when-he-enters-the-room type. Steve Jobs basically is the closest personality. He was very demanding, but he was also able to work people into his vision and to package ideas and to create new technology that would be interesting to the mass market. So I’m not quite sure who would play him but I’m going to start thinking about that now. I gotta be prepared!

screen/read: There’s another interesting inventor who was overlooked for ages and got rediscovered only recently, which is Nikola Tesla. It’s pretty remarkable that people like him and your great-grandfather are appearing on the radar of a broader audience for pretty much the first time now, which is both welcome and more than well-deserved. Do you think that’s a sign for a certain desire to get a clearer idea of our roots in this modern culture of technology?

Alyssa Bolsey: Definitely. It’s probably just because technology has moved so quickly that we didn’t have time to think about it. And I’m not quite sure why, but for some reason right now we’re examinating it in our past. That’s very interesting. I like that.

screen/read: Inventors might just be the adventurers of our time. They’re not travelling the world to meet the unexpected and face their challenges but explore their own minds and brains. Now you are making a documentary dealing with this type of adventurer while being one yourself who again is travelling the world to follow the traces and steps of this special person.

Alyssa Bolsey: Right, well, I have to travel because he went through so much in order to do what he did and he lived in a time where he couldn’t stay where he was for various political reasons. So because of that he experienced many places. But every place that he lived, he made it his home. He wanted to change the way that society worked there. He was a utopianist, he wanted to shape the world to his own ideas. And so no matter where he lived, he was just shaping.

screen/read: And his love for filmmaking obviously was part of your heritage. Can you say what it actually was that drew you to the movies and what it is that drives you today?

Alyssa Bolsey: Hmm. I’ve always just liked telling stories, writing scripts, whatnot. I’ve always had this fascination with underdogs. All of my favorite films, like „Forrest Gump“, „Edward Scissorhands“, they’re always about an underdog and their journey. I think in many ways my documentary fits into that quite nicely actually. I’m not sure why I’m so interested in underdogs but I guess I just like to see someone succeeding against all odds with something that can bring anyone together. So that’s basically really what drives me at this point in time.

screen/read: In an ideal world, where would you see yourself in 10 or 20 years as a filmmaker?

Alyssa Bolsey: [laughs] In an ideal world! Well, I would just love to be making a documentary every few years and then switching to a narrative fictional film, and just going back and forth. As far as documentaries are concerned, I’m really into politics which I won’t get into now, but I could see myself doing a political documentary at some point. And for fictional films I see myself making medium to low budget Indie dramas and comedies. But more than anything I would just want to tell stories and be able to support myself that way which is the dream for most. And to find a balance, so that I don’t have to be working 18 hours a day, that would be nice too.

screen/read: That’s very difficult I’d say.

Alyssa Bolsey: I know! So I probably shouldn’t expect that to change ever.

[Images courtesy of Alyssa Bolsey]

Recommended LINKS for further reading:

• Beyond the Bolex: Official Homepage
• Beyond the Bolex @IndieGogo
• Beyond the Bolex @Facebook
• Beyond the Bolex @Twitter
• Beyond the Bolex @Vimeo
• Beyond the Bolex @Dschoint Ventschr

follow @screenread on twitter

Der Argentinier Pablo Parés ist auf dem internationalen Parkett bislang zwar eher unbekannt, doch in Genre-Kreisen hat er sich mit seinen bereits neun Lang- und rund zwei Dutzend Kurzfilmen längst einen Namen gemacht. Sein Debüt „Plaga Zombie“, das es sogar zur deutschen DVD-Premiere brachte, lieferte er 1997 mit gerade einmal 18 Jahren ab. Zwei Sequels folgten 2001 („Zona Mutante“) und 2011 („Revolución Tóxica“). In seiner Heimat ist Parés mittlerweile einer der wichtigsten Vorreiter einer neuen Welle von Filmen aus dem Umfeld von Fantasy, Horror und Scifi. Jetzt legt er unter dem Titel „Daemonium“ eine fünfteilige Webserie vor, die seinen Status nachdrücklich unterstreicht.

Vollständig unabhängig produziert, bietet die gerade online gestellte erste, knapp 13-minütige Folge erstaunlich hochwertige Optik, vorbildlich choreographierte und montierte Actionsequenzen, sowie fantasiereiche Kreaturen, die durchaus auch Clive Barkers „Hellraiser“-Universum entstammen könnten. Doch „Daemonium“ will mehr sein als bloßes Eye-Candy mit einer Manga-Protagonistin in Schuluniform vor dystopischer Kulisse. Hinter den sorgfältig komponierten Bildern verbirgt sich offenbar ein größer angelegter narrativer Kosmos, der sich Zug um Zug über die einzelnen Episoden hinweg eröffnet. Und da kann selbst ein simples Requisit wie ein bunter Twister Lolly so manche Überraschung bereithalten.

[Abbildungen: Rabbid FX | Studio Patna | Farsa Producciones]

Weiterführende LINKS zu diesem Beitrag:

• DAEMONIUM @ Tumblr
• DAEMONIUM @ Facebook
• DAEMONIUM @ YouTube
• DAEMONIUM @ Twitter

follow @screenread on twitter

Rund um den neuen „Muppets“-Film sorgt die Jim Henson Company dafür, dass die Arbeit ihres Gründers und Namensgebers verstärkt auch jenseits der beliebten Figuren nicht in Vergessenheit gerät. Und da der Filmemacher bis heute immer noch fast ausschließlich mit seinen bekanntesten Schöpfungen identifiziert wird, mag für viele so manches völlig neu sein. Gerade erst hat der US-Verlag „Archaia“ Comic-Adaptionen von „Tale of Sand“, Hensons einzigem unverfilmten Drehbuch, und seiner kurzlebigen TV-Serie „The Storyteller“, sowie eine Prequel-Reihe zu „The Dark Crystal“ veröffentlicht. Von eher filmhistorischem Interesse ist die Fertigstellung einer rekonstruierten Fassung von „Alexander the Grape“, einem frühen Kurzfilm des Meisters, der jetzt kostenlos online zu sehen ist.

In den 60ern hatte Henson in filmischer Hinsicht eine Weile mit den unterschiedlichsten Techniken experimentiert und sich dabei unter anderem auch an der sogenannten Cutout-Animation versucht. Bekannt ist das Prinzip, Stop-Motion ausschließlich mit zuvor ausgeschnittenen zweidimensionalen Papier-Elementen zu betreiben, heute vor allem durch die TV-Serie „South Park“ (die allerdings praktisch von Anfang an lediglich den Look reproduziert, während die eigentliche Arbeit am Computer entsteht). Henson hatte den Ehrgeiz, einen ganzen Film im Cutout-Vefahren zu animieren, führte sein Vorhaben jedoch nie zu Ende.

In der jetzt rekonstruierten Fassung wurden die fehlenden Teile durch originale Storyboards ersetzt, so dass Hensons Experiment erstmals vollständig zu sehen ist. Erzählt wird die lustige und lehrreiche Geschichte von „Alexander the Grape“, einer besonders klein geratenen Traube, die viel lieber eine Melone wäre und eine Menge Anstrengungen unternimmt, um ihren Wunsch wahr werden zu lassen.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures | The Jim Henson Company Archives]

follow @screenread on twitter

Offenbar hatte der britische Filmemacher Ken Russell auch mit 84 Jahren noch kein Interesse daran, sich zur Ruhe zu setzen. Kurz vor seinem Tod arbeitete er jedenfalls noch an der Endfassung eines Drehbuchs zum Remake des Softcore-Klassikers „Alice in Wonderland: An X-rated Musical Fantasy“. An einer Umsetzung des Materials ist man nach offiziellen Angaben des Rechteinhabers Renaissance Media Entertainment weiterhin interessiert. Gemeinsam mit Russells Witwe Elize Tribble und Komponist Simon Boswell will man sich um die Finanzierung und die Suche nach einen möglichen Regisseur kümmern.

Dass in letzterer Hinsicht nicht von vornherein eine Alternative im Raum stand, ist allerdings ziemlich unwahrscheinlich. Im Fall von „A Prairie Home Companion“ musste bekanntlich Paul Thomas Anderson als Notfall-Ersatz für den 81-jährigen Robert Altman herhalten, damit eine Umsetzung aus Investorensicht überhaupt möglich wurde. Ähnliche Gedanken wird man sich hier vermutlich auch gemacht haben.

Das Remake des Musicals von 1976 hätte nach 20 Jahren Russells Rückkehr auf die Kinoleinwand werden können. Und auch wenn die Anlehnung an das Original eher lose ausfallen sollte, ist der Stoff selber doch archetypisches Material für den Mann hinter ausschweifenden Leinwandfresken wie „Tommy“, „Lisztomania“ oder „The Devils“. Wer ihn auf dem Regiestuhl auch nur ansatzweise adäquat ersetzen könnte, ist eine offene und alles andere als einfach zu beantwortende Frage.

Bill Osco hatte den Film auf Grundlage des 1972er Erfolgs von „Flesh Gordon“ initiiert (einer Softcore-Parodie der beliebten Science-Fiction-Comics) und ist auch am jetzigen Remake wieder beteiligt. Im Subgenre des Sex-Spoofs ist „Alice“ ein echtes Glanzlicht, das seinen Hauptreiz im Wesentlichen aus einem Fundus zweideutiger Dialoge bezieht und pornografische Elemente eher außen vor lässt. Erst eine spätere Fassung mit einigen eingefügten Nachdrehs verschob die Gewichtung. Für das ehemalige Playmate Kristine DeBell war die Hauptrolle der gelungene Einstieg in eine immerhin bis in die 80er Jahre anhaltende Schauspielkarriere.

Bereits 1995 hatte sich Ken Russell übrigens einmal auf seine ganz eigene Art an Lewis Carrolls Vorlage versucht. „Alice in Russialand“ entstand im Rahmen einer fünfteiligen TV-Dokumentation und zeigte die Romanfigur im Comic-Stil auf einem Streifzug durch die russische Kunst- und Kulturgeschichte.

Weiterführende LINKS zu diesem Beitrag:

• Raunchy Alice musical could be Ken Russell’s final legacy
• Bill Osco: ALICE IN WONDERLAND | FLESH GORDON @ Mondo Digital
• Bill Osco: Mick Garris über FLESH GORDON

[Abbildungen: Cruiser Productions, General National Enterprises | Originalplakat]

follow @screenread on twitter

Man mag es kaum glauben, aber obwohl Tobe Hoopers Slasher-Klassiker von 1974 als Meilenstein des Genres gilt und längst Teil der ständigen Sammlung des Museum of Modern Art ist, gehörte er in Deutschland bis September 2011 noch zu jener unrühmlichen Reihe von Filmen, die wegen (vermeintlicher?) Gewaltverherrlichung unter Beschlagnahmung stehen. Die unzeitgemäße Absurdität dieses Tatbestandes ist aber nur das vorläufige Ende einer Jahrzehnte anhaltenden Abfolge von Verboten, Indizierungen, Umbenennungen und Kürzungen, die „The Texas Chainsaw Massacre“ hierzulande über sich ergehen lassen musste. Welchen Herausforderungen sich die Filmemacher selber im Sommer 1973 ausgesetzt sahen, thematisiert jetzt ein Comic unter dem Titel „South Texas Blues“.

