FRED Entertainment

January 24, 2011

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Jamy Ian Swiss

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — UncaScroogeMcD @ 5:51 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I chat with magician & skeptic Jamy Ian Swiss about magic, method, and mystery.

Be sure to visit his official site at www.JamyIanSwiss.com.

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Jamy Ian Swiss“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-jamy_ian_swiss.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

January 18, 2011

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Rebecca Watson 2

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 11:50 pm

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have another chat with author, presenter, and skeptic extraordinaire Rebecca Watson about wolverines, Daleks, astrology, and Callahan! And be sure to visit Skepchick.

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Rebecca Watson 2“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-rebecca_watson_2.mp3]

astrology.png

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & DC Pierson

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 10:12 pm

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I chat with 1/3 of the comedy troupe Derrick, writer and actor DC Pierson, about musical theater, improv, pop culture fails, and more…

Be sure to visit his official site at www.DCPierson.com, and check out his weekly comedy show, MAGIC BAG, live at SModcastle.

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & DC Pierson“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-dc_pierson.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

January 6, 2011

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & John Lloyd

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:06 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I chat with the legendary producer behind NOT THE NINE O’CLOCK NEWS, BLACKADDER, SPITTING IMAGE and the creator of QI, John Lloyd, about awards, curiosity, creativity, and more…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & John Lloyd“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-john_lloyd.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

December 15, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Dom Joly

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I chat with writer/comedian/documentarian/presenter Dom Joly, creator and provocateur of TRIGGER HAPPY TV, about Dark Tourism, celebrities trapped in the jungle, and much more…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Dom Joly“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-dom_joly.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

December 10, 2010

Trailer Park: Greg Fitzsimmons

By Christopher Stipp

The Archives, Right Here

Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp

GREG FITZSIMMONS – Interview

This is not hyperbole, just fact: This is the best interview you’ll read all year.

I never quite can tell what conversation will make the life of a freelance writer a little less depressing but conversing with comedian Greg Fitzsimmons about his book Dear Mrs. Fitzsimmons: Tales of Redemption from an Irish Mailbox was certainly a conversation that made me believe Greg could possibly be the most honest man I’ve talked to all year. While he and I talked about what it meant to write a book that was so unflinchingly funny in a way that only those with caustic senses of humor can appreciate there was also the sense that here was a man who had yet to accomplish things in his career, who had regrets, and who was willing to talk about wondering whether he would realize his goal to get an hour long comedy special. It’s hard to think that the man who has a successful podcast, Fitzdog Radio, and plays to audiences who know who he is and want to be entertained by his brand of funny would have any reason to look inward. But he does and he couldn’t have been more frank about the nature of comedy today, what it means to be a comedian on the road and how you don’t carry yourself if you’re looking for help, and what it means to have finally exercised the demons of the mind onto paper.

I think it would be deceptive if I didn’t state that I’ve listened to the man’s podcast since its inception, that his style of speaking to other comedians or to himself if he’s all alone just letting his thoughts flow and collide out of his mouth, the male equivalent of Mrs. Dalloway, a Virginia Woolf of comedic consciousness, but what you see below made me realize that he’s one of the few out in the world of entertainment that will actually answer a question in a straightforward and direct manner. It’s a rarity to have the ear of someone like Greg who doesn’t stick to talking points, who is willing to share something genuine, and for that I am grateful. The book is an amazingly hilarious charting of one man’s course through life, especially considering that anyone with ADHD will be forever grateful for the many pictures and letters which breaks up any lengthy passages, and it made me laugh out loud. It must sound so trite to say, but in an age when what passes for comedy is Mike & Molly there is comfort to be had knowing Greg is out there ready to take down anyone or anything at a moment’s notice in the same breath recognizing his own frailties as a man, a husband, a father. The book is wholly satisfying and more than worth the time it will take to appreciate how hard that this man has scratched, bitten, and fought to get to the middle.

Buy the book. Visit the man’s site. Read the interview.

519nzqmzp1lCHRISTOPHER STIPP: Greg?

FITZSIMMONS:
Yes.

CS:  Christopher Stipp.

FITZSIMMONS: Christopher, it’s a pleasure.  Thanks for calling.

CS:  Really, the pleasure is mine.  I just finished the book over the weekend.  Loved it.

FITZSIMMONS: I can’t tell you how nice that is to hear when I spent so long writing it and now to actually have people reading it just these last few weeks. Feels great.  Thank you.

CS:  You are welcome.  I had just finished Adam Carolla’s book a week prior, finding that both made me laugh while reading it, but yours was more personal,  profound in a way.  I would like to start by asking if you really had that in mind ““ whether you wanted to make this a raw look into your life.

FITZSIMMONS: I’m Irish so I was raised on literature.  I was an English major and I dreamed about being a writer since I was little.  My comedy is drawn to, not only is it dark, it’s story telling that’s truthful and so when it came to writing a book I knew that there was two directions.  We had four publishers bid on the book and they all had a different take on the letters.  I wrote a proposal and they each had a solid different split on whether or not it would be funny to show the letters, write jokes about them and then another publisher wanted the letters out completely and just write the narrative so the great thing about Simon & Schuster is that they wanted both, which is the right way to go. It allowed me to ““ there’s a chapter, it’s a sad part where dad dies, one chapter where I really put all the dad drinking stuff in – it just allowed me to then go through high school years where antics were funnier.  It let me do what I do in my stand-up, just try to draw people in with my truth and then relieve it with jokes.

CS:  I keep thinking about what part of the book I wanted to touch upon and I keep coming back to the moment when you were talking about Uncle Jerry. You were at your uncle’s house and I forget exactly what the circumstances were but he snapped,  he took one of your cousins, took him to a back room, made him stay there, the kid starts thumping his head against a wall and moaning while the rest of you guys then found it hilarious…

FITZSIMMONS: [Laughs] You must be Irish.  Only Irish people think that’s funny.  Other people think that’s horrible.

CS:  I am Irish.  And I found it hilarious.  I look at a show like Rescue Me and I find that dry sense of humor to be satisfying, where it seems all you do is bust balls and take people down a peg or two once in a while.  But in a healthy way if I’m in a relationship, you know?

FITZSIMMONS: Yes.  The Irish are committed to taking down hubris wherever we see it.  It’s a function of growing up. Historically we were made to feel like pieces of shit by the British so we police ourselves.

[Laughs]

CS:  And that brings up a good point. You reference it in your book that being Irish it’s part of your DNA and I’m almost, reading it over and over again in your writing, I’m ready to believe that it’s true.  That it is a nature, not a nurture, thing.

FITZSIMMONS: It is interesting because you always wonder how much of it is cultural and how much is innate.  Speaking of the Irish – our livers process alcohol must faster which is just a physical fact that has led to a certain behavior.  And I think the Irish are prone to depression and I think manic depression and I kind of feel like I have elements of that I keep myself from feeling too great because the fall-off is so painful.

I just of feel like if I clip the highs I won’t go as low and I think culturally it was a way of dealing with that swing we have. And I don’t know if it comes from the damp climate but I think there is just a sensibility to stay steady.

CS:  And do you find that, as you referenced, that you kind of fight those impulses?  You write you have never hit your kids.  Do you find yourself fighting with demons from the past when it comes to trying to correct the path it looks like you were on as you grew up?

FITZSIMMONS: I look at this book ““ I’ve had my midlife crisis the last few years and the book was definitely a part of that and, at the same time, it made it profound.  I can really look at the two acts of my life.  The first one is now over.  In the book I don’t have to look back anymore.  I don’t plan on looking back anymore.  I’ve got a beautiful wife who loves me and I’ve got two kids who are 7 and 10.  I live in Venice Beach which is not exactly where I want to live.  And I’m healthy and I just can’t waste anymore time worrying about how my parents raised me or whether or not I had too much conflict as a kid.  I’ve got it all in the book.  I can just lock it and move on.  It’s a very liberating thing for me emotionally.

CS:  I see that in the text.  Matter of fact, I just listened to your latest podcast where you broke down the Ten Commandments, which is an essential listen every week for anyone interested in solid humor, but you did it without anyone around you.  You were just riffing by yourself.  How do these ideas quickly materialize from thought to rant?

FITZSIMMONS: Well, on Friday, I forget which Commandment ““ but one of the Commandments got me curious like if we were to read the commandments ““ just curious to where we fall on them now.  So I riffed on them Friday night and then Saturday in between the two shows I was doing, literally just sitting in the green room during that hour and a half, in between shows, I just turned on my recorder and started riffing.  Then I hitched up with other comics and they were like, “Where’s the script?”  I go, “There’s no script.  Just go.”  And it just somehow ““ I think doing stand-up for the last 20 years has enabled me to bullshit for an hour.

[Laughs]

CS:  It’s a wicked skill.  It obviously allows you to land you writing gigs and what have you.  I know some people have asked you what do you prefer more ““ the writing or performing ““ but really though, what feeds the other?  What part of the brain is getting satisfied when you are locked in a room writing versus being on a stage and performing?

FITZSIMMONS: I think it has a lot to do with lifestyle.  In a perfect world I can be on stage in front of hundreds of people every night and trying new material and showing that insane outpouring of acceptance from the crowd and the danger of some nights not feeling that ““ that would be ideal.  But, the reality is I have to leave my family to go do that so writing allows me to stay home for months at a time and I do enjoy it.  I like collaborating with other people and I get very claustrophobic.  You know, ADHD, I’m a loaner and I need to go after a while.

CS:  I know you’ve touched upon it too in a podcast in that it’s a lonely existence ““ you’re off doing what you need to do to satisfy that sort of need to do something else and shake it up – but once you’re out there do you find yourself saying “I need to go home” or is more like you need to stay days away before that feeling goes away?

FITZSIMMONS: I think the grass looks greener on the other side of my yard.  I don’t even need to look at the neighbor’s yard to long for the other part of my life instead of the part that I’m in and I think it’s gotten a little unhealthy.  I feel unsatisfied in each one because I’m at the point now where I do a radio show, a podcast, I’ve got a TV deal with 20th Century Fox for a sitcom, I’ve got a game show deal with Nickelodeon, I’ve got the book that I’m still promoting and then the stand-up and after a while you go, you also have two kids and I’m so loaded I don’t see friends anymore because every spare moment I have I’m going to soccer practice and something’s got to give.

This book was a way for me to take all these energies and focus them on one thing; but no real plan, though, of where that would take me other than it would force me to have all of them work towards one thing and I think that that allowed me to make real progress and giving more clarity to what I want to do.

CS:  Not to be facetious about it but is it to get that what they call “f.u. money” ““ essentially say “I can do things on my own time” instead of saying, “I need to fill a need because I need to keep my kids in school, I need to keep my wife from having a job of her own?”  Or is it something more than just the money?

agenda_cap-1FITZSIMMONS: Well, for me, a lot of it is money at this point only because I worked as a kid ““ from the age of 12 on I was shoveling driveways, raking leaves, I was caddying by the time I was 14.  I was just always working and then through the time I was in college I’ve been doing stand-up but really found myself at whether it was stand-up or writing just giving it everything.  And, after 20 years of that you start to feel like ““ life starts to say f.u.. And you always have to work and I’ve always been pretty smart about buying real estate and for a long time I’ve benefited from not having to take just one job and it’s allowed me to make choices and in the long run even more beneficial to my career because I truly do what I want, what excites me. I think, and it’s the biggest cliché, but it really is true, that if you are doing what you love you don’t have to worry about the money.  It just always seems to work out.

But what would work well for me if this book did well enough that I could get another book deal.  I’m starting to get more and more advertisers to my podcast and I think that if my foundation was doing a podcast a few days a week it would make it real money and doing another book then I could continue to cut my stand-up down to just weekends or one night shows rather than 3 or 4 days at a time and not take any writing jobs, unless they were mine, not anyone else’s.

CS:  The idea of just working on weekends for standup…I was just reminded when you talked to Brian Regan, an amazing interview as I never gave that guy a second thought but now I want to check the guy out based on what you two talked about…

FITZSIMMONS: Now here’s a guy if you ask comedians whether you are talking to the biggest alternative comic or biggest performer, he’s the one guy that I think bridges all worlds of comedy and is so respected.  He’s clean, original, and makes you laugh.  Period.

CS:  He does and this is the funny thing ““ growing up as a kid I used to watch Mario Joyner’s Half-Hour Comedy Hour and John Mulrooney when he did Comic Strip Live.  It was decades ago but Brian seems like he still has the same passion for performing.

FITZSIMMONS: It’s passion but also craftsmanship. He’s one of these guys who, you talk about Irish, I think he comes from a family of about 6 or 7 Irish boys and he has that work ethic and aesthetic for quality without having any ego about it.  He always just puts on his tool belt and worked on his act and then underneath that is this silly, goofy, physical comedy and when you bring those two things together it’s magic.