Die Idee ist originell und auf ihre Weise völlig neuartig. Doch ganz wie im Fall von Darren Aronofskys „Noah“ will die Graphic Novel auch hier nur eine Zwischenlösung sein. Die Grundlage bildet ein Drehbuch für ein Projekt, das Filmemacher Christopher P. Garetano, Autor der preisgekrönten Dokumentation „Horror Business“, bereits seit über einem Jahrzehnt auf die Leinwand zu bringen versucht – bislang erfolglos. Doch selbst die von Trevor Cook illustrierte Comic-Adaption muss ein echter Kraftakt gewesen sein, denn erste Ankündigungen hierzu gab es bereits Anfang 2009.

Erst eine Kooperation mit dem Genre-Magazin Fangoria hat die Veröffentlichung jetzt möglich gemacht. Mit der im Januar 2012 erscheinenden Ausgabe #310 wird „South Texas Blues“ zunächst als mehrteilige Serie zu lesen sein. Eine vollständige Publikation ist für einen späteren Zeitpunkt ebenfalls geplant, doch ob es dazu auch tatsächlich kommt, bleibt abzuwarten.

[Abbildungen: Christopher P. Garetano, Trevor Cook]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

So umfangreich die Reihe der Filmschaffenden, die irgendwann zum Pinsel greifen und sich in bildender Kunst versuchen, so eingeschränkt ist vielfach auch ihr Talent. Wie so oft bestätigen einige wenige Ausnahmen die Regel, und da überraschte ausgerechnet Sylvester Stallone vor kurzem mit einer Ausstellung seiner Malerei, für die sich selbst ausgewiesene Kunstkritiker einigermaßen erwärmen konnten. Weniger wohlwollend dürfte hingegen das Urteil ausfallen, das Berufsprovokateur Tom Six für seine Acrylbilder erhalten würde, die er jetzt online zum Verkauf anbietet.

Dass es der Holländer am liebsten so politisch inkorrekt wie möglich mag, ist kein Geheimnis. Weltweites Aufsehen erregte er 2009 praktisch über Nacht mit seinem ebenso originellen wie absurden Horrorfilm „The Human Centipede“, dem er dieses Jahr ein drastisches Sequel hinzufügte. Die wilde Fantasie aus NS-Chirurgie und Analfixierung ist mittlerweile fester Bestand der Popkultur geworden, doch ihr Erfinder hat ganz offensichtlich wenig Interesse, sich auf seinen Lorbeeren auszuruhen.

Während bereits „Full Sequence“, der zweite Teil der als Trilogie angelegten Reihe, aufgrund seiner expliziten Gewaltdarstellungen in England nur knapp an einem Vertriebsverbot durch die dortige Filmbewertungsstelle BBFC vorbei gekommen ist, kündigt Six für die Zukunft noch weitere Grenzüberschreitungen an. Wer sich seine jetzt veröffentlichten Arbeiten als Maler anschaut, kann eine Idee davon bekommen, was dem stets gut aufgelegten Regisseur da so vorschwebt.

Technisch betrachtet sind seine Bilder künstlerisch eher irrelevant, doch was anders sollte man auch erwarten, wenn er sie selber mit entwaffnender Bestimmtheit als „Paint Farts“ bezeichnet? Der Aufbau ist meistens ähnlich. Das eigentliche Motiv prangt im Zentrum, während Titel und Signatur als Rahmen fungieren. Mehr als eine kurze Pointe ist das nicht, aber die kommt in den meisten Fällen mit einem derart unangenehmen Beigeschmack daher, dass so manches Bild eine schwer zu verdauende Nachwirkung entwickelt.

Einige Arbeiten entstammen dem thematischen Umfeld seiner Filme, doch vieles geht auch ganz entscheidend noch eine Provokations- und Abscheulichkeitsstufe weiter. Für Zartbesaitete ist ein Blick auf die eigens eingerichtete Homepage jedenfalls nicht zu empfehlen. Alle Bilder sind ausschließlich als Originale erhältlich (Acryl auf Leinwand) und werden mit einem auf der Rückseite befestigten Foto des Künstlers geliefert. Insgesamt gilt: Als Weihnachtsgeschenk eher ungeeignet.

[Abbildungen © six entertainment company]

Weiterführende LINKS zu diesem Beitrag:

• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Stream auf Bountyfilms UK/AUS
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Filmkritik
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Totalverbot in Australien
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Audio-Kommentar von Tom Six
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Freigabe durch BBFC | 32 Kürzungen
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: US-Poster
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Zweiter US-Trailer online
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Erster US-Trailer online
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Teaser-Trailer für Australien
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Totalverbot in England
• Interview: Tom Six sews up THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE
• Interview Dieter Laser: THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE and beyond
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE gewinnt bei den Scream Awards 2010

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

Die Zeiten, in denen sich ohne horrende Budgets und eine umfangreiche Crew kein Film machen ließ, gehören ein für allemal der Vergangenheit an. Viel erstaunlicher jedoch als die unüberschaubare Flut digitaler Laienproduktionen mit hohem Dilettantismusfaktor ist mittlerweile die zunehmende Zahl an No-Budget-Arbeiten, die zumindest hinsichtlich ihres Looks den Vergleich mit ultrateuerem Eye Candy großer Studios nicht zu scheuen brauchen. Im Regelfall entstehen sie fast zu einhundert Prozent am Rechner und lassen manchmal sogar echte Virtuosität erkennen. Ein aktuelles und besonders überzeugendes Beispiel für diese Entwicklung ist der knapp 10-minütige Animationsfilm „Rosa“ des Spaniers Jesús Orellana.

Die Ein-Mann-Produktion entstand über einen Zeitraum von etwa einem Jahr und brauchte tatsächlich weder ein Budget noch eine Crew. Orellana erarbeitete sich seinen Film gänzlich ohne fremde Hilfe und konnte so problemlos auf zeitraubende End Credits verzichten. Genau da liegt aber auch die eigentliche Sensation von „Rosa“. Denn die eher dünne Geschichte eines Cyborgs, der in einem dystopischen Szenario aufwacht und schon bald um sein Leben kämpfen muss, ist nicht wesentlich mehr als eine Abfolge von Action-Sequenzen ohne größere dramaturgische Tiefe oder erkennbare Charakterzeichnung. Die Optik ist unbestreitbar fantasiereich und bis ins Detail durchdesignt, doch ein grundsätzlicher Unterschied zum Look einschlägiger Computergames besteht kaum.

Doch darum geht es auch nicht. Wüsste man nicht um die Produktionsbedingungen, so wäre Orellanas Film nicht einmal halb so interessant. Die Tatsache aber, dass man es hier mit einem Autorenprojekt im engsten Wortsinn zu tun hat, lässt so manchen aufmerken und zeigt, dass sich alle anderen Künste, die eine singuläre Urheberschaft zulassen, langsam aber sicher darauf einstellen müssen, das Kino bald in ihren exklusiven Club mit aufnehmen zu müssen.

Für Orellana hat sich die Mühe bereits gelohnt, denn nach erfolgreichen Screenings auf renommierten Festivals wie dem Seattle International, dem Toronto After Dark, Sitges und Screamfest sind längst namhafte Agenturen und Hollywood-Produzenten auf den jungen Spanier aufmerksam geworden. Ob dieser allerdings auch in der Lage ist, eine Geschichte zu erzählen, oder doch mehr dem Typus des Regiedesigner vom Schlage eines Zack Snyder zugehört, wird sich erst noch herausstellen. Eine Spielfilmvariante von „Rosa“ soll jedenfalls bereits in Arbeit sein.

[Abbildungen: Jesús Orellana | Rosamovie.com]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

Wer seinem Trailer oder TV-Beitrag mit unfehlbarer Sicherheit die nötige musikalische Dramatik verleihen will, greift heute bevorzugt (und viel zu oft) auf Clint Mansells Stringarrangement „Lux Aeterna“ zurück. Was die meisten eher nicht wissen: Das mit kraftvollem Ernst vorwärtstreibende Stück beschreibt ursprünglich den fatalen Abstieg in den sicheren Drogentod. „Requiem for a Dream“ heißt der Film, für den es komponiert wurde, und dessen Regisseur bekanntlich Darren Aronofsky. Die Adaption des gleichnamigen Buches von Hubert Selby jr. schockierte und faszinierte in einem Maße, wie es keinem anderen Film über Abhängigkeit bis dato gelungen war. Jetzt widmet sich Aronofsky dem Thema erneut.

Vier je 30-sekündige Clips mit den schlagwortartigen Titeln „Deep End“, „Desperate“, E.R.“ und „Losing Control“ werfen ein ebenso kurzes wie nachhaltiges Schlaglicht auf die Auswirkungen von Meth. Der Aufbau folgt jeweils einer ähnlichen Dramaturgie, an deren Ende eine verstörende Pointe steht. Zeitraffer, doppelte Identitäten und beunruhigend komprimierte Krankheitsverläufe, die ganz ohne Schnitt auskommen, hinterlassen einen nachhaltigen Eindruck.

Alle Beiträge sind Bestandteil eines von The Meth Project Foundation ins Leben gerufenen Präventionsprogramms, das in erster Linie Öffentlichkeitsarbeit betreibt, um Bewusstsein für die Gefahren von Meth zu schaffen. Aronofskys Clips werden im US-Fernsehen ausgestrahlt und bilden die derzeit aktuellste von bereits sechs Kampagnen mit insgesamt dreiundzwanzig Kurzfilmen.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures | The Meth Project Foundation]

follow @screenread on twitter

Bis heute können es viele kaum verschmerzen, dass Alejandro Jodorowsky seine Adaption von Frank Herberts „Dune – Der Wüstenplanet“ 1976 mitten in der Vorproduktion aufgeben musste. Das megalomane Projekt, das mit Beteiligung von Jahrhundert-Künstlern wie Salvador Dali, Orson Welles, H. R. Giger, Pink Floyd und Karlheinz Stockhausen schon in der bloßen Vorstellung alle erdenklichen Grenzen sprengte, war seiner Zeit um Jahrzehnte voraus und im Grundsatz unfinanzierbar. Elemente flossen später in Jodorowskys nicht weniger maßlosen Comic-Zyklus „The Incal“ ein, den er zusammen mit dem Illustrator Moebius kreierte. Beide hatten zuvor bereits am Design der „Dune“-Welten miteinander gearbeitet und konnten so bestehende Ideen wieder aufgreifen.

Die Graphic Novel um ein magisches Artefakt, das in einem dystopischen Universum zum Gral wird, dem die unterschiedlichsten Gruppen hinterher jagen, wird bis heute von vielen zu den wichtigsten ihrer Art gezählt und war über Jahre hinweg Gegenstand eines Rechtsstreites zwischen Jodorowsky / Moebius und Luc Besson, dem die beiden vorwarfen, grafische und inhaltliche Elemente für seinen Film „Das fünfte Element“ ungefragt übernommen zu haben.

Eine Adaption des Originalstoffs stand zwar nie ernsthaft zur Diskussion, doch der kanadische Regisseur Pascal Blais war von der Idee so angetan, dass er Mitte der 80er mit einer Reihe von Animatoren der Comic-Verfilmung „Heavy Metal“ einfach mal einen fiktiven Trailer erstellte – heute eine gängige Praxis, um Investoren für ein Projekt zu gewinnen. Blais hatte den Clip dann irgendwann auf Eis gelegt und sich dem Aufbau seiner Produktionsgesellschaft gewidmet, doch offenbar ist ihm das bemerkenswerte Stück Film vor einer Weile wieder in Erinnerung gekommen und hat soviel alte Begeisterung geweckt, dass sich eine vollständige digitale Überarbeitung nicht umgehen ließ.

Ausgestattet mit neuer Musik und einigen inhaltlichen Veränderungen hat Blais das Ergebnis jetzt online gestellt. In gewissem Sinne ist es das erste filmische Lebenszeichen Jodorowskys seit dem katastrophal gescheiterten „Rainbow Thief“ von 1990 – wenn auch ohne seine aktive Beteiligung.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures | Pascal Blais Animation Studio]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

For a period of over fifteen years, director / writer / producer / editor / cinematographer and sometimes actor Eric Stanze is making movies that clearly deserve the label „uncompromising“. Having founded his production company Wicked Pixel Cinema in 1995, it was not before the release of the controversially discussed and heavily censored „Scrapbook“ that Stanze become a household name for gritty out-of-the-box independent films with an edge hardly to be found anywhere else. His latest effort „Ratline“ adds a highly complex and constantly jaw-dropping contribution to the subgenre of Nazi-horror and might best be described as „Inglourious Basterds on Acid“. A good reason for us to sit down with the filmmaker and avowed workaholic to talk about his career and aspirations, investors and censors, Romero, Raimi and a college screening that basically went through the roof.

screen/read: Let’s start out talking „Ratline“ which is pretty much the type of movie that would most likely never happen to be made in Germany. What was the inital idea behind the whole Nazi story on items like the blood flag, the SS paranormal division and other related material?

Eric Stanze: I am something of a Word War II buff. On a very serious level I had been interested for quite some time in the state of mind the average German people were in during the Nazi reign. And when I was thinking about what to come up with for our next horror movie, I knew that I wanted to do something that was very paranormal based. I had this idea of some kind of a very adult and aggressive „X-Files“-episode. Of course I knew about all these probably mostly fictional tales on the Nazis exploring paranormal avenues. And so I thought why not combine those two concepts by adding the Nazi aspect to the paranormal route? And so what I had learned from history influenced the screenplay although I mostly focused on the more fantastic elements. I wanted to treat the Nazi subject matter in a unique way. „Ratline“ is not a straight drama, nor is it some silly Nazi-exploitation movie. It’s somewhere between the two.

screen/read: There is an interesting tradition, if you will, of paranormal Nazi activities appearing in movies, with „Raiders of the lost Ark“ or „Hellboy“ only being the most popular examples. And there of course are lots of exploitation movies about it. In your film one of the many remarkable elements in that respect is a fake historic documentary that runs in its total length without being interrupted by the primary storyline. It works like a short film in itself.

Eric Stanze: There were basically two reasons for that. On the one hand we were trying to be somewhat fresh and innovative in terms of how to present a certain background information that is important for the story. But also, as we were dealing with a very low budget, I wanted to find a way of doing a flashback that wasn’t really one. And I figured if we did it like a military documentary film, it would give me the opportunity to basically get around and not show the stuff we couldn’t afford to put on screen. So it was both a way of trying to do things in a more inventive way than we’ve seen before and also it was a creative decision that was influenced by budgetary restrictions.

screen/read: You’ve been used to working within a very tight frame and shooting movies on a shoestring budget pretty much all through your filmmaking career. In this case you had some really tough decisions to make even during shooting when all of a sudden money that should be there wasn’t available anymore. With that in mind, how long did it take you to make the film and how much did the result differ from what you originally had in mind?

Eric Stanze: We started shooting back in 2008 and actually the entire movie was conceived almost as a plan B project. The very fact that „Ratline“ even exists was born of budgetary setbacks. I guess that’s the best way to put it. We had been developing a completely different feature called „Seizure“ but then the financing just crumbled and we realized that we eventually were not going to make this film. So we launched into „Ratline“ as an alternative, something that we could do more economically. The shoot actually went very very quickly. It was one of the faster ones that we’d ever done. We spent only about a month and a half really working on it full time, followed by little reshoots and pickup-shots that we did in the coming month after that. The real sluggishness that occurred due to the financial problems came in post-production where I would have to keep shutting down the editing and go off and work on something else to bring in some cash and then come back to continue working on the movie. Generally speaking, on a low budget you always have to use your team’s creativity, your own experience, you have to navigate around problems, you don’t have the cash to throw at them and make them disappear. A lot of rewriting happening while we were shooting to make the script fit because the money just wasn’t there. But I’m in the frame of mind that every movie just is a product of the circumstances that it was produced under. So if we had 20 milion dollars we might have wished we had 50 milion. You never quite have exactly what you want when you make a movie, so no matter what budget you’re at you have to approach it with both your creative intentions and also with a lot of plan B and plan C scenarios in your head so that when problems come up you can work around them efficiently.

screen/read: It seems to be a constantly reappearing issue in the history of Wicked Pixel Cinema. You’re doing this for quite some time now and still remain true to this very difficult indie approach despite quite a number of throwbacks, restarts, scripts that couldn’t be filmed and stuff like that. And while others would most likely have given up already, you and your team stay put and solid. What is it that keeps you on track instead of joining the industry and doing multi-milion dollar mainstream?

Eric Stanze: Well, a lot of the line that we’re on is not the line that we’ve chosen. We would all prefer to not have to suffer and starve as much as we do to get each movie made. I feel like we’ve made enough movies that have gotten enough positive attention to have us move up in the industry. We should be getting bigger budgets and we should be better connected and have budgets that allow us to put on screen what we want to put on screen. Going into each project with your creative aspirations and then having to compromise by putting something on screen that isn’t quite what you wanted because the money and the resources aren’t there, can be very depressing and more than anything is the cause of a lot of heartbreak. We’ve had many people comment to us that we should be getting bigger budgets, that we’ve proven ourselves, that we should be moving up the ladder so to speak, but we’ve just kind of hit lots of road blocks along the way. A lot of people hit those road blocks and they just stopped and quit filmmaking. Speaking for me and my team though, I always had this kind of stubbornness. I don’t like to sit still for long, I don’t like to go a long period of time between projects. Call it tenacity or call it stupidity, but my attitude has always been like if somebody isn’t going to assist us in making a bigger movie then we’re just going to make another one on our own anyway. So either you’re on board with us or we’ll see you on the other side [laughs].

screen/read: Let’s travel a little back in time to a period when you started making your first films and then founded Wicked Pixel with many of the people that are still part of it today. What would you say was the initial experience that made you realise and decide that you wanted to do movies?

Eric Stanze: I was still a teenager when I developed an intense interest in making films. I was very much influenced by George A. Romero and Sam Raimi and I knew they had been able to make really interesting movies without huge Hollywood budgets. That was very inspiring and I started making my own little student films but didn’t really think about it in terms of a career. I kind of thought that this was just not anything that I would ever be able to even get anywhere close to. In senior year in highschool then I made a feature-length student film called „The Scare Game“. It was a terrible amateur student movie but it ended up falling into the hands of a distributor who liked it and ended up releasing it. It came out in North America and probably maybe another dozen territories around the world and I thought, well, if my crappy little student film can make that kind of headway, then maybe I should be looking at this more like a career and less like a hobby. So I launched into it one-hundred percent and haven’t slowed down since, learning from each film and trying to make the next one better. I guess that just attracted certain people like Tommy Biondo, Jeremy Wallace and Jason Christ. So we all kind of teamed up and together had everything moving forward little bit by little bit. And even if we didn’t have the bigger budgets coming our way, which we’re still fighting for, I at least had a really solid team around, and I had their creativity and their talents and their problem-solving abilities that helped each new movie getting made and kept us progressing on to the next.

screen/read: There’s a funny and remarkable story about a screening of „The Scare Game“ at Jefferson College where people were shut out and not allowed to watch it below the age of seventeen. How did that come about?

Eric Stanze: Well, I was attending that college at the time and somebody just brought up the idea of screening my film for the other students and the public. I guess they did it because the movie was getting attention and not because they had actually watched it. However, a few days before the screening somebody at the college decided they would have a look at the movie and I don’t know what exactly upset them, but all of a sudden there were posters up everywhere, saying „no-one under seventeen admitted“ and that you have to show ID at the door. So while otherwise the audience would probably have consisted of about eight people, due to those posters all of a sudden the place was packed and we had a crowd around the entrance. It’s been such a ridiculous situation especially because the movie is just so awful [laughs]. So the fact that the college made a big deal out of it was both amusing and embarrassing.

screen/read: It wasn’t the last time one of your films caused controversial reactions. Probably the most profound example is „Scrapbook“which despite raving reviews is still not available in various countries. When you started working on this film back in 2000, did you expect to any degree that it was going to become such a divisive case?

Eric Stanze: We didn’t expect it at all. That was a period in the progression of what we were doing when I still felt like we were very very much under the radar. The first two ‘professional films’ that I had done were „Savage Harvest“ and „Ice from the Sun“, and I pretty much went into „Scrapbook“ with this feeling like nobody’s paying attention to us, nobody’s really seeing our movies, and so we can do whatever we want but in the end it probably won’t matter because nobody will ever see it. So because the shoot was very grueling and emotionally taxing, I actually said to the cast and crew at one point, you know, we’re not in the position where a lot of people are going to see these movies that we’re making yet, and there’s a strong likelihood that „Scrapbook“ could be released and only ten people on the planet will watch it and then it will just vanish and never be seen again. And I asked everybody if they were all comfortable moving forward and completing this project which is obviously very rough on the actors, especially for Emily Haack. But the immediate reaction was, yes, let’s keep moving forward, let’s do this, no matter how many people are going to watch it because at least we’ve been part of the work that’s been done. And so we finished the movie and it ended up making way bigger splash than any one of us ever thought that it would. It was probably the film that finally transitioned me up a few notches in terms of recognizability, and obviously the one that did get a lot of great reviews and gave us a lot of positive attention. So I’m really glad that we went ahead and finished it. But we didn’t anticipate that kind of glowing response to the film and therefor we didn’t anticipate any of the controversy that would come with it.

screen/read: I guess if this movie had gotten in the hands of an interested arthouse distributor it would probably have found its way into theatres alongside films like „Irreversible“ or „Antichrist“ or „Intimacy“. Because it’s less horror in a stricter sense, but more a theatrical, very tough and intense two-persons-drama. Hence it still might not really have reached its core audience so far. Do you think that is due to the fact that you’ve been rather identified with horror back then and still are?

Eric Stanze: That’s a tough question. I don’t know. When going into it, those kinds of thoughts were pretty far from our mind. We weren’t really planning out how we wanted the movie to be perceived. We were just so focused on the idea that we had and tryed to make the best movie that we could make. I don’t know if it had been perceived differently when being released ten years later or handled by a distribution company that could have put that kind of a spin on it. I’ve had some people talk to me about how they feel confident that „Scrapbook“ is a movie that could get a bigger budget if it were to be remade and that it could be viewed as this extremely tough arthouse movie, but I don’t know about that personally. I think if somebody did get hold of it with that kind of intentions and remade it, the movie would lose some of its edge. The fact that it has that edge and the fact that it’s not playing to the cheesy B-movie horror audience is what gave it it’s strength. I think people who watched movies at that budget level back then were simply not used to seeing movies that were handled with such a serious tone. And handled like a drama instead of a horror movie. And if you look at Emily Haack’s performance, I really don’t know if there’s another actress working out there who could have brought such bravery to that part.

screen/read: It’s visible that most of what makes this movie what it is pretty much happened on set and at the very moment when it was shot. It has an improvised feel to it, and that is what makes it so believable and so shocking at the same time. Which might be a reason why you had quite some trouble getting it distributed in various countries. The BBFC demanded to cut about seventeen minutes I think.