CS:  Not to switch too many gears, I’m curious to know ““ the Howard Stern effect.  You reference him in the book and you reference how he’s able to goad things out of you that you normally wouldn’t have otherwise shared.  What is it about Howard that he’s able to get people to really open up?  Is it the power of how many people he’s broadcasting to?  Is it a skill that he has? What’s under the hood that makes him such a good interviewer?

FITZSIMMONS: It’s definitely not about how many people are listening.  That rarely crosses my mind.  It’s if you’re a girl in high school, and the guy with the ’69 GTO and leather jacket, who smokes, and asks you to go out on a date. You are going to go further with him than you would the nice guy”¦than with Brian Regan.

[Laughs]

You accept this.  You have a curiosity and something compels you to take the challenge to be around this person and all of a sudden you find yourself further than you would have gone and all of a sudden you’re blowing Howard Stern.

[Laughs]

CS:  It’s amazing how many people he’s able to ““ amazing interviews ““ he’s almost the Playboy of radio where, sure, you have the naked women but you sure as hell would subscribe just to get the articles.  I think he’s unique and I just don’t understand what he’s able to do and how he’s able to make all these people open up.

FITZSIMMONS: Well, you know what it is?  You learn very quickly.  Anybody that comes on the show is a fan of the show.  It’s very rare that someone comes on because the publicist pitched a really hot project.  I’ve seen Howard get pitched guests for his show and I’ve seen what interests him and what doesn’t.  If there’s not a story he doesn’t really care about how big the project or how big they are.  There has to be something that he knows he can tap a nerve with.  The person is going through a transition, whether it’s divorce or getting off drugs or changing careers – something that he can stir up and get some real juice out of.  I think that he then is able to make you realize you can’t deflect.  He’ll call you on it.  Just by being one hundred percent truthful ““ first of all about himself ““ everything he’s embarrassed about ““ then it’s, “OK, that’s how we play in this room.”  And so if you try not to answer questions, that’s when he attacks he does that as a recourse for not playing by his rules in his sandbox.

CS:  Do you try to do that?  Now that you are on the other side and you’re talking to someone like a Brian Regan or talking to comics on the road, are you trying to take some of that or do you just go in there with your own intentions in mind?

FITZSIMMONS: I certainly do it differently than Howard because I come from a different world than he does.  He had a lot to prove when he was starting out.  He felt very changed by his mother and he wanted to be the outrageous guy and would ask tough questions of famous people.  Where I come from it’s about – I think defiance about Catholicism, and I don’t want to be impolite necessarily – but at the same time from doing stand-up for so many years, I gauge my radio show the way I would assume a comedy crowd would be receiving the show.  In other words, if I feel like it’s boring, I will attack my guest.  I’ll cut them off.  I’ll tell them they are being boring and say things like, “Can you say it any slower?  Can you drag this out more?”  I’m very direct but I never offend a guest and it’s just because I pay attention to them.  I’m only being truthful.  I have no tolerance for people that indulge themselves a story they’ve told a million times.  I don’t want that kind of show.  I don’t want your prepared jokes.  I just want you to answer questions in an honest way.  I learned that from Howard.  I think the motives may be different.

CS:  He choose you ““ I assume he had some hand in having you have your own show on Sirius.

FITZSIMMONS: Yes, he asked me on the air one day.  He said, “Do you want to have your own show?” and I said, “Yeah.”

CS:  That must have been wholly gratifying.  Was it just that fast or was it…

FITZSIMMONS: It was that fast.  It was literally just, “Hey, want your own show?”  And at the time he threw a bunch of people on at first and of all the people ““ you got people that have full-time shows ““ Bubba and Ferrell ““ but of all the people he threw up there the few that remained are the guy who claims he was abducted by aliens and somebody who’s an alcoholic.  I’m a 44 year-old guy with a receding hairline and two kids who doesn’t drink or do drugs and somehow I have a show that has traction on his network.

CS:  That is pretty remarkable.  It must have been completely flattering to think you could have a place on his network.

FITZSIMMONS: When I first got the show I knew it was a lark.  This thing could go one, two, three episodes and then it could politely and, well, I knew it could go six months. By that time you kind of  know if you’re dead in the water.  And so I felt ““ my dad did radio his whole life.  He was one of the most successful DJ’s in New York.  I really dug in and certain opportunities in your life that you are very aware at the time could be very meaningful if you put the effort into it and if I don’t put the effort into it, it’s really going to show so I always respected the opportunity.  I took a lot of good notes and was able to grow and learn the skills of broadcasting just by being on.

CS:  Was it, I don’t want to say terrifying, but was it?  Let’s say today is my first day and I’m on the radio interviewing you, I’d be out of my mind thinking how do I balance both trying to be funny but be informative but also be a good host and interview someone properly.  Were you filled with anxiety by being a comedian and wanting to be funny or were you past anxiety at that point?

FITZSIMMONS: No, lots of anxiety every single time.  The only thing that makes it work is I took a two year acting program at the Neighborhood Playhouse and learned the Meisner Technique where you really just put every thought out of your head except focusing your attention on your partner.  Listening in the audition, looking at them, being connected to them.  And I find with interviews, not worrying about my manners, and not worrying about my agenda, I can get out of the way of the interview.  Then I can be really fast and I can be really clever and can be really gracious and the only thing you have to learn is jump breaking for commercial and try to put some bits in there, recurring bits in there and all that, but as me interviewing, even the monologue, it’s about just having the confidence to get out of your own way which I learned in stand-up.

You are not a good stand-up until you are not nervous and you don’t care.

You don’t let them judge you.  It’s like you just do it and do it until you are in the zone longer and longer each time.  So, it’s still terrifying to me because I don’t know how long to pause and I don’t know how much to ramp up.  So the only thing that keeps it organic for me is like that thing backstage it kind of helps to be the comic for the green room because I see a smile and say, “OK, this is working.”  And from there I think that there’s more meat on this bone and I’m going to keep going on this part.

j_jol_01_0103_11_v6CS:  And I’m reminded about the riff from last night just going off, you were knocking the Commandments down, one after another.  It was almost felt like, as we listen to you, you were thinking, “While I’m at it let’s just go through the rest of this and see what I can make out of it.”

FITZSIMMONS:  I was on the Internet that day and I just had a number next to each one.  It was like, one, no gods, then two, father and mother, and I had thoughts on each one and had done it on stage a couple of times so I felt it was starting to gel a little more.  That’s the great thing about doing a podcast on the road.  I’ve always got a page of bullet points or new ideas I want to talk about, like Sarah Palin is like a rodeo clown.  She’s comic relief during a bad economy.  Just one image and you go on stage with it and explore it.  You just keep throwing stuff out and I record every set and then by the weekend it’s a little more gelled so the time I get a podcast usually like Saturday, I’ve already done two or three sets.  So now I’m doing a podcast and it’s totally fresh and brand new but it’s also got a little bit of form.

CS:  I’m reminded about last week, too, I was listening to Howard’s show and he was talking to Gilbert Gottfried and Gilbert had no interest in being a mentor to anybody.

FITZSIMMONS  Yeah, I loved that.

CS:  And I’m reminded of you when you are talking to these comics and these people who I have never heard of but I hope they come into their own and become people that I do hear about, do you find that this is something you wanted to do in talking to these comedians that are relatively fresh on the scene?  Is it your intention to be sort of an elder statesman, as it were?

FITZSIMMONS: No, not at all.  There are a lot of comics I find on the show that are original and earnest and I feel like even if they don’t make it big, here’s somebody who I think I can help and want to help.  It always comes down to would it make a difference if I gave this person advice.  And when you are working with a guy who is drinking at every show, he doesn’t change a word of his act, he’s more concerned about after the show.  I’m not going to waste a second of my energy on to try and say to that guy “You know you can transition this better” but when I see somebody who’s young, going over their notes, they are nervous, they care, then I feel like what’s the glaring thing about their act that I can point out ““ one given note, if taken, can save that person from having to figure it out on their own.  But, only if you really listen to it, which is hard.  I love coaching people in anything that I feel I might have some skill in.  I don’t know why but I love kids.  I love teaching them sports.  I love working with anybody that is, like you said, is earnest, and if I am in a position to help them, I love that.

But I can’t stand the sense of entitlement that a lot of young comics have today.  They see you, I go through my set and run out because there will be people that come up and say “You don’t remember me?” and I say “When did we meet?” and they say, “I don’t know, it was probably…”  It’s like, “You motherfucker….’I don’t remember’…F.U….I don’t owe you anything.”  Just because you have happened to see me, just because I may be above you on the ladder that doesn’t entitle you to be rude or have some expectation that I’m going to”¦..I don’t f’n know you.  You want me to what?  Call a club.  Tell them I got somebody to open for me?  And then if you bomb I look bad?  Where’s the upside for me?  I never once asked a comic to bring me on the road with him.  I used to drive for hours to go to clubs and showcase and then get hired by the club.  Now it seems everyone wants you to do them a favor.  And you don’t even know them.  I think the landscape has changed like that.  When I’m on the road and can connect with somebody who is quality, I love it.  But, the idea of being a mentor is really preposterous.  I’m still trying to learn how to do stand-up myself.

CS:  To that point, I think it actually comes down to the work ethic.  I think myself I’ve been told you do good work and the work speaks for itself that you’ll eventually be recognized for it but some people now want to jump that line and think it’s more about style.  And that if you have enough style you can move forward, and it certainly works in some areas, but where do you fall on that whether work for it’s own sake will get you noticed or is it about self-promotion, is it about putting something in front of somebody and saying, “Recognize me! Recognize what I do!” Is there a line there?

FITZSIMMONS: Yeah, that’s what I struggle with every day.  Self-promotion today is such a pure drain of energy and time and if you go half-ass you might as well not do it at all.  At the same time if you don’t do it at all, you’re screwed.  People are bombarded with marketing and promotion and they think they can just go on the road and just kill and think that that’s going to build up a following ““ those days are over.

The guy who had a regular TV show, no matter how bad, those guys will outdraw everybody except, literally Brian Regan and maybe two other guys besides him that don’t have weekly TV exposure or guys that have movie exposure.  I think clubs booked by talent and with a certain editorial in mind.  So I try to find a way of marketing myself that is more natural.  I like Twitter because I can send out one or two tweets a day and maybe one is a joke and one is about a book signing tonight and I always have a fear, a paranoia, that people are going to see me as just another pushy person who’s trying to get somewhere in a rush and more often than not, I don’t do enough.

I’m ashamed of marketing myself.  I find it distasteful and I feel like I’m proud of the show I do and I’m proud of what I do.  The thing about being a perfectionist is I don’t put out as much content as I should.  I really do worry about that.  I hired a webmaster.  I have a publicist right now and I have a producer on my podcast which most people don’t have because I need to hand stuff off so I can focus on the creative side of things.

CS:  It’s really fantastic.  Nothing but quality.  What’s more I respect that if you’re busy or if you can’t do it you allow yourself to miss a day.  You’re not out to put out a half-assed product and that comes through.

FITZSIMMONS: Like Twitter, the podcast seemed like the way to put content out that wasn’t…that wasn’t promotion for the sake of promotion but it was content that worked as promotion.

CS:  Do you find that people responding positively?  I don’t know how many followers you are up to now but do you find it’s a positive thing for you to use?

FITZSIMMONS: I have like 17,000 people that follow me on Twitter.  It’s not like in the days of the Myspace page when I had way more than that but I would say three quarters of them were probably spam addresses, whereas on Twitter these are people that are actually reading your shit.  It’s crazy.  I do a couple segments on my show like Overheard, where  people sending things overheard, and I get a hundred of them a week and I get people coming out to my shows and it used to be way back when it was because I had a show on MTV and that went away, and then it was Best Week Ever and those people come out…but the podcast by far is the biggest draw because people are listening for the whole hour, every week, and it may not be the same numbers you get on Stern but they are really there to listen to it.

CS:  And advertisers?  Are they responding well to the fact that you are such a top rated download?

FITZSIMMONS: Yes, it makes a difference and also that and the demographic they are going after. I think that’s like Adam Carolla and Marc Maron and myself are the young male demographic that people watch.  So I’m actually surprised that there aren’t more advertisers.  I know it’s a podcast and I really think that they will. Like right now, there’s half a dozen that work with most of us and breaking through to that next level is what everyone is trying to do now.  What’s hard is that if someone is not familiar with podcast it’s hard to turn them on to the process of it ““ people are techno-phobes and are just used to getting their content the way they get it.  You really have to go after the tech-savvy and the people who have iPhones and really care about fresh content as opposed to listening to albums on their iPod.  I guess the short answer I guess is I think that the business model isn’t there yet but I think that the audience is growing and seems like everything is in place for it to grow much faster and we’re not yet in the clutches of the studio system ““ still completely independent meaning we can keep all the money, which is nice.

CS:  There is only so much ““ how many ProFlowers bouquets can I buy this week ““ how many downloads can I make from audible ““  and you are right it does seem like a very tiny ““ all these companies ““ feels like there should be a lot more because, demographically, like you’re speaking, there’s always these other people advertising.  I’m amazed that it’s just these core half a dozen.