Eric Stanze: Well, they didn’t ask us or make us cut them out. It was just seventeen minutes that they wanted to be taken out and then it just happened. It wasn’t us who cut those sequences out. Whoever was the first distributor in Europe, they handled it and did the re-edit of the movie. It was done without our blessing and it was done without our participation. I’ve never seen that version in its entirety. Out of curiousity I watched about halfway through it and then decided that was enough.

screen/read: If you had the chance to participate in the re-edit, would you have done that or refused to do it?

Eric Stanze: That’s a good question. I prefer to be hands on with that sort of thing. I like to do it myself because then I know it’s done the way I want it. But before I saw the shortened European version I was sent a list of the cuts that they were demanding. And the cuts were extremely specific. There was not a whole lot of opportunity to be creative with the whole issue. It was a list that very much specified it’s got to go away from this moment to this moment. So even if I had been involved in the editing I don’t think the shortened version would have been much different than it is now.

screen/read: It destroys the whole picture.

Eric Stanze: Yes, it does.

screen/read: Did you have other experiences where you were meant to re-edit movies or cut stuff out, not for budgetary reasons but for distributor’s wishes or censorship or whatever?

Eric Stanze: I think as far as I’m aware the only trouble that we’ve ever had along those lines was with „Scrapbook“. I’ve had a couple of siuations where distributors would talk to me during post-production and tell me, well, you need to cut this out and you need to not include that kind of material. And basically their reasoning was, if you don’t eliminate these controversial elements, you’re never going to achieve wide distribution. And I always looked at them like, well, I’m not going to achieve wide distribution anyway so why make those cuts? So I would just ignore the advice and do it the way I wanted to.

screen/read: Do you think that the new channels of distribution via VOD and the web in general can help especially filmmakers like yourself who produce rather difficult and uncompromising material to gain broader attention?

Eric Stanze: I think we saw that kind of change happening right around the time that the DVD boom began around 1999. A lot of people grew up with horror movies on VHS, knowing that these releases were cut, and now these guys were old enough to get into the distribution game themselves and started their own small DVD companies. And so with DVD becoming a big deal, all of a sudden you got to see all these movies uncut for the first time delivered to your home and you could throw away the VHS and the terribly looking uncut bootleg version that you had acquired under the table somewhere. I think that mentality continues to this day. More and more people enter the industry of both filmmaking and distribution. And the internet is able to push this product all around the planet much easier. I think the days of material being cut out of movies are starting to see an end and people are a little more open-minded and able to embrace a movie for what it is. So I do see it improving.

screen/read: You were part of this revolution to some degree with „Ice from the Sun“ by being among of the first ones to put an indie film on DVD and produce the authoring yourself. What was the reason for that decision back then?

Eric Stanze: At the very beginning of the DVD boom I recognised that this was the direction that we needed to go in, and that the sooner we connected with that part of the industry the better. And as I felt like it wasn’t something that I wanted to wait around, I decided to dive in head first as quickly as I could. The downside of it was that producing the authoring was still in its infancy. There were a lot of people who tried to figure it out and didn’t do a very good job at it. First we dealt with outside companies to get our first DVDs released but it was an absolute desaster. So I decided if I wanted it to be done right, I needed to do it by myself. And that’s actually how I got into the DVD authoring game, partly out of foresight that this was a direction we had to go, partly out of frustration due to dealing with incompetent people and having to take my movie away from them and then do it myself.

screen/read: With „Ratline“ you decided to first distribute the film by means of VOD before putting it out on DVD. Did you already get an idea how that worked and if the strategy was right or needs more elaboration?

Eric Stanze: We’re still figuring that out. Just about everybody, from the indies all the way to the major studios, hasn’t quite figured out how this kind of rebirth of the film distribution machine works and how to maximaze its potential. We’re all navigating those waters for the first time. It’s a different ball game than it was only five years ago. So I’d say it’s too early to know if we’re doing it exactly right or if we’re screwing something up. It’s an experience that I’m interested in learning from at this point.

screen/read: So it’s a trail you plan to be following in the future?

Eric Stanze: I would assume so, although this is on many many levels a very transitional period, not only in terms of the direction that distribution is going, but also concerning the direction that my career specifically is going. I don’t know what my next feature project is going to be, I don’t know how it’s going to be financed, I don’t know how it’s going to be distributed. It’s all kind of up in the air at this point and I’m genuinely excited about seeing what people come to me and offer their expertise and their ressources. I’m very interested in taking this learning experience and applying it in some way to whatever our next project is.

screen/read: Another new development for indie film production is the whole area of crowdfunding that many small and micro budget filmmakers are turning to. Is that an option for your projects, something that you considered trying in the future as well? Especially as there is quite a solid fanbase of yours that might be willing to participate financially.

Eric Stanze: It’s something that I’ve definitely looked into but it’s more in the research base at this point. It’s not something that I’m completely sold on because there are so many differing opinions about it. There are people telling me that the track record and the fanbase that I’ve accumulated over twenty years get me an edge over some guys that are trying to do the crowdfunding thing and make their first feature. So there’s that positive aspect of that. But then there are a lot of other people that I’ve talked to who say that crowdfunding basically just accumulates enough money to put something on the screen but everybody still has to suffer and starve to get through the production of the movie, and it still doesn’t give you all the ressources and better ressources than what we’ve had in the past. So the other part of me thinks, why would I go through the process of crowdfunding if it’s just going to put us back at the same level that we had when we were making „Ratline“? And then I’ve talked to other filmmakers who seem to have a quasi ethical problem with trying to raise money through donations from people who are probably fighthing themselves to keep their lights on. And then there are the people that swear by it and think that’s the way independent movies are going to be financed eventually. So there’s a whole strange swirl of opinions around about the crowdfunding thing. It’s just a very new way of getting independent films funded but it still has to go to a lot of trials before we figure out how to maximize its potential.

screen/read: You already mentioned that this is a transitional phase in your career, and you did a few interesting things on the side. You shot second unit on „Stakeland“ for instance, a horror movie that is sold quite well, and also made a documentary on that one. What was the experience like, especially as the budgetary frame probably differed decisively from what you usually have? And is that where you’d say Wicked Pixel should move up to pretty soon?

Eric Stanze: Absolutely. I think that’s not even were we should be but even more where we’re already moving to. And I hope there won’t be any more setbacks that will knock us off that course. It’s where I feel things are gravitating towards. Working on the set of „Stakeland“ was a completely positive experience, being able to have enough money to pay professionals that come in and do all these different tasks and also are really great people to work with. That’s definitely a state that I want us to progress into and that I think we are progressing into.

screen/read: But would a bigger budget also mean compromising here and there or do you think that you could work the way you always did?

Eric Stanze: Well, while „Stakeland“ had a significantly bigger budget than what my movies are produced on, I didn’t see anything in those filmmakers that seemed like they were being forced to compromise. It’s an issue of carefully selecting the people that you’re partner with. That goes with your crew, that goes with your cast, that goes with the producers, that goes with the people that are financing the movie. Instead of just jumping at anybody who is willing to write a big cheque, I think you do have to be careful and just select the people that you want to work with and make sure that they’re willing to support what you want to do creatively. The movie has to be as good as it can possibly be and everybody is working for that goal. So if anybody is interested in doing something that’s on to corrode the quality of the project or the artistic aspirations of the creative people involved, then you just shouldn’t work with them.

screen/read: As a thought experiment, imagining „Deadwood Park“, a less controversial film of yours, had been made with a bigger budget, it could have certainly been sold to a bigger audience. And up to a certain point it might have even worked as a PG-13 ghost movie. So would that be a direction you could imagine moving into with more money around?

Eric Stanze: I don’t know, I tend to look at those controversial elements in terms of what works best for a particular movie. I mean, you’re right „Deadwood Park“ borders on that PG-13 level of more mainstream acceptability, but that wasn’t something I intended to do. I went into it actually being very much inspired by the films of Mario Bava and certain more atmospheric films of the sixties and seventies, and I wanted just to make that kind of a movie. The marketability aspect of it or the mainstream aspect of it wasn’t really in the forefront of my thoughts. I’m of the opinion that if any of these movies that I made had a bigger budget, it would be better and be able to find more traction in the marketplace and be able to reach more people. If „Ratline“ had a bigger budget, then I would have been able to achieve more of what I wanted to do and I would have been able to reach a wider audience but I also think I would have been able to keep the more aggressive and more controversial aspects and not give them up just because I had a bigger budget to work with.

screen/read: Despite budgetary restrictions, „Ratline“ pretty much feels to me like being designed for not just being a standalone movie but also happening on various platforms afterwards, thinking comic books, spin-offs and sequels centering around the mythology behind the story. Is that a trail you’d be interested in following, like establishing a horror franchise of a certain kind?

Eric Stanze: I think that maybe one of the reasons why you kind of get that sense is this idea of having a lot of misdirection in the movie and kind of putting things in the forefront for a brief period of time and then pulling them way back and eventually discarding them entirely as the narrative progresses. That was something Jason [Christ] and myself were interested in doing. We did that partly because this type of misdirection is not something that you usually get to see in movies and I thought that it added an interesting texture. The result of it is that that you do have all of these various plot threads that could be exploited for exactly what you’re talking about. There is definitely more material in „Ratline“ that could fuel sequels or comic book adaptations. That would be very interesting and I certainly wouldn’t turn down the opportunity if somebody came to us pitching those kinds of ideas, but that wasn’t at the forefront of our minds when we were writing. I think that the movie will pretty much remain a standalone thing, but you never know. Maybe in the future we might dig back into some of the storylines again.

screen/read: The fact that the movie is constantly leading the viewer astray is one of the decisive elements that makes it so interesting and refreshing. But „Ratline“ is not the only movie of yours that has a more complex narration. Is that something you’re especially attracted to when conceiving a movie?

Eric Stanze: Oh absolutely, that’s exactly where I tend to gravitate towards. If you asked me what is the single mosts important thing that I would like to see in a movie, and my answer would always be: the unexpected, something in that successfully catches the audience off-guard. That’s when you’ve done something remarkable. But I don’t think a lot of filmmakers agree with that these days, or maybe it’s rather the people financing movies. When you present them with a concept that is off the beaten path and isn’t necessarily going to make an immediate giant pile of cash, people interested in financing and distributing your movies get very scared. If it’s not easily being packaged and sold, they’re not interested. But to me it’s exactly what makes a movie most interesting. And I prefer to come up with stuff that people probably don’t know how to feel about when the end credits roll, but sticks with you and maybe the next day or maybe the next year you still are thinking about. It puts more flaws into the project if you experiment but at least my track record shows that people do continue thinking about the movies. It’s really fulfilling to have people still approach me about „Scapbook“, and that movie is out for over ten years now. And that’s the kind of filmmaker that I am trying to be, who has a little bit more of a shelf life, even if that means exploring and improvising and making a movie that isn’t immediately satisfying but grows to you over a longer period of time. But I guess the attitude of people who are investing is all about making as much money as quickly as possible. It’s kind of fueled by the Hollywood mentality that opening weekend box-office is the most important thing to determine whether a movie is succesful or not. I’ve always been of the opinion that if you’re going to put money in something, you’re better off with a long-term investment, something that might pay out over many many years. I see that with older movies that I am a huge fan of and that have become classics and were made maybe fifteen years ago. I look at those movies and think, well, that was a good investment because ten or twenty years later they get re-released and that’s another chunk of money coming to the investors. And I would think that most people would want to have that, but typically they don’t.

screen/read: One of the reasons for that might be that most people investing in movies today rather approach them from a pure business side are not really film lovers and don’t understand the nature of art and entertainment that evolves over the years, especially in the independent sector.

Eric Stanze: Yeah, I agree, that is part of the problem. There are a lot of people that control the business side of it but don’t really care about the art side of it. I’m not one of these people who think that movies are just art and doesn’t care if they make money. I’m totally aware of and I completely embrace the fact that motion pictures are a blend of commerce and art. And you have to pay attention to both sides of it. But the investment part of the industry is probably rather irrational than anything else.

screen/read: Let’s talk a little bit about artistic influences What would you say are the movies or filmmakers that sort of shaped you into who you are today?

Eric Stanze: When I was very young I think probably the filmmaker that had the biggest influence on me was George Romero. The darker, more dramatic, more bleak tone in his zombie movies, I think that shaped the tone of my films as well. Also I was very influenced by Sam Raimi’s „Evil Dead“ which is a little more boisterous but what it sparked in me was to keep things visually interesting, especially in terms of camera placement and just having a very fearless attitude about creating visuals for movies. As I grew older I tried to watch a lot of different kinds of movies and never restricted myself to certain genres or types of films. I like the idea that I can be a fan of both Joe D’Amato and Terrence Malick. I like the idea that all of these influences have been slowly entering my brain basically my entire life. So when it comes time to make a movie I have all of them to draw on.

screen/read: Wouldn’t it be fantastic to see Terrence Malick shooting a Joe D’Amato script?

Eric Stanze: [laughs] That would be amazing!

screen/read: You also wrote two science-fiction scripts that have not been shot yet, with „Tempest of the Dawn“ being one of them. Is that still a project you’d like to follow today?

Eric Stanze: Well, generally speaking, one of the things that I’d like to explore in the future is the science-fiction area because I haven’t done that yet and I think that that would be fun. What I value most about those unproduced screenplays is just the practice that they gave me. None of them I would put into production today. They all have decent things in them but they all would need to have major re-writing on them because I advanced beyond where I was when I wrote them. So I wouldn’t pick „Tempest of the Dawn“ and make it right now unless I have the opportunity to give it a really thorough re-write. But it made me a better writer. I think writing is both the easiest and the hardest part of filmmaking because you don’t need the money to do it while on the other hand, to write something that’s good is probably the hardest part of filmmaking. Some people are really lucky and they can just bust out of the gate at the age of twenty and write a screenplay that’s brilliant. I was not that fortunate, I had to work very hard at it and write and write and still write some more. Today I think that I’m a pretty good writer, but when I say that it doesn’t mean that I was born with some amazing talent or that I’m something special. I think I am a pretty good writer today because I’ve written so many bad scripts in the past.

screen/read: Apart from the films and filmmakers you mentioned, there has also been an important influence on a more personal level, which was your grandfather who helped you a lot with making your first movies and even acted in them and thus became a local celebrity in a certain way. It’s quite unusual because you’re making movies where you’d rather say, I’m not sure if I can show them to my parents, and here it’s even your gandfather who helped and supported you. That must have been a pretty close relationship.

Eric Stanze: Growing up, he was probably the strongest positive influence in my life. And it wasn’t so much like we buddied around a lot and had long, deep, heartfelt conversations and things like that. It was more that I just admired him. He was a very intelligent and get-the-job-done-kind-of-guy. He would look at what I was trying to do as a filmmaker no matter what was in the script or what kind of movie it was. He just supported what I was trying to do because he recognized that filmmaking made me happy and that it was something that I was trying to learn a lot about. I guess he admired that this teenager was more focused on trying to learn this craft than going out and party and getting drunk all the time or do whatever normal teens would do. I think he just recognized the positive qualities of it and then supported me unconditionally. And to have somebody that I admired so much show me so much support, I think that had just an immense impact on me growing up. He passed away a while ago and still his influence is felt and it still provides a lot of fuel for what I do today.

screen/read: That’s a very cool thing to say and having someone like that when you grow up probably helps you to become a strong person in life. And maybe that’s why you’re as stubborn as you are.

Eric Stanze: [laughs] It might be. Those of us who have a support like that are extremely lucky.

Recommended LINKS for further reading:

• Eric Stanze: Official Homepage
• Eric Stanze @Fearnet (Surviving Cinema)
• Eric Stanze @Facebook
• Eric Stanze @Google+
• Eric Stanze @Twitter
• Wicked Pixel Cinema: Official Homepage
• Wicked Pixel Cinema @Facebook
• Wicked Pixel Cinema @YouTube

[Images courtesy of Wicked Pixel Cinema]

follow @screenread on twitter

Seit John Carpenters Slasher-Klassiker hat kein Film dem Kürbisfest so nachdrücklich seinen Stempel aufgedrückt wie „Trick ’r Treat“ von Michael Dougherty. Beruhend auf dem Kurzfilm „Season’s Greetings“ und zusammengesetzt aus mehreren ineinander verwobenen Episoden, erfreut sich die einfallsreiche, mal unheimliche, mal ausgesprochen lustige Liebeserklärung an Halloween und seine Bräuche seit der Premiere 2007 ungebrochener Beliebtheit. Auf dem amerikanischen Spartenkanal Fearnet gibt es den Film dieses Jahr praktisch den gesamten 31. Oktober über im Loop zu sehen. Dougherty hat extra zu diesem Zweck einen kleinen Beitrag geliefert, der in Form einer augenzwinkernden Frankenstein-Variante mit einem Cameo von Kürbismonster Sam auch als Kurzfilm viel Spaß macht.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

An Halloween gibt es für echte Puristen eigentlich nur einen Horrorklassiker, der als gänzlich unverzichtbar gilt, und das ist und bleibt John Carpenters gleichnamiger Slasher von 1978. Wie zeitlos und unverändert effektiv sein Film heute immer noch ist, belegt gerade der Vergleich zu Rob Zombies durchaus gelungenem, aber wenig erschreckenden 2007er Remake und dessen eigenwilligem Sequel. Dass der Meister selbst aber jemals wieder zur alten Form zurückfinden wird, muss man gerade angesichts seines bislang letzten Films „The Ward“ wohl eher bezweifeln. Zusammen mit seiner Frau Sandy King und Schauspieler Thomas Ian Griffith entwickelte er jetzt eine Horrorcomic-Reihe, die viele Fans auf eine Wende hoffen lässt.

Doch wie groß der Einfluss Carpenters auf das Projekt tatsächlich ist, lässt sich nur spekulieren. Das Skript stammt ausdrücklich von Marvel-Veteran Bruce Jones und nicht von ihm selber, doch im Gespräch mit IFC betont er zugleich auch, dass er keineswegs nur seinen Namen zur Verfügung stellt – eine andernfalls nicht ungewöhnliche Praxis. Wenn er „Asylum“ dieses Wochenende auf der Long Beach Comic and Horror Con persönlich vorstellt, wird es vor allem sein Name sein, der für Aufmerksamkeit sorgt. Ob es der zunächst auf zwölf Bände angelegten Reihe auch verkaufstechnisch hilft, steht noch auf einem anderen Blatt.

Mit der Verfilmung der erfolgreichen „Darkchylde“-Comics von Randy Queens nähert sich Carpenter dem Medium demnächst von anderer Seite an. Wie genau es um das Projekt steht, das derzeit für 2013 angekündigt wird, ist allerdings eher unklar. Testshootings von Peter Jacksons WETA-Studios liegen mittlerweile bereits ein Jahr zurück.

Einen ersten Eindruck von „Asylum“ gibt es online bei Graphicly.

[Abbildungen: Graphicly, Storm King Productions]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

Filmadaptionen erfolgreicher Videospiele haben nicht den besten Ruf, und das ist nicht allein die Schuld von Uwe Boll. Wenige Ausnahmen wie „Silent Hill“ oder die gelungeneren Teile der „Resident Evil“-Reihe bestätigen eher die Regel, dass auf dem Weg von der Konsole zur Leinwand immer noch eine Menge verloren geht. Dabei ist es im Wesentlichen eine Frage von Sorgfalt, Originalität und der richtigen Perspektive, mit der man sich dem anderen Medium annähert. Eindrucksvoll belegen das gerade drei Kurzfilme, die der amerikanische Spartenkanal G4TV im Rahmen seines Epictober Festivals für sein Online-Portal in Auftrag gegeben hat. „The Hunt“, „Kart Game“ und „The Birds of Anger“ gehören bereits jetzt zum Besten, was an Game-Adaptionen derzeit auf dem Markt ist.

Zusammen mit Produzent Joe Lynch („Chillerama“), ehemals Kreativdirektor bei G4, haben sich die beteiligten Regisseure Sam Balcomb, Drew Daywalt und Gregg Bishop jeweils einen Spieleklassiker vorgenommen und sein Grundprinzip in denkbar eigenständiger und jederzeit augenzwinkernder Weise auf die Grammatik des filmischen Erzählens übertragen. Die Spannweite reicht dabei von Backwood Horror über Monster-Action bis zur Hitchcock-Hommage, und das bei gleichbleibend hoher Qualität. Die großen Studios hätten allen Grund, hier genauer hinzusehen. Die Beiträge im Einzelnen:

THE HUNT

Wer den harmlosen Nintendo-Shooter „Duck Hunt“ aus den frühen 80ern kennt, wird kaum auf den Gedanken kommen, dass dort Potential für einen blutigen Slasher vorhanden ist. Sam Balcomb sah das offenbar ganz anders, nahm die wenigen Elemente, die das Spiel überhaupt zu bieten hat, in die Hand und formte aus ihnen einen alles andere als zurückhaltenden 10-Minüter, dessen Pointe vor allem dann seine volle Wirkung entfaltet, wenn man sich zuvor noch einmal das Original vor Augen führt.

Balcomb ist mehrfach preisgekrönter Kurzfilm- und Videoclip-Regisseur. Mit seiner Produktionsfirma Rainfall Films realisierte er bereits mehrere Specials für G4, produzierte Promos für TV-Serien wie „Lost“ und betreute die visuellen Effekte für Musikvideos von Katy Perry, Britney Spears, Steven Tyler und anderen. Rainfall gestaltete zudem die Poster aller drei Kurzfilme.

KART DRIVER

Wie detailgetreu sich das legendäre Arcade-Spiel „Donkey Kong“ in einen Realfilm umsetzen lässt, beweist dieser Beitrag von Drew Daywalt. Wer sich auskennt, weiß, dass hier auch die Wurzeln von Super Mario liegen, der ursprünglich noch Zimmermann war und schlicht „Jumpman“ hieß. In Daywalts Variante gibt es ihn selbstverständlich im heute bekannten Klempner-Outfit zu sehen, und auch sein Bruder Luigi taucht auf. Weit entfernt von den Albernheiten des gründlich misslungenen Spielfilms mit Bob Hoskins und Dennis Hopper von 1993, liegt der Witz von „Kart Driver“ genau darin, sich praktisch überhaupt nicht vom simplen Konzept des Game-Klassikers abheben zu wollen. Das Ergebnis ist verblüffend.