FITZSIMMONS: I just got a couple new sponsors.  There are some that I won’t take.  I’ve had offers ““ pornography ““ and then junk companies where they want you to write the ad and want you to work off commission on what you bring in.  I’m not interested in that.  There’s a recipe of every thousand downloads you get a certain dollar amount.  That’s the only way it really makes sense.

CS:  Is this thing growing on its own?  Is it taking away from what you really want to be doing, and that’s your act, your comedy?  Is it not even significant to even talk about because the technology is so in its infancy that it’s not really taking any of your time to deal with?

78855250FITZSIMMONS: When I was coming up in New York and then LA, I always did a lot of alternative comedy because there’s always one room that I would try to work every week or every other week because it would force me to do 10 new minutes.  You are standing in front of a crowd that was there every week so you couldn’t do something you’ve done before and it forced me to come up with new material every week.  And, the podcast is the same way.  I try not to look in the paper for what my monologue is going to be.  I try to really look at either my life, which is pretty limited ““ two kids and on the road a lot there’s just so many airplane jokes and my kid threw up jokes ““ for me where my head is at is the existential midlife crisis type things.

Like the 10 Commandments ““ thinking about the big picture and trying to express my anger or confusion about things that are in my heart right now and I think that trying to do topical stuff is fine as long as it’s a springboard into something bigger.  I was talking to a friend about how much of your identity is a collection of attributes, whether it’s fine wine seems to go along with classical music and good cigars and Brooks Brothers, no matter what walk of life you’re from you think you have much more taste in a universal, objective way and give yourself credit for having more choice in taste than you really have.  It’s more that identification with a group and social climbing and that’s something that seems to touch a nerve.  When I bring that up, people get incensed.

Even my own wife, who swears that, no, it takes a certain intelligence and worldliness to appreciate a single malt scotch that’s good or bad.  Even she couldn’t really wrap her head around the fact that if she was from another world it would be much more about whether or not your wear a sarong that denotes a different cast system and you may not be attacked with sticks for it and that everyone has their agenda with their fashion choices or culinary choices or where they vacationed.  Something like that is a show and whether or not the show goes that way that’s where I’m going to start it and 9 out of 10 times it goes in a completely different direction.  I do the same thing with sand up.  I’ll explore an idea and if there’s something to it, I’ll continue it on stage or vice versa.

FITZSIMMONS: If I had what Brian Regan has, which is that work ethic, I’m going to write it all down, I’m going to organize it and then like Louis CK is doing, what Chris Rock did, and what George Carlin did, which is every year do my one hour special ““ I lay it down and then start from scratch.  I wish I could do that.  I have ADHD and every set is like a drunken knife fight for me.

[Laughs]

I jump from thought to thought and talk about how the spotlight above me is humming and driving me crazy and I never quite get through a stream of consciousness that’s not interrupted.

CS:  Do you think you have it in you, let’s say if HBO came up, or Comedy Central, said, “We want you to do an hour show.” Would it motivate you?

FITZSIMMONS: I’m dying to do a one hour show.  I know I have that hour.  I’ve actually done it on tape.  I made a spreadsheet with all the bits and I just did an act a few weeks ago in Minneapolis and I recorded three shows and I have the hour.  Every minute is something that I’m proud of, that I worked on, and that I know will stand up in a theater but I’ve been so caught up in this book that I haven’t even pursued it.  But the one hour in the past, there wasn’t enough interest.  It’s a lot of money and there aren’t a lot of buyers like there used to be.  HBO is only interested in things like George Lopez, somebody who already has a show or big name.  And then Comedy Central is a place that I would have more luck with but maybe they are pursing someone younger.

So, I’m kind of dying to do it the same way I’m dying to do this book.  There’s nothing I want more now than to do the one hour special so that at the end of my life  I can sit on my porch with 14 Emmys on the mantle and my book on the shelf, with my one hour special on top of the TV.

CS:  I’m amazed that it hasn’t happened. It almost seems like the cliché from your own show that you like just being in the middle and but that’s where you’re currently caught.

FITZSIMMONS: Yeah, I was on the road for two years straight and that’s a lot of road work.  And when you do that you lose all the momentum if  you’re not out there ““ you’re not a comedian anymore because a lot of comedians get off the road as they start writing gig and you never seen them on the stage again.  I would fly out on weekends…I never gave up on it but the perception was the same.  It’s held me back a lot.  It’s just the reality of it.

CS:  Really?  Even with all the road gigs you did?  Hasn’t the tide turned?

FITZSIMMONS: No.  I think I’m back in a place of having more visibility as a pure stand-up but the fact that, even writing a book, even having a TV deal, it all works against you in a weird way.  I know it sounds contradictory saying guys like George Lopez, but he got to where he was with stand-up.  I got jobs more because of my writing skills.  And it just gets spread kind of thin.  “Oh, he’s the guy with the podcast.”  “He’s the guy on Stern.”  But, not always, “He’s the guy who used to work stand up non-stop for 20 years.”  I think my goal now is to do as much as I can and put my main energy into the podcast and stand-up because they seem to work really well together.

Do a one hour special and get to the point when you can go out one night or two nights as opposed to longer and it’s just a matter of believing it will happen and making it a priority, which I didn’t do before, and that’s one of the things I talked about when I did the book.  I was focusing all these different energies because I know I put a more concerted effort in this book than I ever have in my life.  It taught me about how much time I was wasting and things I gave up doing this book that I certainly didn’t miss.  I don’t audition anymore.

I am not very good at auditioning.

I have a low batting average and a huge waste of time to drive up to the valley and rehearse and it makes me feel like a loser.  There are certain things I had to give up while I was writing the book and I’m not bringing back into my life.  Stand-up is the most truthful thing you can do in our society today.  I think there is probably more freedom of speech with stand up than almost anything else.  You can choose to do it the way you want to.  You can do theaters, you can do clubs, you can just do it on the internet.  You can do it on TV.  Whatever your sensibility works best, you have the option to do it that way.

CS:  Do you find people respond the same way?  In terms of comedy, can you be, I guess Brian Regan would be the best example, that people respond to the same comedy he has been doing for decades, are you finding that you can be as free?  Are audiences different than they were, 10, 15, 20 years ago?

FITZSIMMONS: I don’t know.  I never really thought about that.  I always just walk on stage and walk up to the mike and my goal is ““ I truly have no idea what I am going to say when I walk up to the microphone.  I have no idea what’s going to happen in the middle.  I have bullet points I want to get to but some nights I don’t get to any of it.  I know I’ve grown in some ways and in other ways I think I have gotten, I don’t know if I’ve gotten weaker, but I was on Bob and Tom this morning and they pulled out some comedy clips to play them on the air from 15 years ago and it was jokes, just bam, bam, bam, good jokes.

I think back and I don’t write like that anymore and I do miss it.

It was really more of a varsity sport back then for me.  It was like, “How can I type this up?  How can I land a tagline to this?”  As opposed to now it’s much more about, “How can I talk around an idea that I think is interesting to keep the audience with me through choppy waters “˜cause they might have been uncomfortable with the topic but we all came through it together?”  But there’s a part of me that would like to do more of that.

CS:  I am intensely curious to know ““ you bring her up in the book, you said that Erin wants to put the brakes on what you can say sometimes.  Do you find that the deeper relationship you have with the wife and the kids, that the impulse is to drag them into the comedy in a way ““ is there an impulse to keep that at bay?  Is there a back and forth of what you can and can’t talk about?

FITZSIMMONS: I think it helps me make more mature decisions about what I should be talking about.  I am reading this book right now called The Razor’s Edge.  Have you heard about that?

CS:  No.

FITZSIMMONS: It’s kind of a classic and it’s about this guy who is born in the upper-class in Chicago, 19-teen’s and it’s a fast read. It explored what it was like to be a part of that whole scene of Paris of that time.  His friends tell him, “What are you doing?  You’re wasting your life.  You’re not working.  You’re not going to the country club.  You’re not working on your golf game.  You’re throwing your life away asking all these questions about God and evil.  These questions have been asked forever and you think you’re going to solve them?”  And he says, “Well, if they’ve been asked forever maybe because there’s no answer they are the only questions that are supposed to be asked.”

So, I don’t know if you could say embarrassing but maybe divulging more about my family than what would make people comfortable I can be forced to have to take on bigger questions and more important ideas than anger at my child misbehaving or frustrations about not having sex with my wife as much.  That kind of stuff has been pretty well mined and I think, even for me, I kind of transcend those kinds of things.  It’s my marriage, my kids, and thinking about how can I deepen my relationship with my wife.  How can I be a more supportive non-judgmental parent to my kids and not feel frustration?

And I think with my stand up it’s the same thing.

How can I go deeper with my stand up?  At the end of my career can I look back and be proud of the topics I was talking about on stage?  I look back at some of the material and I absolutely cringe.  I talked about those jokes before but I also did a lot of very ““ I don’t want to say offensive ““ but tacky topics ““ not topics ““ tacky premises.  So, I think it’s good to cringe when you look back at your work because it means there must be some kind of growth going on and I just really do feel that after 20 years I have no idea the right way to do it ““ it’s a work in progress.

CS:  And I think that’s a good a place to end it as it could be.

FITZSIMMONS: Hey, I can’t go any deeper than that!

Laughs.

December 3, 2010

Holiday Havoc: An Evening With John Hodgman & Ken Plume III

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:06 pm

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

holly.jpg

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

Continuing my annual tradition, I’ve got an in-depth conversation between minor television celebrity, PC, and literary trivialist John Hodgman and FRED’s own me, Ken Plume. I present this audio feast for the ears, as one titan of culture and one Ken Plume touch on social networking, A GAME OF THRONES, fan expectations, Jeff Goldblum, the strut of dreams, & more.

Be sure to pick up a copy of Mr. Hodgman’s most recent book, More Information Than You Require, also available in Audiobook Form

havoc-hodgman.jpg

Download “An Evening With John Hodgman & Ken Plume III“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-john_hodgman_2.mp3]

Check out the rest of this year’s Holiday Havoc – and past Havoc – HERE

holly.jpg

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

If you enjoyed this post, please take a moment to DONATE

holly.jpg

Trailer Park: Andrew Jarecki of ALL GOOD THINGS

By Christopher Stipp

The Archives, Right Here

Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp

Andrew Jarecki – Interview

You need to see this movie.

I know, the din from all the Oscar bait is much too loud to ignore but, I implore you, do what  you can to see an emotionally evocative film that takes the “ripped from the headlines” to a whole new level. At the center of a very real murder mystery is Ryan Gosling who plays David Marks, a man who may or may not have killed his wife. Whether he did or not is where this film departs from so many procedurals where the outcome is the one thing that’s needed by an audience who has to know, unequivocally, whether the accused did it or not. You will not get that satisfaction here as the real pleasure comes in the form of Gosling who is downright riveting in an Oscar worthy performance portraying a man who is beset on all sides by ambition, by love, by raw passion.

The brilliance comes in, you understand, by Jarecki who never once wants to make this man seem like a monster who is obviously capable of murder, capable of making his wife vanish. Jarecki, who directed one of the greatest documentaries of the 21st century, Capturing the Friedmans, brings that same sensibility here as we focus on what is in front of us and not what we can infer. It’s the attention to detail, of making this period piece actually feel like the time in which we’re experiencing these events, that elevates this from a simple drama to a dynamic entry into an already congested list of films that need to be looked at when it comes time to handing out little gold statues. From Frank Langella, Kirsten Dunst, even Kristen Wiig the performances are uniformly spectacular.

Jarecki spoke with me recently about the film and its production. All Good Things is out today.

all_good_things_movie_poster_01CHRISTOPHER STIPP:  Thank you for talking with me.  I just got a chance to see the movie over the weekend and loved it.  It was a great film and one that, just reading the synopsis it seems like I’ve seen this movie a dozen times before but this one really felt fresh.

JARECKI: It’s hard to come up with a one liner to describe this movie, I have to say.

(Laughs)

CS:  What made you think that there was a movie to be made out of this story?

JARECKI: I’ve always been fascinated by monster stories.

Often because when you see someone who has been described in awful ways and in the past has been painted as a one dimensional figure, when you get more deeply into it you find that that person is much more complex and human than you originally thought.  That was certainly the case here and as I started to research the original story, the story about Robert Durst, I found so much depth to it that it was clear to me that this was something that had never been told ““ even though there’s been thousands of pages of newsprint written about the story and there had been hours and hours of tabloid television shows about it over the last 30 years – nobody had a picture of what might have happened, particularly early on in this relationship.  In the early stages this was a couple that was in love and who had great hopes and plans for the future and nobody ever sets out to have this path in their lives but it happens that they go on different journeys than what they had expected.

CS:  I know we spend a lot of time following Ryan Gosling through this. He actually provided some depth to this man but you position it to where we actually like him on some level, to listen to what he is saying.  Was it tough for you to break that shell and to make him more of a ““ you might not feel great sympathy towards him – sympathetic character?

JARECKI: Yes, I think you have to feel his sense of humanity.  And I also think that, in terms of characters in film or drama or literature that are not instantly appealing to us, there is always that feeling that even if we don’t actually love this person as long as somebody that we love loves that person.  So once you know that Kirsten Dunst’s character is in love with this man, which she clearly is, we have stakes in that relationship ““ that we care what happens.

CS:  Did you have any influence with Marcus Hinche and Marc Smerling who helped co-write the story?  Were they the ones who crafted this script by themselves and came to you with it or did you help shepherd it in any way?

JARECKI: We all started the movie together and then we all went out ““ the very first step was that we all went out researching the story and getting into the relationships and discussions with people who had known the families and done business with the family and were friendly with the couple and had been part of the investigation.  We really met over 100 people who had something to do with the story, the case and the couple.  In the course of that we began to develop an idea of what the movie would be, which we worked on together.  So we started developing a script together.  The director, certainly in this case because I had initiated the contact with my partner Marc, and then we put Marcus into it, it was pretty democratic and free flowing process.

CS:  I didn’t realize that your last full length film, Capturing the Friedmans, had come out over a half decade ago.  Were you just waiting for a movie like this to come along?

JARECKI: It’s probably taken me a long time to observe the story and try to get a take on it because this is a story that had never been made into a movie and, in fact, even when it’s been explained in one way or another on television they always take a piece of the story because it’s very hard to convey 30 years of history and these three presumed murders over 30 years of this very large block of someone’s life.  It’s just a difficult thing to do and a lot of the time is compressing the history.  You can say, well it Andrew it took you 5 years to make this movie, which it really did.  It took about 2 years to write the screenplay and then it took about 3 years to get the movie made.  Aren’t you glad I didn’t make you sit through the whole 30 years?

(Laughs)

For me, I’m not in a hurry that’s for sure.  I know it would be fun to work on a movie very quickly.  I think I might have that in me but historically I’ve wanted to do all this homework first.  So as a kid, maybe it was ingrained into me by my father who has a lot in common with Sanford Marks.

CS:  It’s funny that you bring that point up.  I am reminded of a great film I saw this year which was The Red Riding Trilogy. It spans years and years and years but it’s broken up into 3 films.  Was it ever a thing to you that if it wasn’t a movie this maybe a mini-series for HBO?  They might like something like that, or did it ever come to a point where you thought that maybe this could be longer than just 90 minutes?

JARECKI: I remember when we made Capturing the Friedmans. We had a 5 ½ hour version of the movie.  And I have to say it was extremely logical.  I was living in Rome at the time and we showed it to groups of people and people never said I’m done after 2 hours.  They said, can I get a glass of water and sit back down.  So, I think there is always a much fuller version of the story that you can tell but at the same time I think the challenge here was to try, in a relatively short period of time, convey a lot of emotional history and so it felt to me that we could ultimately get it to the length of a feature film and that was probably the right way to do it.

CS:  Obviously, it worked.  Talking to Frank, Kirsten, and Ryan, did you convey that to them or did you lean on them as actors, let them read the material and act the way they saw fit?

JARECKI: I direct a lot of theater and I’m a big believer that the actors bring a huge amount of the work we put into the character and it’s very much a collaborative process and if you cast the actors right you are lucky to be working with actors who have the capabilities like Ryan and Kirsten and Frank and some of the other people.  We took some big risks in this movie like we cast the part of Deborah Lehrman who is in her 20’s when we meet and her and then later is in her 50’s.  We cast this 25 year old girl, Lily Rabe, because we thought she could do it ““ play the character and play the same character 30 years later and I think she did.  She transformed herself.  Physically, her body becomes decrepit.  She’s fundamentally different.  She has a bad hip and she walks funny and a lot of these things happen in a way that I think is true to the way people age and how people evolve.  So we were really lucky to have this group and I think lucky that they all took their jobs very seriously.  Then we also did something unusual.  Somebody said “I guess you’ll be wanting some rehearsal time” and I said, “Yes, about 2 months.”

Everybody really laughed at that and they said, “This is not a play.  These actors are very busy and they have other jobs that they’re doing and it’s going to be crazy and to even consider the possibility that you would have them in New York for 2 months before you start shooting a movie.”  So I said, “Alright.”  Then I called Ryan and I called Kirsten and they said “When do you want us there?” and I said,  “How about a few weeks ““ that would give us 2 months to rehearse?” They said OK.  So I realize that was fortunate because they were in a position to do it ““ they could have been in the middle of some other movie but they weren’t.  They were excited about that idea ““ about giving the movie the rehearsal period that it needed.

CS:  How did production on the film translate?  I know documentary filmmaking obviously would lend something as to how you shot this film.  Did you find it was a smooth transition?

600full-andrew-jareckiJARECKI: For me I was comfortable working with the actors.  I like actors a lot.  I knew what they would bring.  I thought a lot visually about how we wanted the film to look.  We joined forces with the cinematographer that had lots of experience because if I had an idea for how I wanted to say something I wanted someone that had the chops to say that’s not going to work or I have an even better idea.

Michael Seresin shot Angela’s Ashes, Midnight Express, a Harry Potter movie, he is an extraordinary talent and someone that helped us visualize the story so that everything was speaking the same direction so that the style of the movie was visually was properly married to the subject.

CS:  Yes, it’s gorgeous.  It literally is like walking into another decade.

JARECKI: Yes, thanks.  The period was so important ““ just getting the period right without getting hokey.  Michael Clancy who is the costume designer ““ not only did he go way beyond the regular costume ““ he had a huge collection of his own vintage 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s, were original pieces ““ he said the problem of early 70’s is that things can get pretty clownish.  People tend to overdue 70’s.  The 70’s was a clownish period ““ like what John Travolta wore.  So that period that was properly done but was reserved enough without looking ridiculous.

CS:  It was very subtle.  That comes across.

JARECKI: And in Kirsten’s case ““ the early 70’s ““ she’s very knowledgeable herself and she knows that it’s a big part of the character that here’s a girl that comes from this modest background in Long Island and comes to New York City and meets this incredibly wealthy, young man from this huge real estate family and when we first meet her she is in this very simple sundress and clearly nothing appropriate to wear to dinner at Gracie Mansion and within a few years she has become much more sophisticated and see her style evolve as she gets more confidence in herself.  And that was an important part of the evolution.  Even Ryan’s character.  He rebels in some way but at the same time he becomes more strapped into the jacket and tie that his father wants him to wear.  In the beginning we see him as a much more free spirit.

Trailer Park: Yony Leyser of William S. Burroughs: A Man Within

By Christopher Stipp

The Archives, Right Here

Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp

Yony Leyser – Interview

Watching a documentary on William S. Burroughs is kind of like opening your mind up like a flower waiting for a bumblebee to come and pollenate it. You know that in order to carry on, you need to have someone assist you in continuing down the path of evolving as a species. Burroughs was that bee. He was slight, unassuming, but wielded such a power as to be completely and totally dangerous.

I hadn’t ever come into contact with his work until having this documentary, crafted together by director Yony Leyser, put in front of me to see exactly what kind man he was. Forget about what the media has built up around the perceived mystique of the man, what you think you know about him, as this documentary is informative as it is, at times, nonlinear. Burroughs’ sensibility lives in this documentary but it’s completely accessible. Through the wonderful lens of archival footage, interviews and excerpts from the man’s work this film is a loving testament to the enduring power of Burroughs’ strengths as a writer, a poet, and as someone acutely aware of what was happening in the world around him. I had a chance to talk to filmmaker Yony Leyser about the making of this movie and why John Waters is so delightful.

William S. Burroughs: A Man Within is now playing.

william_s_burroughs-_a_man_within-1288295074CHRISTOPHER STIPP:  Yony, it’s so nice to talk to you.  I saw the movie over the weekend and was mesmerized by it.

YONY LEYSER: Great.  Thank you so much.

CS:  You are so welcome.  Unfortunately, I’m not a hipster and can’t say I knew of his work and never interacted other than seeing Naked Lunch.  How did you come upon the idea that this would be a documentary that you would want to do?

LEYSER: I read his work in high school.  I grew up in the suburbs of Chicago and Naked Lunch was the first thing I picked up.  It blew my mind. It opened a whole new world to me.

CS:  I had no idea that the notion of the beats was manufactured, that it was something the media crafted and ran with.  You sort of explore that a little bit.  Did you feel that Burroughs ever felt comfortable with being labeled being part of that scene?

LEYSER:  I don’t think he was, no.

CS:  As you look on it and his work was it hard getting this film off the ground?

LEYSER: Oh yes, absolutely.  I started to film in the spring and had no idea what I was undertaking.

I worked on this film for many years.  I actually started in Lawrence, Kansas and then moved to New York.

CS:  I was very taken by the amount of footage that you were able to get from various sources.  When you were doing the project, were people giving you these things or were you finding these things on your own?

LEYSER: Yeah, a lot of it was just in people’s basements or junk drawers.

CS:  Really?  They thought there was just no need for it, put it in a collection somewhere?

LEYSER: Yeah, it was like, “What am I going to do with it?”

CS:  I would imagine that there would be some sort of writing museum that would love to have it or some school that would love to own it.  With regard to the process of making this film — did you go to film school or did you just have a camera and say, “I want to interview some people about Burroughs?”

LEYSER: Yes, I got a camera and started shooting and had no idea it would turn into what it turned into.  It was really all his friends that pushed it forward.

yoniCS:  Was this an ongoing process?  Did you have another job?

LEYSER: Yes, I had jobs and enrolled in school so I got my diploma while I was making the film.

CS:  So on weekends, were you going places to get this done?

LEYSER: Yeah.

CS:  And I have to say this and I think he gets a bad rap but I’m a John Waters fan.  When he’s talking, the mind of that man is brilliant in the way he sees things is very matter of fact, no superfluousness.

LEYSER: He’s brilliant”¦”¦Â  He nailed everything as soon as I asked.

CS:  He makes it so people like me who are not familiar with his work become familiar, like I get it.  I understand.  The other people you got to interview for this, Laurie Anderson, Patti Smith, were they just as receptive as John was?

LEYSER: I think John was unusually receptive.

CS:  Did you find the narrative for the film difficult in terms of knowing where you wanted to start?

LEYSER: Yes, I knew I didn’t want linear form but Ilko Davidov, our editor, helped with that a lot.

CS:  When you started the editing process when you were like, “OK, I got what I needed, I have what I have.” How much footage did you have by the end of this?

LEYSER: I had about 100 hours and cut it down to an hour and a half.

CS:  Where do you start on a process like that?  Did you find you had to come up with the narrative yourself?

LEYSER: I let his friends tell the story.  There wasn’t much time for me to edit but having a big time editor was very helpful.

CS:  Were you sick of Burroughs at the end of this?

LEYSER: He was such a complex, multifaceted, person.  Not only him but the influencers that he influenced.

CS:  I noticed that the project started or at least had some part of this movie began on Kickstarter, which I have become very familiar with this year.  It seems to be a new way for filmmakers to get financial support without having to go to a man in a suit and tie.  Did you find that was a real positive way to help get your film financed?

LEYSER: Yes, it was awesome.

CS:  Were you looking for a lot?  5K?  10K?

LEYSER: We weren’t looking for much but raised 150%.

CS:  Was it knocking around any film festivals beforehand or did this go straight from finished product to getting it into their hands?

LEYSER: It was a part of the film festival circuit extensively.

CS:  I’m curious to know from this standpoint, now that you have this finished film, are you looking ahead to do another 5 year project?

LEYSER: I have two films in the works but can’t talk about them yet.  One is a major documentary and one I hope  doesn’t take me 5 years.

CS:  And the technical aspects of filmmaking”¦was it sort of a learn as you go, get the best camera you can find?

LEYSER: I worked on a film set and I had a bunch of sound equipment.

CS:  And the technical aspects, like framing, it’s quite wonderful to look at.  I would never has assumed that this would be anyone’s first film.  It’s a high compliment to you.

LEYSER: Thank you much.

CS:  Do you feel like you have lots to learn or found out that filmmaking really isn’t that difficult?

LEYSER: I just went head first and learned so much like a doctorate degree.

CS:  Any sort of ideas of lessons you took away from this film?  Did you think you knew everything you knew and this bolstered what you thought of the man or did you come away with thoughts of, “I didn’t really know what I thought?”

LEYSER: I learned every day.

CS:  Why do you think the man’s work still endures to this day?  It’s amazing that the man is still alive in pop culture to this day.

LEYSER: I know.  He was the first to do it and anyone who is the first is going to be remembered.

November 16, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Jonathan Coulton 2

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 6:12 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I chat with Troubadour 2.0 Jonathan Coulton about off-roading, gongs, Giants, cruises, and more.

You can purchase all of his discs, plus other merch – as well as partake of more sonic goodness – at www.JonathanCoulton.com. While you’re over there, be sure to check out all 52 Things – and pick up his CDs. And pledge your life to him. The talented bastard.