Dass Daywalt die Kunst des Horror-Kurzfilms derzeit beherrscht wie kein zweiter, beweist er beständig mit den oftmals nur wenige Minuten langen Produktionen seiner „Fear Factory“. Ebenso auf sein Konto gehen die Webserie „Camera Obscura“, sowie mehrere Episoden der MTV-Show „Death Valley“.

THE BIRDS OF ANGER

Dass die beliebten „Angry Birds“ nahe Verwandte von Hitchcocks angriffslustigen Vögeln sein könnten, ist eigentlich ein naheliegender Gedanke, denn sonderlich gute Laune haben beide Gruppen nicht. Für Gregg Bishop Grund genug, seine Adaption der Rovio-Games als bis in die Farbgebung hinein minutiös nachgestaltete Liebeserklärung an den Horrorklassiker von 1963 anzulegen – inklusive Tippi Hedrens Frisur. Dass am Ende nicht nur die gefiederten Protagonisten eine Menge Wut im Bauch haben, sorgt für eine Pointe, die sich gut im Tarantino/Rodriguez-Universum machen würde.

Sein Gespür für eine stilsichere Balance aus Humor und Horror konnte Bishop mit „Dance of the Dead“ auch bereits auf Spielfilmlänge ausleben. Die originelle Highschool-Zombie-Komödie von 2008 gefiel keinem Geringeren als Sam Raimi gar so gut, dass er sie ins Verleihprogramm seines Labels Ghosthouse Underground aufnahm.

[Abbildungen: G4TV]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

Bereits im Februar hatte das Brüsseler Verlagshaus Le Lombard damit begonnen, die Werbetrommel für ein ungewöhnliches Projekt zu rühren: Ein Comic über den biblischen Arche-Erbauer Noah, basierend auf einem bislang unverfilmten Drehbuch des allzeit ambitionierten Filmemachers Darren Aronofsky. Es sollte jedoch weitere acht Monate dauern, bis die als Tetralogie angelegte Graphic Novel auch wirklich das Licht der Öffentlichkeit erblickte. Am 7. Oktober erschien jetzt der erste Band auf französischer Sprache unter dem Titel „Noé“.

Für den Regisseur von „Black Swan“ und „The Wrestler“ stellt die jetzige Form allerdings nur eine Art Zwischenlösung dar, denn Ziel ist und bleibt die Verfilmung, mit der es jetzt offenbar in die Vorproduktion geht. Ganze vier Tage vor Veröffentlichung des Comics gab Paramount offiziell bekannt, sich mit New Regency für die Leinwand-Adaption zusammengeschlossen zu haben. John Logan („Gladiator“) werde zuvor das bestehende Drehbuch überarbeiten.

Bereits als 13-Jähriger hatte Aronofsky sich mit der Figur des Noah beschäftigt und mit einem apokalyptischen Gedicht aus Sicht des alttestamentarischen Auserwählten einen Literaturwettbewerb der Vereinten Nationen gewonnen. Ganze zwanzig Jahre später nahm er sich des Stoffs erneut an und verfasste ein episches Drehbuch, von dem er 2007 erstmals öffentlich berichtete.

Mit den Bildern aus der Feder von Comic-Künstler und Co-Autor Niko Henrichon bekommt Aronofskys Version des Weltuntergangs jetzt erstmals eine visuelle Entsprechung und vermittelt eine Idee vom Ausmaß des Projekts. Erfahrungen mit dem Medium der Graphic Novel konnte der Filmemacher zuvor bereits im Rahmen einer von Kent Williams gestalteten Comicversion seines späteren Kino-Misserfolgs „The Fountain“ sammeln, sowie bei einer Zusammenarbeit mit Frank Miller für eine geplante, aber nie zustande gekommene Adaption von „Batman: Year One“.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures | Le Lombard Bruxelles]

follow @screenread on twitter

Welches immense Ansehen Eli Roth unter Genre-Fans genießt, ist angesichts seines Outputs als Filmemacher ziemlich erstaunlich. Seine letzte Arbeit auf dem Regiestuhl absolvierte er, lässt man seinen Beitrag zu Quentin Tarantinos „Inglourious Basterds“ einmal außen vor, 2007 mit dem nur mäßig erfolgreichen Sequel zu „Hostel“, jenem Film, der nicht nur seinen Ruf begründete, sondern auch den von Kritiker David Edelstein erfundenen Begriff „Torture Porn“ erstmals aufs Tablett brachte. Seitdem tritt Roth vor allem als Produzent („Der letzte Exorzismus“), Gelegenheitsschauspieler („Piranha 3D“), Drehbuchautor („The Man with the Iron Fists“) oder Kommentator für Joe Dantes Online-Filmschule „Trailers from Hell“ in Erscheinung. Auf dem Discovery Channel versucht er sich jetzt erstmals als Moderator.

Dass Roth inhaltlich durchaus zum Gegenstand passt, liegt auf der Hand. Thema ist jenes berühmte, nach seinem Entwickler Stanley Milgram benannte Experiment von 1961, in dem Probanden angewiesen wurden, anderen Versuchsteilnehmern scheinbar harmlose Elektroschocks zu verpassen, sobald diesen ein Fehler beim Zusammensetzen von Wortpaaren unterlief. Dass die Voltzahl von Mal zu Mal erhöht wurde, hielt die Beteiligten in aller Regel nicht davon ab, den Anweisungen des Versuchsleiter weiterhin brav zu folgen. Immerhin 26 Personen waren bereit, einen Stromstoß von 450V offenbar bedenkenlos zuzulassen. Am Ende erwies sich das Experiment selbstverständlich als bloße Inszenierung, doch das änderte nichts am durchaus beunruhigenden Ergebnis.

Usprünglich hatte Milgram damit erforschen wollen, ob sich die Verbrechen des Nazi-Regimes durch eine spezifisch deutsche Obrigkeitsgläubigkeit erklären ließen. Wissenschaftler wiederholten die originale Versuchsanordnung später auch in anderen Kulturräumen, doch die Resultate blieben im Wesentlichen die gleichen. Ob ähnliches ein halbes Jahrhundert später immer noch gilt, sollte eine erneute Durchführung im Rahmen der Folge „How evil are you“ aus der Reihe „Curiosity“ des Discovery Channels aufzeigen.

„Hostel“-Erfinder Roth fungiert also in gewissem Sinne als Testimonial für die fiktive Wiederbelebung eines vermeintlich wissenschaftlichen Folterszenarios. Dass er sich angesichts der erwartungsgemäßen Bereitwilligkeit der jeweiligen Probanden besonders schockiert zeigt, mag man ihm zwar gerne abkaufen, doch vermutlich gehört das auch einfach zum Image.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures | Discovery Networks]

follow @screenread on twitter

-Anzeige-

Würde er heute Filme machen, wäre Edward Davis Wood jr. vielleicht nur einer von vielen, die ihr eingeschränktes Talent einfach ignorieren und mithilfe von Digitalkamera, Youtube und Facebook zu ebenso überschaubarem wie zweifelhaftem Ruhm kommen. In jedem Fall ist der Vorreiter des Micro-Budget-Filmmakings seiner Zeit weit voraus gewesen, denn die Rahmenbedingungen für seine Art des Arbeitens waren in den 50er und 60er Jahren, als Wood seine berüchtigten Klassiker schuf, noch ein gutes halbes Jahrhundert von ihrer technischen und distributorischen Umsetzung entfernt. Umso mehr wurde das Verfassen von Pulpliteratur irgendwann zunehmend seine einzige Einkommensquelle. Wie viele Romane und Kurzgeschichten er tatsächlich verfasst hat, ist heute nicht mehr nachvollziehbar.

Eine Ausstellung in der New Yorker Galerie „Boo-Hooray“ zeigt ab dem 2. November eine Sammlung von Paperbacks, die Ed Wood zugeordnet werden können. Siebzig Titel gibt es zu sehen, doch Experten gehen davon aus, dass noch wesentlich mehr existieren. Die Festlegung der Autorschaft ist mit einer ganzen Reihe von Problemen belastet, und die Vielzahl von Pseudonymen (wie Ann Gora, Dick Trent, Shirlee Lane), die zum Teil mit anderen Verfassern geteilt wurden, stellt dabei die größte Schwierigkeit dar.

Daran wird sich vermutlich auch in Zukunft nichts ändern. In seinem Buch „Bad Mags“ beschreibt Tom Brinkmann das mühsame Unterfangen, Woods Beiträge zu zahlreichen Adult-Magazinen der späten 60er und 70er Jahre zu identifizieren – ein Gebiet, das noch unzureichender bearbeitet ist als das der Paperbacks. Ende 2010 stellte der US-Verlag Feral House zudem den Vertrieb sämtlicher über längere Jahre hinweg neu aufgelegter Romane des Filmemachers vollständig ein. Woods Erben hatten eine Unterlassungsanordnung beantragt, da die Autorschaft einiger Titel schlicht nicht nachgewiesen werden konnte.

Vieles aus Woods Feder gilt heute als antiquarische Rarität und selbst Bücher, die sich nicht eindeutig zuordnen lassen, erzielen im Handel beachtliche Preise. Einige dieser Beispiele sind ebenfalls Bestandteil der Ausstellung. Begleitend erscheint ein umfangreicher, vollständig farbiger Katalog in limitierter Auflage von 750 Stück zum Preis von 40 USD, sowie eine 60 Dollar teurere Deluxe-Edition.

Die gezeigte Sammlung ist mittlerweile an die Bibliothek seltener Bücher der Cornell University verkauft und wird dort Teil des Archivs für menschliche Sexualität.

Ed Wood’s Sleazy Paperbacks
2. November bis 1. Dezember 2011
Kuratiert von Michael Daley und Johan Kugelberg
Boo-Hooray Gallery, 265 Canal St. #601, New York, NY 10013

[Abbildungen: Boo-Hooray Gallery (Bookcover) | Public Domain (Ed Wood)]

follow @screenread on twitter

Auf den ersten Blick sehen sie wie Bücher aus, doch was modebewusste Stars wie Clémence Poésy oder Natalie Portman mit sich herumtragen, sind tatsächlich Handtaschen, deren Design dem Einband von Erstausgaben literarischer Klassiker nachempfunden wurde. Gefertigt in Handarbeit, mit Baumwoll-Batist überzogen, bestickt und immer auf 16 Exemplare limitiert, erfreuen sich die Clutches der französischen Designerin Olympia Le-Tan großer Beliebtheit – offenbar auch bei Filmemacher Spike Jonze. Mit „Mourir Auprès de Toi (To Die By Your Side)“ legt er jetzt einen Kurzfilm vor, der Le-Tans Buchcover auf spielerische Weise zum Leben erweckt.

Zu dem Projekt war es gekommen, als Jonze die Designerin um einen gestickten Einband für „Catcher in the Rye“ gebeten hatte. Le-Tan hatte als Bezahlung einen Kurzfilm vorgeschlagen und war damit auf offene Ohren gestoßen. Über einen Zeitraum von sechs Monaten entstanden das Drehbuch und ganze 3000 handgefertigte Filzelemente, die für den Film mit angenehm nostalgischer Stop-Motion-Technik animiert wurden. Das Ergebnis ist, wie so oft bei Jonze (der hier mit Simon Kahn als Co-Regisseur arbeitete), ebenso skurril wie märchenhaft.