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Jonathan Coulton 2“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-jonathan_coulton_2.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

November 6, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Mike Phirman 2

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 6:34 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I chat once again with one half of the musical comedy duo Hard ‘N Phirm – Mr. Mike Phirman – about scary robots and autotune…

You can pick up his album at www.MikePhirman.com

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Mike Phirman 2“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-mike_phirman_2.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

November 2, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Tom Scharpling 2

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 8:46 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a another chat with writer, performer, and the host behind WFMU’s legendary Best Show, Tom Scharpling, as we awkwardly promote chocolate & character actors…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Tom Scharpling 2“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-tom_scharpling_2.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

October 23, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Marian Call

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 5:26 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a chat with singer/songwriter Marian Call about the road, social networking, and poor Delaware.

You can visit her official site at www.MarianCall.com

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Marian Call“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-marian_call.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

October 20, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Dan Schreiber

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:36 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a chat with writer, comedian, QI Elf, and co-creator/producer of THE MUSEUM OF CURIOSITY, Dan Schreiber, about fried rice, travel, volcanoes, and comedy.

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Dan Schreiber“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-dan_schreiber.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

October 19, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Rebecca Watson

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 8:05 pm

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a chat with author, presenter, and skeptic extraordinaire Rebecca Watson about judges, beverages, knives, aging, and karaoke. And be sure to visit Skepchick.

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Rebecca Watson“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-rebecca_watson.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

October 18, 2010

FROM THE VAULT: An Interview with Dom DeLuise

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:52 am

vaultinterviews.png

Conducted ~early 2003

One of the great joys about being an interviewer is actually going out and, when the wind is blowing right and the stars align, getting a chance to speak to your childhood idols.

Growing up on the heavy side, one of those idols was Dom DeLuise. Be it a Mel Brooks comedy, teamed with Burt Reynolds, or pointing Kermit the Frog in the direction of Hollywood while deep in a swamp, I couldn’t get enough of him. He was, and remains, one of my favorite screen comedians. Rare is the actor whose very screen presence lights up even the dullest of flicks, and many a piece of mediocre celluloid was redeemed by a little shot of Dom.

He’s played Caesar (“Wash this!”), a hypocritical public watchdog (“Texas has a whorehouse in it!”), an agent (“Alligator!”), a sidekick (“Captain Chaos!”), and even a crow named Jeremy… With over 50 years in the business, he’s done everything from Broadway to TV, nightclubs to movies… And back again.

I got a chance to have a conversation with Dom a few years back, one which lasted many hours and touched on all aspects of his life and career. Like many a great storyteller, a conversation with Dom was rarely linear – you never know when an anecdote or a fascinating tangent will pop up, and I largely gave Dom the reins to recall and relate whatever he wanted to, when he wanted to… With many a gem uncovered in the process.

Unfortunately, the sheer magnitude of the piece meant that its transcription was often put off in favor of smaller, quicker pieces in the intervening years – much to my dismay, as this interview was something I’d desperately wanted to share. Finally, the piece was finished.

I would like to note that, since we spoke a few years back, some of the people we discussed in the interview have since passed away, including the much-missed Anne Bancroft, as well as Dom himself.

After we had finished the interview, Dom remembered our conversation about my Grandmother, who had grown up in the same neighborhood at the same time as him. Dom asked for her address and phone number. A few days later, my Grandmother called to tell me she had just received a phone call from Dom – and the two had reminisced for almost an hour. A few days after that, she received a signed copy of one of Dom’s cookbooks, as well as a signed 8×10 – two pieces of kindness, above and beyond the phone call, that sum up what a charming, big-hearted man he was.

My Grandmother passed away a few weeks ago (at the time of this writing). Here’s the inscription Dom wrote…

dombook.png

For more info on Dom, be sure to visit his official website at DomDeluise.com

lucyline.gif

KEN PLUME: Am I correct in my understanding that you were born in Brooklyn?

DOM DeLUISE: Yes, I was born in Brooklyn, on August 1, 1933. And my mother was an Italian immigrant, as was my father. They spoke Italian and I learned English. As soon as I was born, I was heard to say, “Is it ready?” And it was pretty good. I had a brother who was 12 years older than me, and he was Nicholas. And my sister was 8 years older than me, and we’re still talking to each other after all this time. My father was quite amazing because he came to this country and he never spoke English and he was illiterate. And the lovely thing about him was that he ended up buying a gigantic house with four apartments in it, which my sister now owns. It was pretty wonderful because my family lived in one apartment and then all the other people were there… we would visit in the hallways, you know, so it was very communal. And there was a gigantic basement that we used to make wine in, and can tomatoes in. When I say can, I mean we would put them in bottles.

I was taken to the movies at about, I think… I don’t know… seven. I was pretty old. And I saw in the movies that first time, when Jimmy Cagney killed Humphrey Bogart. Cagney was going to the electric chair, and Pat O’Brien told him to fake that he was scared – “I want you to scream and yell when you go to the electric chair.” And Cagney said, “I’m not gonna do that.” But he did make believe he was scared for the sake of the dead end kids, so they would straighten out their lives and he wouldn’t be a hero. I think it was Angels With Dirty Faces. And I said, “Ah! That’s what I want to do!” I remember so clearly going to my first film and there was this gigantic picture, and I was so thrilled and I thought, “Oh, wow, I want to do that.” I just immediately knew. I was just able to talk and walk, and I thought, that really is beautiful.

PLUME: Had you shown any inclination towards being an outward person prior to that?

DeLUISE: I was pretty outward, yes, I was… first of all, I was the youngest. And because my mother had lost other children – that’s why my brother was older than me. The reason he was 12 years older was my mother lost three children in between. And then came my sister, and then they lost another child, and then I came… so my mother lost four and then she had the three: Nicholas, Ann, and then Dom. And because I was little, and survived, I have a feeling that they fed me carefully because of the history of my other brothers and sisters that didn’t make it.

PLUME: Lavished more attention on you?

DeLUISE: A lot of attention was lavished on me, right. And then I know that I was fed carefully. And that influenced me… That’s the reason I’ve always been roundish, you know. And I went to school and I was a fairly good student. I was a little dyslex… dyslex… I can’t say it. I have it, but I can’t say it.

PLUME: Dyslexic.

DeLUISE: There, you said it. I had problems learning to spell, and my sister didn’t. She was very, very good about that. And to this day, I will call her long distance – she’s in Long Island and I’m in California – and I’ll call her up and she’ll spell something for me. I mean it’s… I mean, I write books and I have written two cookbooks and I’ve written 9 children’s books, but I still call her up and ask her for some help with the position of letters and words. But a lot of famous people who have accomplished a great deal are also dyslexic, so it’s all right.

PLUME: Do you think it’s a sense of over-accomplishing to compensate?

DeLUISE: I’m not sure why it happened, but I know that there was a man named John Kennedy who had it. And a lot of people can… like, my son has it, and has trouble reading the words. His eyes don’t go along the line, and they pop around, and so he has trouble reading. But he performs all the time. And he’s very skilled about looking at a script that’s two or three pages long and then he memorizes it very quickly and will often perform it very well, since he has the skill of pronouncing a lot of words. So he’s very smart about it. I didn’t hit it. I didn’t know what was wrong. You don’t have it, right? You don’t have that…

PLUME: No.

DeLUISE: Because you have a script and you… it’s not what I do. Not a skill that I have. Especially when you were young, and as an actor you want to read scripts cold and you were hoping to read them well, and that was not a skill that I had. But after I listened to it once to get the gist of it, I had to go over and study what I could read. When I went to school, I had just a block to walk to school, but I remember clearly being a mama’s boy. I was home and my mother left me at school, and I was very, very upset that my mother was going to leave me in this room. I remember saying, “You’re gonna leave???” That was very vivid to me. That day of my life is very vivid. I had an opportunity to go to a high school called the High School of Performing Arts, which was in New York. It meant that I had to leave my house and go about seven blocks, put a nickel in, go down in the subway, travel for about an hour, and go to the High School of Performing Arts.

After I got out of the subway, 46th Street and Broadway, I went to 46th Street and 6th Avenue, which is a block and a half, and there was this wonderful school where I could have voice, diction, and dance, and acting and stage craft. It was a thrilling experience to be focusing on how to perform. And when I was in my junior high school, which is what you go to before you go to high school, I was in a show called The Christmas Carol, and I played Ebenezer Scrooge the first time. A bumbling man who was very sweet, and Scrooge learns how to be a better person by looking at him. And then the next year they did the same play over and I played Ebenezer Scrooge, and I still have the script. It’s a huge part, you know. And I was a young big kid, and I played Scrooge and I also made my own tombstone! It said Ebenezer Scrooge, and I had to make this. And I said, “What name is on there? Ebenezer Scrooge! Oh no! Are these the things that will happen, or the things that might happen? Tell me!” The ghost was played by Anita Calaio – she was underneath that black cloth – and I said, “Oh, please!” And then at the end, we all bowed and they closed the curtain and I came outside, and the whole school screamed with approval, and I was so aware of how nice it was to work really hard and have them cheer for me. It was wonderful.

I had to audition for the High School of Performing Arts because they wanted to see if you could, in fact, carry on and, you know, act a little. So my brother, who was older than me and not as wise as I thought, said the thing that I should learn was Shakespeare. So here I was talking, just barely talking when I was a young person, and my brother said you should learn “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women are merely. They have their entrances and their exits and in their lives they play many parts. The mewing puking child…” And so here I tried to do… can you imagine, a Shakespeare thing? Then they said, “Now we’re going to improvise. Find that book on the table and there’s a piece of paper in it, and just ad lib.” So I looked at the book and looked around and I said, “Oh, a letter!” And I took the piece of paper and I said, “If you don’t pass your…” I was reading the letter. “If you don’t pass your audition, you’ll never get into the High School of Performing Arts.” And you know that I got into it.

Now, three years of my life was spent at the High School of Performing Arts, and it was a wonderful experience. Every day getting on the train. Every day going to school. And every day having some lesson in voice and diction. So I was saying ‘earl’. I mean, I was saying “cup of ‘earl’.” And they said, “Oil.” “Oil? Really?” And then they said, “It’s correct to say ‘bahth’.” And I was saying ‘baath’. And I said ‘bahth’. “I’m going to take ‘bahth’.” So for a long time I said, “I’m gonna take a ‘bahth’, and if you don’t want me to take a ‘baath’, I won’t.” I was learning to speak eastern standard speech. Oh, it was difficult. It was new to me, you know?

PLUME: What was your favorite aspect of performing? Was it acting or voice or singing?

DeLUISE: Assuming the other characters was thrilling to me. It was so exciting to not be me. You have to be other people. We had an exercise at school where we had to be an old person. I only knew people who were old and had an accent. So when I started to do an old person, other people got up and they spoke correct English. English correctly. And when I spoke as an old person, I got on the telephone and I said, “Make-a sure you come-a home, and don’t-a be afraid in-a New York, and take care and goodbye and God blessh.” And so I spoke with an Italian accent, and they said, “Why did you speak in an Italian accent?” And I said, “I don’t know!” And it was because, of course, everybody I knew… my mother was-a talked-a like this, “Dom-a, please,” you know? My father said, “Dom-a, come over here.” Everybody had an accent.

PLUME: It was your frame of reference.

DeLUISE: I had no idea that an old person could speak without an accent. And it was so odd because I remember clearly it’s one of the things I did and then I figured it out. I said, “Wait a minute! Everybody I know who’s old does that!” I mean, it wasn’t apparent. And I met some wonderful people who I still am friends with. There’s a guy named Bob Ellison, who became the writer/producer of Cheers, Taxi… he’s just amazing. We didn’t see each other for a while. In fact, he became friends with me when I was young. We were all young. And damn you for asking me to tell you my life story.

PLUME: How can I make it up to you?

DeLUISE: Are you recording this?

PLUME: Yeah.

DeLUISE: Oh, I’m so glad. Maybe you could play it back to me and I can find out what I left out. I would sit with him – and I’m jumping ahead – I needed some scripts, and we wrote eight pages of sketches where I did a character called Dominick the Great, a magician that speaks with an Italian accent. What a surprise. And then I did interviews and I interviewed a werewolf. I paid him $200 for each sketch, and he now is a producer for television.

PLUME: Is this the character you would perform on the Gary Moore Show?

DeLUISE: Exactly, exactly. And that… the strange thing is I was doing that when I was 18 years old. And later, when I performed for Reagan at the Ford Theater where Lincoln was shot, I performed the same jokes I had written when I was 18, and I was older, and the people from the White House were laughing. They said it… you know, I mean it was an amazing thing to think that I made up a joke… I held up a ball and I said “I’m gonna make-a this ball disappear. I’m gonna say tree, and the ball is gonna be gone. One two tree. Ladies and gent…” and I let go of the ball, and it was on an elastic, and as I let go of it, it went over to my left and popped over my right shoulder, and then it would recoil and then pop again on my left side, and then it would pop again… so you’d see the ball go bong, bing, boom, boom, and then it was hanging in back of me. So that’s the same thing I did at the White House, and they laughed. I said, “They’re laughing at my 18 year old creation of a, you know, joke.”

And anyway, so what happened was, I also noticed that there was a man named Dan Melnick. And he was a guy who had a low voice and was very good, and he became the president of MGM. And then I went to school with another girl named Suzanne Pleshette, who became the wife of Bob Newhart, and we’re still friends, and we went to high school together. And uh… it goes on. Joseph Wishy, who became an impresario, and would bring Russian dance companies to this country… Have touring companies. So it was very sweet to see people that I went to school with becoming accomplished. When you’re young and you go backstage, and you say, “May I see Danny Thomas?” or some person and they say, “Stand over there at the moment. Keep the door clear.” And now, I say, “Can I see Anne Bancroft?” – who’s one of my best friends… or Mel Brooks or Carl Reiner, or anyone who does a show, they say, “Come in, come in. Get out of the way. Make room for Mr. DeLuise.” And it’s so wonderful to have the ability to go backstage and have somebody say, you know, “come in,” because you know the star of the show. All because of the fact I knew a lot of people who were interested in the theater.

PLUME: Did the high school prepare you for life after high school?

DeLUISE: Ha ha! I’m not sure about life so much as um… as just the idea that you wanted to be in a theatrical… you know, my interest was theatrical.

(continued below…)

October 17, 2010

FROM THE VAULT: An Interview with Frank Oz

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 11:54 pm

vaultinterviews.png

I first met Frank Oz on the set of Muppets From Space, in January of 1999. We got on quite well, and made plans to do an in-depth interview sometime in the near future.

Towards the end of the year, our schedules finally met in the middle, and we had quite a long conversation, marked by Oz’s complete candor about his time with the Muppets, his move into directing, and much more. I also learned that Frank Oz swore.

Like a sailor.

It was an endearing verbal affectation that sticks out in my memory to this day. Here was an iconic performer who brought to life a fair chunk of my childhood – Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Cookie Monster, Animal, Grover – and he cussed. A lot.

From the vaults, I present to you my chat with Frank Oz…

lucyline.gif

KEN PLUME: You were born in England. When did your parents move to the States? Why did they?

FRANK OZ: I was born in Hereford, England in 1944. We moved when they had an opportunity to get a visa, about 1950. My Dad always thought Europe was a bit too small for him. He wanted to see the United States…

The typical immigrant story. He wanted a better life for his children, too. He always tried to get the visa and it didn’t come up. Even before the war he wanted to come to the United States.

At that time you had to have six months residence supported by a sponsor in the United States. He finally found a sponsor in Montana, bizarrely enough, so in 1951 he took my brother and I and my mom, who I think was pregnant with my sister, from Belgium to Montana.

PLUME: What was your father’s profession?

OZ: He was a window trimmer, like for Ladies’ apparel stores.

PLUME: Your parents were both puppeteers, weren’t they?

OZ: Right.

PLUME: What was his profession in the States?

OZ: He stayed a window trimmer. He was a freelance window trimmer.

PLUME: So the puppeteering was a hobby…

OZ: It became a hobby, right.

PLUME: Did your parents foster puppeteering within the family?

OZ: No. My brother had no interest in it whatsoever and my sister didn’t have interest in it till later years. My brother was into cars. It was something that I latched on to because it was a way to please them and it was a means of expression for a shy, self-effacing boy.

PLUME: Did it come naturally to you?

OZ: I have no idea. In the beginning I imagine you’re a kid, you don’t know what the hell you’re doing. It took awhile. At that time, it was only marionettes, not hand puppets.

PLUME: Where were your interests growing up?

OZ: The usual things: girls and sports. That was the interest, mainly. I never wanted to be a puppeteer. I stopped puppeteering when I was about 18. I puppeteered when I was eleven years old to 18 to make extra money to go to Europe, which I made half of and my parents gave me half.
I bought a tape recorder and some stuff and went to Europe for three months when I was 18. The puppeteering was only there as a hobby. I wanted to be a journalist. When I was 19 and after I had spent about a year in college, Jim Henson asked me to come out and try puppeteering for awhile.

PLUME: Where did you first meet Jim (Henson)?

OZ: They have these puppeteers conferences, which I never used to go to… ever…except for this one I went to when I was 17 years old and Jim happened to be there.

PLUME: Jim Henson wanted to hire you right out of high school, right?

OZ: He saw what I did there, and I was working with an old friend of mine named Jerry Juhl, so he hired Jerry, who went on to be the writer for the Muppets. Two years later when I finished high school and was in college, he asked me to come out to work part-time with him. I tried to continue my studies at CCNY in New York, but that lasted only about a semester or two. I continued on with the Muppets. What was going on was too exciting.

PLUME: What were your first impressions of Jim during that first meeting?

OZ: He didn’t have a beard. At that time I was 17, so he must have been about 23. He was this very quiet, shy guy who did these absolutely f***ing amazing puppets that were totally brand new and fresh, that had never been done before.

(continued below…)

September 17, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Phill Jupitus

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a chat with comedian, poet, cartoonist, TV quiz show captain, and author of GOOD MORNING NANTWICH, the great Phill Jupitus, about his book, the future of radio, and Sarah Vowell impressions…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Phill Jupitus“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-phill_jupitus.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

August 31, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Adam Savage

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 1:34 pm

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a chat with the man, the Mythbuster, Mr. Adam Savage, about ghost chairs, zen painting litmus, and how to slice time…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Adam Savage“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-adam_savage.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

August 27, 2010

Trailer Park: Yael Hersonski

Filed under: Interviews,Trailer Park — admin @ 4:45 am

By Christopher Stipp

The Archives, Right Here

Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp

Yael Hersonski- Interview

Just when you thought that everything has been unearthed about what happened to Jews in the holocaust filmmaker Yael Heronski unearths documentary footage, shot by Nazis, about life in a Warsaw ghetto. It was mere months before this very same ghetto would be purged of its residents, the remainder still around shipped off and sent to their certain death.

a_film_unfinishedWhat Heronski found in the footage that was once thought complete, the movie on display here showing the lengths to which the Nazis wanted to craft their own narrative that stretched the truth about what was happening inside these claustrophobic walls of half a million Jews that were contained within 3 square miles. From retakes that had poor, starving children looking just as forlorn and despondent as they did the first time they were put in front of the camera to the indignities that women had to suffer as their nude bodies were objects to be film and exploited, as if they were cattle to be assessed, are things of nightmares. Yael wanted to make a movie that went beyond outrage, to showcase the pure and unrepentant horror that were these men who took this film, and she did exactly that.

Praised with reviews from the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times this is no ordinary documentary about the atrocities of an army bent on complete ethnic cleansing, this is a singular portrait that embodies the kind of inhumane and cruelty man is capable of. It may very well be presumptuous to say this is the kind of film that belongs in history classes everywhere but it does. It’s a historical document that cuts through the Hollywood glamorization of a time that time would like to forget but never will.

Oscilloscope Laboratories, the production company putting out A Film Unfinished and headed by Beastie Boy Adam Yauch, recently gave the MPAA a piece of its mind when the rating body saddled the film with an R rating. A sad decision that prompted Yauch to respond: “This is too important of a historical document to ban from classrooms. While there’s no doubt that Holocaust atrocities are displayed, if teachers feel their students are ready to understand what happened, it’s essential that young people are given the opportunity to see this film. Why deny them the chance to learn about this critical part of our human history? I understand that the MPAA wants to protect children’s eyes from things that are too overwhelming, but they’ve really gone too far this time. It’s bullshit.”

Yael spoke with me last week and we talked about the film which is now open in New York and Los Angeles and will be opening wide as the weeks roll on.

Check out the movie’s official site for release dates about when it will be coming to a theater near you.

Senior Programmer David Courier (L) and Director Yael HersonskiCHRISTOPHER STIPP:  Thank you for fitting me into your schedule.  You are probably all sorts of busy.

YAEL HERSONSKI: Given that I am leaving on Sunday, I am trying to use every minute here.

CS:  I just read what the New York Times had to say about the movie.  That must be very uplifting.

HERSONSKI: Yes.  I was very fortunate to have this kind of a review.

CS:  I would like to just get right into it and talk about, now that the finished product is now out and people are responding to it in a positive way, how did you approach this project and how were you the one to put this together?

HERSONSKI: I think it was after I decided to do a project on the Holocaust not only because of the Holocaust’s inhumanity and inconceivable horror but mainly because it’s marked the beginning of the systematic documentation of the Ghetto.  I thought of it also as a case study of the images we’re bombarded with today.  I think there is a kind of numbness today and we cannot emotionally digest what we are actually seeing.  We are watching, but I don’t think we want to see anymore.

I was thinking, too, of where it all started and I think it all started there, at the point of documentation.  Then I decided to approach one of the most prominent film producers in Israel, of documentary films, and he gave me a list of footage I should watch.  To just watch and try to understand the most familiar footage they used.  And that film was among them.  And when I saw it, I was shocked.  I literally experienced a kind of anxiety not only because of the images but also because I knew some of them and saw them in so many other films I was never able to understand what I was seeing because it was out of the full context.  Have you seen the film?

CS:  Yes, I have.

HERONSKI: OK, so the scene in which you see the naked women going into the ritual bath, at the Polish museum they called the footage “Ritual Bath.”.  I thought it is hard to believe for me today but when I saw it then I couldn’t realize how anxious and terrorized and terrified these women were because it was titled like an objective documentation of real life inside the ghetto.  Being able to see the whole sequence, however, I suddenly saw much more.  It was the same image but I couldn’t and didn’t realize that these women were having something very close to an anxiety attack and they had a good reason because they were naked and surrounded by uniformed men who were pointing cameras at them.  It was a terrifying experience and I think in learning about how these images were made shifts the place of the horror to its real place.

CS:  And that leads into something I was going to talk to you about.  I know there are moments in the film where moments are done again, and again, and again, and to my eye I can’t see what they were doing so many takes for. It’s as if they were obsessing over a shot they wanted to get perfect.  Did you try and understand the actual filmmaking process of what they were obsessing about?

filmunfinishedHERSONSKI: I have no idea.  Eventually when we see the children just gazing at the window shop of the meat store that’s all they had to do was just stare.  Period.  We had something like seven takes of this same action.  I don’t know what their problem was.  Maybe the lighting was not satisfying.  I have no idea.  But one thing is clear here.  This is one of the most amazing moments I read in the protocols of the Nazis with the camermen.  It was written in German so I read it slowly.  “It was very difficult for us to shoot this film…”Â  And I’m sure, at this point, I’m going to read an emotional confession and the next line is, “because we didn’t have enough lighting equipment.”Â  It was difficult because they didn’t have enough film equipment.

These guys were occupied with the lighting and all the small details on how to make the shot and just not to see ““ the ability to see the ability to watch something – but not do see.  Inside the ghetto they were filming but they are not realizing, not able to realize what it is they are perpetrating.

CS:  And it strikes me, you talked about it earlier, their preoccupation with something that was completely irrelevant ““ the level of suffering at their own hands ““ that they are meting out.  The men who film this are just completely numb to what they’re doing and I think it’s almost that you can just extrapolate it to the larger picture of Nazism in general. I am just astounded that they were able to do this without any sort of moral hesitation ““ for lack of a better word.

HERSONSKI: I think it’s such a different situation that we not only know, but can imagine, that I preferred not to judge the cameraman ““ not to judge what he is saying because the protocols are what they are.  I didn’t change one comma, one word, from what he was saying in the very strange phrasing in German that he used.  I don’t know and I don’t want to guess what he knew or didn’t know or whether he realized what he was doing while doing that and what he realized just after the war.  I just don’t know.

I guess that if it was not conscious that he’s part of something ““ if it was not in his conscious level, maybe a subliminal – because in fact, after the war, he did change his profession and he was driving to the east to the film archive.  Somehow he managed to find his own cameraman, take all his reels, and took them home and burned it.  This is not a series of actions of someone who feels innocent.  I feel that they cannot understand the reality of living inside the ghetto, therefore I won’t bother even to imagine how it feels to film there.  But for me what was quite astonishing to think about was the fact that 1942 was one of the last years of the ghetto and was one of the most horrendous.  100,000 people died from hunger and diseases and you could see buildings that were full of families really enduring hell.

The reality is that some of this is documented in film like raw material for their own audience.  The action of filming.  It was one of the most extreme examples of propaganda filmmaking.  I don’t think it’s completely alien from contemporary filmmaking that we practice as it is an art skill.  When the war was over people laughed and when people stopped suffering around the world we moved on.  Easily, I can tell you we live in such an area.  The filmmakers documenting the suffering of the Palestinians for a long time are doing so now and I’m trying to understand what does it mean to go to the occupied territories to document suffering of others and go back to your comfortable life.

What does that mean?  Many films actually make their point but it doesn’t change the fact that people are still suffering.  So I am just raising questions, I don’t have answers.