„Mourir Auprès de Toi“ spielt im berühmten Pariser Buchladen „Shakespeare and Company“ und erzählt die Liebesgeschichte zweier Coverwesen, einem Skelett aus dem Einband von „Hamlet“ und Draculas heimlicher Liebe Mina, die den Knochenmann mit ziemlich eindeutigen Gesten in ihr Bett locken will. Am Ende landen beide im Bauch von Moby Dick, wo ein leidenschaftlicher Kuss fast zur Tragödie wird.

Nach seinem Debüt auf der diesjährigen Critic’s Week in Cannes ist der Film jetzt erstmals online bei Nowness.com zu sehen. Dort finden sich zudem zwei Interviews mit Spike Jonze und Olympia Le-Tan.

[Abbildungen: Screencaptures | Realitism Films]

follow @screenread on twitter

For a while, Jack Perez was mostly known for directing the rather infamous „Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus“, but since his movie „Some Guy who kills People“ is playing festivals worldwide, things have changed. The subtle slasher comedy did not only convince John Landis to function as executive producer, it also keeps winning audiences and critics alike. Just recently Perez entered the „ABCs of Death“ contest with his short film „T is for Tantrum“, hoping to become a part of the upcoming horror anthology alongside 25 other prestigious genre directors. Being the second collaboration with writer Ryan Levin, „Tantrum“ immediately found its audience and over night became one of the most voted for films of the competition. With us Perez talked about his directorial approach, working with child actors, humor in horror, tight budgets and what he shares with David Cronenberg.

screen/read: By the time we’re speking you’ve entered second place in the „ABCs of Death“ competition and you did so pretty much immediately. What do you think about that, how do you explain this reaction so soon?

Jack Perez: I know it sounds so clichéd but I didn’t expect it at all. It’s funny because I didn’t really know about the contest until Ryan [Levin] brought it up and was very enthusiastic about participating in this. I really hadn’t made a short film since I was a student. As far as the response goes, well, I don’t understand why certain things become popular and why certain things don’t, because god knows there’s tons of good work out there that isn’t recognized. So I was completely delighted when I saw the numbers shooting up and I’m just happy people are watching the film.

screen/read: And obviously enjoy it. There are many favorable comments on the discussion board and of course you’ve gotten praise by John Landis and Barry Bostwick whom you have been working with before.

Jack Perez: Yes, I thought that was very generous of both of them to say such nice things. So yeah, it’s flattering.

screen/read: Now you already said it’s been quite some time since you’ve made a short and as far as I can see the majority of people participating in this contest are pretty much just starting out in the business or have only made short films so far, while in your case it’s the other way round by returning to the format after many years of working on features and tv productions.

Jack Perez: Yeah, it’s interesting. Actually I feel strange competing with so many first-time filmmakers. Also because I haven’t tackled the format in a long time. On the other hand, when I teach film to students, which I do at the Art Academy in San Francisco when I’m not making my own movies, I’m guiding them constantly through the short film process. So for a moment I was a little daunted and wondering whether I could still do this. But as it turned out, it was exactly like doing a feature and I approached it the same way. I approached it as a mini-movie with an extremely short schedule. The process by which you go ahead and make a movie whether it’s three minutes or three hours is essentially the same. You’re still working with actors, you’re still designing your visuals, you’re storyboarding, you’re shotlisting and just in general you’re thoughtfully creating this piece of work. What I was concerned with when I was making it was whether or not it was going to fit into those four-minute parameters. I was worried I was going to go long, but fortunately it fit. And I really enjoyed it, also because it meant working with Ryan again. We had such a successful collaboration on „Some Guy who kills People“ which I felt was one of the most successful collaborations in my entire career. And so I was eager, and I guess so was he, to kind of jump back in and just do another piece while the film is playing festivals. It didn’t really matter what it was. It was just the opportunity to work together again.

screen/read: It’s pretty easy to see that both films have been done by the same people. It almost feels as if the short was a part of the feauture as it looks similar, the tone is very similar, the style is recognizable. Which is quite fascinating.

Jack Perez: That’s interesting you recognize that. I know there’s a particular way I like to photograph my movies, in terms of the lenses that I choose and the compositions and the kind of lighting. But it all depends on the material. In other words, with „Some Guy“ and „T is for Tantrum“, the written material, Ryan’s scripts, inspire the shooting style. Which is something that I think is sort of developed naturally over time. Recently I was watching some of David Cronenberg’s last movies and I was thinking about how his particular style has developed over the years. I think there is a certain simplicity or purity to how he approaches the visual breakdown of his movies now. It’s just very boiled down or distilled in terms of the camera just being in the right place for the right moments with the right lense. Maybe that’s a factor of age because I think all of us early on, when we start out making films, try to make our films more stylized and replicate things we’ve seen in other movies to show and prove to oneself and the world that you can do that. So there’s a lot of flash in younger people’s movies, mine included. But as I’ve gotten older, I feel that my own particular approach is more distilled or precise. I don’t know quite how to put it. But again, it’s the written material that inspires the shots. It’s just less interesting for me to design a movie visually when the written material is not something I relate to personally and so I think my lesser films are those that were done either for a paycheck or for the simple pleasure of working. But with Ryan it’s just that we connect, our sensibilities are very similar. And so it’s sort of the perfect combination of elements. His words inspire exactly the kind of images that I want to create and so I think that’s why there’s a consistency between those two films. We’re simply on the same wavelength.

screen/read: It’s obvious that the two of you click and there will probably be more collaborations in the future.

Jack Perez: I hope so, I really do. We were talking about that.

screen/read: Now while „ABCs of Death“ is originally a horror movie contest, your short is not really a straight forward horror film but more of a black comedy. Do you feel connected to this type of genre, is that something you always felt like wanting to do?

Jack Perez: Yeah, I am a huge horror movie and monster movie fan, whether it’s 30’s Universal horror movies or the Hammer films or whatever it is. I did a terrible „Omen“-rip-off several years ago, called „666: The Child“ but I don’t really count that as a proper genre work. Other than that I haven’t really done anything horror myself. What I loved about Ryan’s writing was that there was this very specific black comedy aspect to his work. There are certainly strong comic lines in his writing but apart from that there is always a believability of character. These people always felt real to me, like real people. The comedy is on top of that and the horror is again on top of that. And that’s what I think makes his approach to the genre so interesting or appealing to me. That it’s based in character. And I think that’s really where all good direction comes from. You’re directing from a point of character. You’re trying to find out what is really going on in this scene, what are these people thinking, what are they feeling, what is the mood of the scene? And if the characters are real then the situations become real and it becomes very easy to visualize what this world is like. You don’t have that very often nowadays. In a way its more indicative of the middle 70’s and the films that I grew up watching and that inspired me to become a filmmaker. Particularly thrillers like „All the President’s Men“ or „The Parallax View“ or the original „Taking of Pelham 1-2-3“ or „The French Connection“ where you got real characters and real believable drama. And all the thrills on top of that. I think that’s what’s absent in so many genre movies today. It’s just that you don’t have people that you really care about. And in a way I think that’s essential for thrills to be thrilling. I think people forget that the degree to which you are scared is relative to how much you invest in the people in the movie.

screen/read: A remarkable thing about this only four-minute short is that it delivers characters who seem to have an existing background story that you want to know more about. Especially the father is someone that has the potential for further insight into what is going on with him. Same is true for the Sheriff in „Some Guy“.

Jack Perez: I agree. Of course that’s partly due to the actors that we had. Barry Bostwick’s portrayal of the Sheriff in „Some Guy“, even though he’s not the main character, is so full and rich that you can totally see this guy existing beyond the confines of this one particular drama, that he must go on to other cases somehow, that his life must continue. It would be great to find a way to continue that character in some other form whether it’s a tv show or another movie or something. He could be sort of an Agatha-Christie-type character, a Hercule Poirot kind of guy who strangely manoeuvers through various cases. And with the father in „Tantrum“ it’s been all up to Paul F. Tompkins. He’s someone I wanted to work with for a long time, and for a moment it looked like he was going to be in „Some Guy“ but then his schedule wouldn’t allow it. Probably my biggest concern about doing the short was not necessarily that I wouldn’t be able to cram the story into four minutes but I was afraid that the characters would be two-dimensional, that there really wouldn’t be enough time for you to believe that these are real people. And Paul’s take on the character of the father really helped. His performance was fairly understated and I supported that. If a character is supposed to be an asshole or whatever the stereotype is and you have the actor overstating one particular kind of personality, then it just becomes cartoonish. And while the violence I think can be cartoonish, and I prefer it to be a little on the funny side, the character stuff can’t be. Because then it just becomes dumb. So what helps in the short form is to not try to hit the nail too hard on the head.

screen/read: It’s one of the few shorts in this competition that keeps getting richer on repeated viewing because you can approach it from various angles. It works as a comedy, as a gory sketch to some extent, but it also works as a very condensed family character study, because you can see there’s something wrong with this constellation of people and one might guess what their development might be like in the future. So there’s a variety of persectives to deal with. Was that something you were aware of from the beginning?

Jack Perez: No. Actually it was there in the story, but if you’re looking at three or four pages of script, you don’t know how much is there. So just as in the case of „Some Guy“ I decided to approach it like a drama, to photograph it straight. I think that was a way of making it believable for me. Obviously there are certain stylizations in terms of how the lighting and the colors are designed, and some of the angles are a little more broke and gothic. But in general, when the characters are talking to each other, when they’re sitting down for dinner, I would just shoot it like a normal drama. And for me that was a way of making it at least bigger in my mind. But then again, even in four pages, Ryan’s sense of humor and that combination of a real situation, real characters with a sort of fucked up gory component and dark comedy was all still there. I think our sense of humor is definitely the same. Ryan has much more of a passionate interest in serial killers and slasher cinema. And for me I feel like that stuff is almost in support of what he does with his characters and dramatic situations. I think it’s just a rare combination. I didn’t know if anybody was going to like „Some Guy“ let alone „Tantrum“ because I thought the sensibility, the sense of humor was so specific. I didn’t know who would think it was funny, I didn’t know if people would laugh, I didn’t know if people would think it wasn’t gory enough. I mean, some people like their genre in a certain way, they like their horror movies straight, without any comedy, or if it does have comedy they want it to be of a particular kind. I was just happy to do something that spoke to me and I guess that’s true for everyone who does movies.

screen/read: Now apart from the father there’s the little boy’s character who is actually the protagonist. For a director it’s always a risk to work with children because you never know how believable they will be. Fortunately you’ve been quite lucky. What was working with the young actor like?

Jack Perez: Well, it was not the first time I’ve worked with children but that was another concern, because when Ryan wrote the script and said there’s a six-year-old kid, I was like, „Oh no.“ You know, the old saying of children and animals is what makes movies ten times harder is true. When you work with children, a lot of them are not well-trained, they don’t have a lot of experience, the way they act is very indicating and broad. And I can’t stand that because to me that kills the believability. But funny enough, the last child we’ve worked with, if not as young, was Ariel Gade in „Some Guy“. She was the exception as far as child actors go in a sense that she was such a mature person and a thoughtful actress. So when we found her I figured we got really lucky. And when Ryan wrote „T is for Tantrum“ I thought there’s no way we’ll be lucky again. But Griffin, who plays the boy, had a real quality to him. I don’t know if kids are different these days, but he had a maturity too, he was very relaxed and very confident and patient. And those are rare qualities in a little kid. So I just basically directed him like I would direct any actor. I think I was a little more sensitive to his age and perhaps I used direction that was more simplified than I ordinarily would do. But in general it was very easy working with him because we had to shoot the thing really fast and I thought his sort of take on how he decided to play certain things was right on. I guess what I related to was the panic that comes, specifically when he pulls his tooth out. It’s almost like Jeff Goldblum in „The Fly“, pieces are falling off of you, so it’s like, look, I’m dying here! As for me, I was a nervous kid and I had a fairly strict father. Those elements that Ryan wrote in the script were easily identifiable for me. So I wanted the kid to be sort of a mess and frightened and nervous and neurotic. And Griffin was able to do all that very simply with his eyes and I would just push him a little bit into one direction or another when I felt that we needed more of this or that. So I got lucky twice with child actors.

screen/read: How long did you work on the short including shooting and post-production?