CS:  Is that frustrating as a documentarian or is this just part of the job to raise the questions and not really answer them?

HERSONSKI: I have a very interesting confession with one of the filmmakers that I appreciate the most in Israel.  He’s also a political activist and when we were talking about that we came to the conclusion that making films and being an activist cannot be the same thing.  Not being an activist by making films.  Making films is a visual way of thinking about the world, and reality, in a very deep manner.  It’s probably the most complex medium we have, to make something about our perception of reality but it’s not about making a change.

filmunfinished2CS:  And that’s interesting because I know there are some documentarians out there who use this form as a platform to push their own theories, theses, as they have an idea of how the world looks and craft that as they see fit.  I think this is one of the reasons why this film works is because it doesn’t demonize ““ it literally takes the risk of showing the events as they happened and to let the horror speak for itself.  It’s a risk I think some filmmakers have taken and I think you did it as well.  That must have just clawed at you, you must have wanted to make some kind of comment about the filmmakers and where they were coming from.

HERSONSKI: Yes.  That’s exactly what I was trying to do and not to do; trying not to be on the front page because something which is so much more complex and real speaks for itself that I could have very easily done that.  I thought making this film which I thought was first collecting lots of materials and then discovering them and I felt that there was something here that needs to be told but my part here is to be a storyteller and not more than that.  It’s a story that shed light on the way we tell stories, let’s put it that way.  So I feel I have done my part in collecting the pieces but not more than that.

CS:  And if I could ask you just one more question before I let you go, bringing in the survivors of the ghetto to watch the film, one at a time. That was obviously a tough moment for all involved as you probably didn’t know what kind of reaction you would get.  How was that build-up when you knew that was going to happen?  Did you have anything in mind of how you wanted things to go or was it really just, “Let’s show them the film and just get their reaction”?

HERSONSKI: It was exhausting, difficult, and mysterious. I knew it during filmmaking.  It was something that became my nightmares before I did it.  Because I knew of the survivors and know how little we know about what they went through.  It was extremely difficult for me to ask them to do that.

First of all, I wanted them to know exactly what it was about.  They could not imagine it themselves because they didn’t know what the footage was but I explained to them.  I didn’t want to intensify the experience of being confronted with these images as much as I could.  As well, I knew they wouldn’t have a second chance to see the footage not because they wouldn’t be able to show up again but you wouldn’t want to show this footage to these people again.  We have one chance here and if you blow it up it is your business.  I really wanted to make sure that they saw these images and commented on them in the best way they could.  These people, it was hard for them to see the uniform.

I explained to them, upfront, and those who were hesitating to do it or not I said we prefer they don’t come.  The ones who had hesitations had good reasons to hesitate.  At the moment I heard them hesitate I said, “OK, I prefer not to do it.”Â  Those who came were the ones who really insisted to do it.  Felt great urgency to do it.  And felt also that their own personal task to have the final word here over the images because they were the only ones that are alive, that are actually hiding from that film crew, and when we see these images we can’t imagine them several meters away and to have the opportunity to watch these images from a such different perspective.  After more than 70 years it is an overwhelming situation.  I am speaking here on my own behalf.  Of course, I didn’t want to torture them too much, they saw the film, we talked about 30 minutes maybe one hour, there was one woman that was stronger than the others and that’s it.  And they wanted to see it again.  The finished film, edited.  They did come to the screenings and were quite touched by the result.

CS:  It’s a film that I think should be required viewing.

HERSONSKI: Thank you so much.

August 23, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Tom Scharpling

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 4:48 am

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have a chat with writer, performer, and the host behind WFMU’s legendary Best Show, Tom Scharpling, as we place Angela Lansbury in deadly peril…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Tom Scharpling“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-tom_scharpling.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

lucyline.gif

August 20, 2010

Trailer Park: Innocence Mission

Filed under: Interviews,Trailer Park — Tags: , , , — admin @ 2:39 am

By Christopher Stipp

The Archives, Right Here

Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp

Innocence Mission- Interview

I remember taking a cab when I lived in the city of Chicago to see The Innocence Mission in 2006. It was a cold night, and they were playing a small club, but I couldn’t have been more excited. The band was riding a small wave of popularity with a couple of singles, most notably Bright As Yellow which became ubiquitous as their signature song around this time. Meeting them after the show was done I was struck with how disaffected they were with popularity. Meeting lead singer Karen Peris and talking with her I’ll never forget simply because of how low-key and genial she was, the moment captured with a ballpoint autograph on a CD single I brought with me.

Her personality is the person you hear coming through the speakers  and as they went from playing clubs to touring with Natalie Merchant when she broke from the 10,000 Maniacs they never conformed to any logic that dictated that you needed to change your “sound” with every progressive release. It’s almost a cliche at this point to hear how bands say “this” release is a real departure for them or that the band has never sounded better. But with every album Innocence Mission has released since 1995, 6 albums in total, they’ve kept things just as they’ve always been. With a sound that has been compared to The Sundays, I would say they possess a sound that is wholly their own. With an emphasis with muted percussion and deft guitar work, with Karen’s vocals languidly smoothing everything out, they are neither folk nor are they easy listening. The newest album out now, My Room in the Trees, is a testament to their power as a group that produces catchy, low-key songs that embody everything good about what’s possible with modern music that evokes the music you would play on a rainy morning or a gentle Sunday afternoon spent relaxing. The band answered some questions I submitted about their process and what it has been like to be together over two decades.

My Room in the Trees is available now.

my-room-in-the-trees-web1CHRISTOPHER STIPP: What drives you to keep putting out albums? Many bands from the mid-90’s who had some popularity are all but extinct yet you keep producing quality material.

THE INNOCENCE MISSION: It is really just a love of music, and an on-going searching for ways to express things that can’t really be expressed.  Also it’s partly because of the kind letters we’ve received that we keep recording the songs and sharing them out loud. Otherwise I think I would just sings the songs to myself. But this way, it is like joining in a conversation with other people. That’s the way it feels to me, anyway.

CS: Does age slow your desire to play live? I saw you on a few dates during Natalie Merchant’s solo tour many many years ago and I recently found myself hoping you would get out of the house more often.

TIM: Well, not really age, as much as circumstance.  Not wanting to leave our kids made me take a long break from touring, and then, maybe because of not using it in that way,  my voice has sort of un-adapted itself to singing for long periods of time.  Performing is a whole other discipline, so different from writing.  The thing I miss is being able to meet and be with such kind people in different places. It really was a privilege that I enjoyed for a lot of years.  Maybe we can do concerts again someday.

CS: The creative process. Has it gotten easier with the band being together for as long as it has? I would assume that the well you go to for inspiration constantly changes but are you finding there is always something new to write about?

TIM: Yes, I think there is always a lot to write about. But I am not always as aware of  this.  And then some days I feel that I want to try to  write about every small aspect of a single moment, I get excited about words,  about trying to see the words, and  mapping out poems. It goes like that. Music is different, though. Music is more immediately discoverable. It is almost always easy to become absorbed in composing something new.

CS: The actual recording process. Some people go to exotic locations, mess with the physical ways they lay down tracks, work with an arcane producer who is convinced they can get “something new” out of the band, but you don’t seem to share any of those notions. Do you have favorite method when you have a batch of songs that need recording?

TIM: We used to travel to record and that was nice, too.  But recording at home has been better for our music, I think.  It is just us here, in our studio, and so we can take the time to really hear and to try to do our best with every song.  I don’t know if I have a favorite method, other than thinking that just about every song should have pump organ on it.

CS: Is there an Innocence Mission sound? I hear many bands talk about wanting to reinvent themselves after album, after album but you’ve, delightfully, stayed consistent. Do you ever feel pressure that you should change it up?

mission-2010_2TIM: Well,  we really don’t think about the songs in that way. We don’t talk about changing or not changing.  We just try to strive for the sounds that we’re hearing for each song.  The first two albums are dramatically different from what we’ve made over the last twelve years or so, since Birds of My Neighborhood.   It took a little while for us to find our way.

CS: The world consumes music differently than it did when you first came onto the scene. Do you see people’s shifting methods to getting music as a benefit to where you are today or are you finding yourselves on the outside looking in because of how fractured the marketplace is? Has it even mattered to you at all, the business of getting your music out into the world?

TIM: I have to admit, I don’t really think about it that much.  I do see that new music in general is more accessible to everyone now, which is great.

CS: What does it take to stay together in a band like this? Is it easy for a group best known for its delicate arrangements? I would imagine any fighting is done politely and with the kind of manners usually reserved for those at a swanky dinner party.

TIM: That’s funny.  Well, we don’t usually have fights about music. And if we do, it’s always Don’s fault. (Kidding). Working together on recordings has always been such a big part of our friendship and marriage. It’s not something I have to question, but I am grateful for it.

CS: This album in particular, what was the impetus for making it? Was there any great event that hurried you into the studio or was it a slow, progressive build-up of material?

TIM: It was just the enjoyment of writing and making the recordings. It does seem to take a long while to have a group of songs that we still feel close to over time.  But that’s okay. It always seems better not to be in too much of a hurry to finish a record.

CS: What are your hopes for the future of this band? Do you see yourselves continuously putting out new material every now and then?

TIM: I hope to be able to keep writing.   I hope the songs will be worthy of sharing. That’s about it.

August 15, 2010

A Bit Of A Chat with Ken Plume & Paul F. Tompkins 2

Filed under: A Bit Of A Chat With Ken Plume,Interviews — Tags: , , , , — UncaScroogeMcD @ 6:19 pm

bitofachat-header.png

lucyline.gif

I’m Ken Plume, and soon you’ll be listening to “A Bit Of A Chat” with me, Ken Plume.

In this episode, I have another chat with actor, stand-up, gadfly, and sartorial dandy Paul F. Tompkins, fresh from his cross-country rail journey, and we proceed to plot & scheme…

Hope you enjoy…

Download “A Bit of a Chat with Ken Plume & Paul F. Tompkins“:

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/bitofachat/bit_of_a_chat-paul_f_tompkins_2.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

##

patreon-fred.png

Drop Ken a line HERE.

##

You can also find more of my interviews by clicking HERE.

pft-01.png

lucyline.gif

August 12, 2010

FROM THE VAULT: An Interview with Gary Kurtz

vaultinterviews.png

The wonderful sci-fi geek site i09.com recently linked out to an LA Times interview with producer Gary Kurtz, and i09 believed it to be the first time that Kurtz had spoken in-depth, on the record, about the creation of Star Wars and the issues he had with George Lucas during the making of The Empire Strikes Back that led to a massive falling out between the two creative partners.

Well, not so.

I’d done a massive interview with Kurtz back in 2002, which goes into a lot more detail about the falling out, plus Kurtz’s other work on American Graffiti and with Jim Henson on The Dark Crystal.

Here is that interview…

-Ken Plume

ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 11, 2002

In many projects, there are “unsung heroes”… people whose contributions are extensive, but have been overshadowed by the passage of time (or the bluster of others).

One of those “unsung heroes” is producer Gary Kurtz, whose credits include American Graffiti, Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, Dark Crystal, and Return to Oz.

I’m not going to try and explain Kurtz’s importance to Star Wars in this introduction – the interview will accomplish that.

Without further ado, my in-depth interview with Gary Kurtz…

KEN PLUME: I’d like to go back to the very beginning and ask about your introduction to the film industry.

GARY KURTZ: Well, I went to film school at USC in Los Angeles. Actually, to go back even further than that, I was a music major, really, in high school in the southern California area and actually went to USC on a music scholarship to begin with. At that time, I was looking to major in composition and conducting with a possibility of maybe teaching music. But, it was a bit vague and in the first year one of the requirements of music scholarships is that you have to play in every group that’s available – so I was playing in the concert band, the symphony orchestra, the opera orchestra, the wind and other small ensembles in the classical music side, as well as the jazz band and a couple of other jazz groups that were organized at the school.

PLUME: Was that just meant to give you versatility as far as that curriculum?

KURTZ: Well, that was part of it, and also they always desperately needed members to play in the various groups and so they felt that music experience and performance – a lot of composition majors didn’t know how to play anything but the piano, so one of the important things was to get orchestral experience playing an orchestra instrument other than the piano. I didn’t have that problem. I played reeds primarily and then oboe and English horn, and dabbled in most of the rest of the instruments except for the heavy brass. I never tried to play anything other than a bit of the clarinet.

In that first year at USC I did the music for three or four student films. It didn’t necessarily mean composing music, because the time deadlines were unbelievably short, so it meant mostly to assemble music from a variety of sources. Since they were student films, it didn’t really matter where they came from – there were no rights problems. In doing that, though, I became more and more interested in the films. I had had previous experience in high school at shooting 8mm and 16mm film footage, both documentary and sort of dramatic type materials, so it wasn’t a new thing to me. And I had been a keen still photographer for years, so moving to a cinema major wasn’t really that big a jump.

PLUME: … and this would have been what, the mid-’60s?