Jack Perez: We shot it in a weekend, just a couple of weeks ago, and we cut it in a weekend. So actually it was just four days altogether which is obviously extremely short. But I’m sure it’s probably comparable to what most people have been doing for this contest. It’s amazing how many are entering this and how many are out there shooting movies.

screen/read: It’s interesting in general how the popularity of the short format is increasing due to all the new ways of distribution via mobile devices and the web of course. Compared to only a few years ago there are more short films around today than ever before while the format had been completely dead for years.

Jack Perez: You’re right, it was dead. But I think that streaming video and youtube and vimeo etc. are designed for the short film format. And people are accustomed to it being a reasonable amount of time to watch something.

screen/read: And then there’s the webseries as a whole new format becoming more and more popular. Is that something you would like to explore in the future as well?

Jack Perez: Oh yeah. I think it’s hard enough to get any movie made, any kind of story made, and so I would certainly never limit myself to any kind of platform. Webseries is very appealing to me. I look at it the way television was in the early fifties, when it was a new form that had yet to be fully explored. It’s still a novum, and if Ryan and I could find a way to get that going, that would be great because I think there would be way more freedom and we could probably continue with the kind of tone of comedy and horror that we’ve been doing with these last two projects. I think that would be a good home for work like that. And now that the broadcast quality, the streaming quality is so high, there’s no reason not to.

screen/read: I could easily imagine the two of you working with that format but as usual, the question is, where do you get the funding from?

Jack Perez: Yeah, I was going to ask you that [laughs]. Basically, that’s the question that looms, where’s the money? I’ve seen too many people put their dreams on hold because they’re waiting for all the money that’s going to make it happen. And I’ve done it myself. So today I would rather do smaller low budget work that I know is our own and can be done than wait around forever for financing. Because it does take a long, long time and it can be very soul-crushing waiting for money. So in a way it’s better to design stuff you know you can do for a couple of bucks yourself. I mean it’s always nice to pursue money, but it’s a gamble and I was never patient enough.

screen/read: There was quite some discussion on the boards of „Tantrum“ regarding the ridiculously small amount of $4000 that you gathered up by means of a crowdfunding campaign. And judging from the comments there, people obviously have no idea why you need money to make a short film look and sound the way yours does. So once and for all, let’s clarify all the confusion that seems to be there.

Jack Perez: Well, neither Ryan nor myself are Hollywood guys with money to burn. But for a certain technical quality there’s no way around spending some money. We didn’t pay ourselves, we didn’t pay the actors but what we paid for was the technology. Of course some could argue we might have shot this on a 5D or 7D, and I actually considered that, but we ended up shooting it on the RED. I wanted it to look and sound a certain way that required a lighting package and a gaffer with a grip truck and specific lenses and a sound mixer to record proper sound. And that all just cost money. There were certain art department things that had to be purchased to create the kid’s room and some minor props, like for the tooth fairy, even though it’s a small costume it still had to be purchased. We could have certainly have done it for less money but I don’t think it would have looked the same way. I think it would have looked cheaper and it would have been less effective. There’s just a certain texture and quality that comes from using finer optics, finer lenses. Which doesn’t mean you can’t do great things with a consumer camera as well. Because most of all it’s a question of care. And I think people can feel if something was made with care. Which is true for everything, whether it’s a car, a lawnmower or a toaster. It’s a certain thrown-together feel that makes many films less effective.

screen/read: I guess it’s also about making the most out of what you got, and „Tantrum“ as well as „Some Guy“ both look like you had more money than you actually did. That’s obviously a lessen you’ve learned over the years by doing all those rather low budget movies. Now speaking of your teaching job, is that somethig you encourage your students to do, going for the utmost effect no matter how much money there is?

Jack Perez: Oh yeah, I do, I do. You’re right, I never had big budgets. So from the very beginning I learned quickly. One of my first jobs was doing the pilot for „Xena: Warrior Princess“ in New Zealand. Nobody told me in film school there was such a thing as making your day. In other words I thought that studios just had a big pile of endless money and that basically the goal was to get it right. I didn’t really understand that you had to get it right but you also had to shoot eight pages a day, and if you didn’t, there would be consequences. I learned very quickly that the way to go is to think like an editor, to try to see the movie shot by shot in your head. And if you do that you start to cut away all the unnecessary setups, the coverage, where you shoot pretty much everything from a master to overs and close-ups so you get the scene from a lot of different angles. But that takes a lot of time and it wears down your actors. So if you can preconceive the movie and decide which moment happens in which shot, and only in this particular shot, then you can take the time to light it properly, shoot it properly and get the performances that you need and move on. That will not only help you to shoot the movie in the short amount of time that you have and with a small amount of money, but you will also be able to protect your vision. As most people know, this was Hitchcock’s whole method, to design a movie in order to have it cut together in a certain way, so that producers or studios couldn’t take it apart and put it together any way they want. Which is what happens when you don’t have final cut and you deliver a whole pile of material that could be interpreted any way editorially. And so thinking like an editor is really the approach that I teach, it’s my philosophy.

screen/read: What would you say how many minutes of footage did you end up with on „Tantrum“?

Jack Perez: My shooting ratio is probably three to one. I never do more than three or four takes, so I doubt we shot more than fifteen minutes of material. And there certainly wasn’t one shot that isn’t in the movie.

screen/read: If you imagine yourself looking back at your work in about ten years, what type of movies would you like to have made then?

Jack Perez: Well, there’s certainly a number of movies that I liked to make but didn’t get made and I think a lot of directors are like that. I heard a quote from John Boorman recently that was kind of bitter. He said, „Filmmaking is about all the movies you didn’t get to make“ [laughs]. But it’s true. So there’s a handful of films that I continue to try to make. Basically between 1997 and 1998 I did two movies back to back that I thought represented my pretty well. One was „The Big Empty“, a private detective story that was very much inspired by Robert Altman’s „The Long Goodbye“. And then „La Cucaracha“ which was a south of the border noir, reminiscent of „The treaure of the Sierra Madre“ and „Bring me the head of Alfredo Garcia“. Those were the types of movies that I wanted to make back then. They’re both about using the genre and then going somewhere else. And it wasn’t until last year when I made „Some Guy who kills People“ that I felt like I had returned to that kind of approach. So that’s what I would like to continue doing, genre movies transcending genre conventions. And I guess if I had to pick one particular genre then it would be thriller because I think that is the most cinematic. But as so often, nobody wants to pay for that.

[Thanks to Jack Perez for taking the time. His short film „T is for Tantrum” can be found on the official homepage of the contest or right here below. Voting is open for everyone.]

Recommended LINKS for further reading:

• Ryan Levin and Jack Perez join The ABCs of Death
• Ryan Levin and Jack Perez might join The ABCs of Death
• Ryan Levin talks Some Guy who kills People
• Screamfest 2011 features Some Guy who kills People

[Images: Battle of Ireland Films]

follow @screenread on twitter

Ob er sich damit als zukünftiges Mitglied der Guru-Gilde um Joe Dante und dessen Online-Filmschule „Trailers from Hell“ qualifiziert? Jedenfalls hatte Autor und Regisseur Tom Six hörbares Vergnügen daran, per Telefon einen gutgelaunten Audio-Kommentar zum aktuellen US-Trailer von „The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence)“ einzusprechen. Die von IFC, dem amerikanischen Verleih des Films, gerade online gestellte Aufnahme ist offenbar jedoch schon ein paar Tage älter, denn das Verbot der BBFC für den englischen Markt, auf das Six gegen Ende hinweist, wurde mittlerweile unter umfangreichen Schnittvorgaben aufgehoben.

[Mittlerweile bietet Bountyfilms UK/AUS die Möglichkeit, sich den Film gegen Leihgebühr online als Stream anzusehen.]

[Abbildung: Screencapture | IFC Films]

Weiterführende LINKS zu diesem Beitrag:

• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Stream auf Bountyfilms UK/AUS
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Filmkritik
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Totalverbot in Australien
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Audio-Kommentar von Tom Six
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Freigabe durch BBFC | 32 Kürzungen
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: US-Poster
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Zweiter US-Trailer online
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Erster US-Trailer online
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Teaser-Trailer für Australien
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2: Totalverbot in England
• Abscheulich, aber Kunst: Tom Six als Maler
• Interview: Tom Six sews up THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE
• Interview Dieter Laser: THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE and beyond
• THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE gewinnt bei den Scream Awards 2010

follow @screenread on twitter

Larry Cohen konnte sich an den Namen des Franzosen nicht mehr erinnern, der Interesse an den Remake-Rechten für „God told me to“ gefragt hatte. Ein paar DVDs von seinen Filmen hätte er ihm aber gegeben, und die hießen „Irreversible“ und „Enter the Void“. Der Franzose war also offenbar eher Argentinier. – Nun ist Gaspar Noé sicher nicht der erste Name, der einem einfällt, wenn man Cohens 1976er Horrorfilm um satanische Morde, Alien-Entführungen und unbefleckte Empfängnis vor Augen hat, doch gerade das macht den Gedanken so reizvoll. Bei genauerem Hinsehen ist die Verbindung zudem gar nicht so weit hergeholt.

„God told me to“ wäre Noés erster reiner Genrefilm und zugleich möglicherweise eine Rückker zu frühen Arbeiten wie „Carne“ und dem späteren Semi-Sequel „Seul contre tous (dt. Menschenfeind)“. In Larry Cohens krude-beunruhigendem Original morden harmlose Menschen wie ferngesteuert und erklären ihre Taten im Nachhinein mit einem göttlichen Auftrag. Im Verlauf des Films stößt der von Tony Lo Bianco („French Connection“) dargestellte Ermittler Peter Nicholas auf offensichtlich dämonische Hintergründe und sieht sich gezwungen, seinen eigenen christlichen Glauben und seine gesamte Existenz in Frage zu stellen.

Cohens aus der Bahn geworfener Polizeibeamter bietet eine Menge Potential für eine echte Noé-Figur im Umfeld des namenlosen Pferdeschlächters aus den beiden Frühwerken. Zunehmende Besessenheit mit der Folge gesellschaftlicher Entfremdung und dem Verlust der eigenen (ohnehin ungesicherten) Wurzeln – in der Figur ist eine Menge angelegt, wenn auch auf den Genre-Kontext des Films reduziert. Aber auch der Kontroll- und Identitätsverlust der unbescholtenen Bürger scheint außerhalb der engen Grenzen des B-Movies reizvoll.

Wie ernst es dem Skandalregisseurs mit seinem Remake-Plänen ist, darüber lässt sich derzeit nur spekulieren, denn neben Cohens Aussage aus der September/Oktober-Ausgabe des US-Magazins „film comment“ gibt es derzeit keine weiteren Statements.

[Abbildung: Screencapture]

follow @screenread on twitter