KURTZ: No, no … I went to USC first in 1959, so it was in the early ’60s. Very early ’60s.

PLUME: So you were a part of that initial group of classes in the film department.

KURTZ: No, the film department at USC had been going on since the 1920s, since the silent days … I guess it was the oldest film school in existence, because it started so early … It wasn’t really until the mid-’60s, after I’d finished and was gone, that the popularity of studying cinema became magnified 100 percent or more, because when I was there, it was very difficult to find enough students to make up film crews. As a matter of fact … in the first senior project year that I was in in that term, I was doing advanced camera, as well as sound and production management and other things, and I had to work on four of the seven projects. Normally, you’re only supposed to work on one! But everybody in the class that I was in worked on four or five projects, because there weren’t enough people.

Then the next term, when I directed, I had a really hard time getting together enough of a crew. I had to actually do a lot of my own camera work – there wasn’t a cameraperson available. Film school wasn’t particularly popular at that time. It wasn’t until George Lucas and his group, John Milius and those guys, who went to USC also – they didn’t start until ’66 – by then it seemed to be much more popular. And certainly by the end of the ’60s, it was incredibly popular and they had to create all kinds of devices to wheedle out a lot of people by requiring a lot of portfolio work and films made in high school – all kinds of pre-requirements, just to get it down to a usable number of students that they could cope with.

PLUME: During the time you were there, was it rather open?

KURTZ: Oh, it was completely open. If you had projects – either written or film projects – they would look at early film projects or just written material, scripts and proposals for projects, for acceptance. But it wasn’t too definitive, because they were interested in having enough students to make up the program.

PLUME: And at the time you were going, how respected was the film program by the industry?

KURTZ: Oh, it was quite well respected. There were a lot of people that had graduated out of the program in the post-war period – the late ’40s, ’50s – that had become fixtures in the industry of one kind or another – studio executives or agents or television producers or a few film directors – but … it wasn’t a straight line to the creative heart, because the other big factor was the fact that the unions in the late ’50s and ’60s were very strong, and you couldn’t work in the industry unless you were a union member, as far as the crafts were concerned, and you couldn’t get into the unions because they were closed. A closed-shop kind of system. So the experience that I got while I was a film student was working on Roger Corman kind of low-budget exploitation films, and I worked on a lot of those – 40 or 50 over a three or four year period.

PLUME: Generally doing what type of work?

KURTZ: Well, everything really. I started out being a grip and an electrician and a sound boom operator, and on some of the later ones I was the director of photography and film editor or production supervisor.

PLUME: So, basically, a jack-of-all-trades.

KURTZ: Yes, yes, a little of everything. On some projects, there was so few crew that they were very much like student films. I remember one picture where I was production manager and the assistant director, as well as the editor and one of the cameramen – and the second unit director as well.

PLUME: Now …in film school at that time, what were the aspirations for afterwards? I mean, when you talk to film students now, everyone wants to be a director right out of the gate.

KURTZ: Yes, that wasn’t quite as strong then … there was a general feeling, in the very early ’60s, that people wanted to sort of break down the barriers of Hollywood and go into ALL of the various things. There were a lot of students who wanted to become editors, and there were a lot who wanted to become cameramen. There were quite a few who wanted to be directors as well, but it didn’t seem to be the only thing.

PLUME: It hadn’t quite been placed on the pedestal it got placed on later, had it?

KURTZ: No, no … the auteur theory really came out of the French new wave writings in the late ’50s/early ’60s, and we were reading all that stuff from Cahiers du Cinema and talking about it at school, I remember, and I think most of the students thought the concept intellectually was valid, but practically was rubbish because there’re so many accidents that happen on a film. The chemistry of the group that you’ve gotten together makes a huge difference, and yes, picking the right people is important. But it’s really difficult for a director – unless you’re Stanley Kubrick – to have the final say on every single little minute detail, so all the films are pretty much a group effort. It can be pretty much assumed that most of the aspiring directors felt that way – they had no illusions about the fact that they could become like French directors were.

PLUME: Sometimes having absolute final say is one of the worst things that can happen if you have wrong instincts.

KURTZ: Yes, absolutely. I mean, the whole point of having a group effort is that your crew becomes a sounding board.

PLUME: I never understood the auteur theory when so much of a film is a matter of checks and balances.

KURTZ: Well, I think that intellectually the auteur theory came out of the idea of looking at a body of work – like Hitchcock’s work or Hawks’s work or John Ford’s work – and trying to see common threads. Well, that’s perfectly acceptable as an analysis of the whole career of a filmmaker, because there are going to be tying threads there. A director’s not going to pick a project to do unless it has some meaning to them. You are going to find that it’s just the idea of the director being the only creative entity on a picture was the aspect that I think most people felt was a bit far-fetched.

PLUME: And do you think that that trend has become detrimental over time?

KURTZ: Yes, I do. Definitely. I especially think, since I’ve focused mostly on my career on producing and working with a lot of first time directors, I’ve felt that what’s happened is that the working producer’s job – basically, of being the director’s partner and being his mirror and sounding bound – has disappeared and the producer’s job has primarily turned to deal making. Most of the people whose names you see up on the screen don’t have anything to do with the making of the film, which is a shame, really, because it leaves the director kind of totally on his own – and it means also that there’s no one to say “Wait a minute, that’s terrible, don’t do that!”

PLUME: There’re no ‘no-men’ anymore.

KURTZ: There’re no ‘no-men’. Yes, exactly.

PLUME: Do you think that leads to the working producer now being more of a traveling man than they were in the past? You used to be able to see that certain directors worked hand-in-hand with producers over ten films. Now you’ll be lucky if they work past two films, if one of those is a success.

KURTZ: Yes, I think that’s a result of most of those relationships having risen out of the deals. Sometimes the producer’s relationship with the director and the writer on a project is only because either they own the property in the first place or they’re the one that pulled the money together, so that there is no actual working relationship. The legwork that the producer should be doing is shared out amongst the production staff, some of it being done by the production supervisor and others, and the rest being absorbed by the director. I mean, I’ve never felt that it’s fair to a director, in a way, to saddle him with having to deal with all that stuff. I’ve always felt that a good producer should insulate the director completely from having to deal with the studio and any outside influences, to allow him to get on with working with the actors and putting the film together.

PLUME: Do you think that film schools today – and to a large extent apocryphal evidence that filters down – have made directors nowadays believe that any and all producers should be seen as enemies to whatever the vision of the director may – or may not – be?

KURTZ: I’m sure they do, because that’s probably the case. The producer is looked upon as pretty much the same as a studio executive, who may not have any idea about the project. Whereas if you go back to the ’60s, ’70s and even before … even of the big studios days, prior to the studios losing their real power in the ’60s… the producers that were working – the Arthur Freeds of the world, and David O. Selnicks – they had the power. The directors were their hired hands. That’s not necessarily great either, but those kinds of producers from the ’30s and ’40s seemed to have a fairly grand vision of what they wanted to see on the screen. The directors that they hired went along with them – and that was part of the studio system anyway, when they all were employees of the studio. So it isn’t fair to try to compare that with what’s going on today.

PLUME: The irony is that a good deal of major directors nowadays have become those type of producers as well, bringing on other directors as hired hands.

KURTZ: Yes, exactly… Because they had the power to do that. But there’re so few good movies made today, it’s difficult for me to believe that it’s all because the directors don’t have any vision in what they want to see. I think it’s primarily due to the fact that the studios are now all owned by big conglomerates who are interested in making money to the exclusion of everything else. Now, the studios always wanted to make money – that was one of their reasons for being in existence – but the men who ran the studios, no matter how difficult they were, they had some sense of what being a showman was like.

They were willing to take chances on oddball projects, and you don’t see that as much anymore. There are smaller companies who will, but there’s so many stories about projects floating around the last ten years that couldn’t get made because the elements weren’t right. When you just look at the list of the elements that the studios wanted, you know it wouldn’t work that way. But it’s a security blanket to have it be a Tom Cruise picture, or a Jack Nicholson picture, or whoever. Whether they’re right for the project or not, the studio executive is not going to get fired if the picture fails if they have A-list talent.

PLUME: Right – and then they complain about the audience, for not accepting it.

KURTZ: Yes.

PLUME: I’m interested… when you talk about the Golden Age of Hollywood, as opposed to now, there seemed to be a better balance between “Okay, these are our A pictures, and then these are our B pictures, the experimental ones that we’ll toss money towards, but … we’re going to bank on the A ones, if the B ones hit – fine.” Now it seems that everything has to be a blockbuster.

KURTZ: Yes, that’s exactly right. I mean, I was part of the program at Universal Studios in the early ’70s – the low-budget program that was run by Ned Tanen which produced twelve or thirteen pictures, all under a million dollars at that time. Anything under a million dollars was considered bare bones movies. The most famous film that came out of that group was, of course, American Graffiti – and it made the most money – but all the films that were made under that program were interesting, quirky films that at least made their money back. If you count video and things over the long run, they all made money … it’s not Jaws business, but American Graffiti even wasn’t Jaws business. American Graffiti was a very, very small picture that went on to do reasonably well. I think it eventually did $60 million in America, which wasn’t big box office even in the early ’70s. But, based on the cost of the picture, it was pretty phenomenal. The other pictures in that program – Doug Trumbull’s Silent Running and John Cassavetes’s Minnie and Moskowitz and Milos Forman’s Taking Off and Peter Fonda’s The Hired Hand and the other one that I helped produce, Monte Hellman’s Two-Lane Blacktop – all of those films are interesting films and they’re worth seeing today.

PLUME: They hold up very well.

KURTZ: They do hold up very well, and because they cost so little money, the studio didn’t worry about them. But no one seems to be willing to experiment with a program like that today – at all. They’re not willing to make small films, or if they do, they make them by – well, they don’t make them, actually. They have a classics division of some kind or another like Fox Searchlight or Miramax that seek out odd projects, and they get made independently and then just released by the studio. The studio doesn’t instigate the making of those projects.

PLUME: So they have no initial costs…

KURTZ: No, they do have costs. They wait for the filmmakers to come to them with a developed script.

PLUME: Or, in some cases, a completely filmed project…

KURTZ: Well, yes, that happens, too.

PLUME: It seems like the industry depends solely upon initiative, nowadays, rather than taking any risks.

KURTZ: At the time we were doing American Graffiti at Universal – which was not a picture made on the lot, although we had an office there – it was made in San Francisco, and we were very rarely at the studio. But some of the times when I was at the studio for meetings and various things, I realized in talking to some of the story department people that they had probably 100 projects in various stages of development – script development – that they were paying someone to develop. They don’t do much of that anymore at all. I suppose the idea is now that the scripts will somehow be generated. Either the independent producers or the writers themselves will spend the time and energy to develop them to the point where they can be seen. I think one of the reasons that there’re so few good movies is that that process has been truncated so much. Too many films go into production before they’re ready.

(continued below…)

August 8, 2010

Trailer Park: George Gallo of MIDDLE MEN – Part 1

Filed under: Interviews,Trailer Park — Tags: , , , — admin @ 9:47 pm

By Christopher Stipp

The Archives, Right Here

Check out my other column, This Week In Trailers, at SlashFilm.com and follow me on TWITTER under the name: Stipp

GEORGE GALLO – Interview

One of the most thrilling things you get to do when you’re in a position to see a film very, very early is knowing that whatever you are feeling about the experience of seeing that movie, is pure. Pure because you are not tainted by the pool of public opinion or subconsciously projecting someone’s off-handed comment onto your own. It’s devoid of judgment and expectation and watching a movie like Middle Men, with a crowd that only knew that it starred Luke Wilson, who hasn’t given such a dynamic performance since The Royal Tennenbaums, Giovanni Ribisi, a complete terror who delightfully and shamelessly steals every scene he’s in, and James Caan, who lets loose in one the more engaging roles in recent memory, you realize just how fun it is to go to the movies.

Middle Men is a production you never saw coming in a month usually reserved for the detrius of summer because it is just a rock solid film and one brimming with character. It is hilarious, dark, unnerving, and is the reason why talkies that don’t deal in superheroes or have budgets that swell into straospheric heights can still inspire that sense you’re in the presence of great filmmaking. To wit, a large part of that should be credited to writer and director George Gallo who many will remember as the writer behind Midnight Run and, still one of my personal favorites in the 90’s, Bad Boys.

To hear Gallo talk is to hear a man who really should be teaching how to make a movie from the ground up. Forget about the nascent ramblings of stuffy shirted old men who want to talk about making movies in a way that makes the process seem filled with pomposity, Gallo is chock full of stories that make you want to put down the voice recorder and just listen to a man who has navigated decades within a business that delights in chewing and spitting out talent like obese midwesterners at a Sizzler. He’s a joy, a fascinating player in a game he’s very much still a part of and, based on the film in question, still full of good ideas and is on point behind the lens. There’s no question he belongs in this business because he’s both a realist and man undeterred by the barriers that have stopped lesser creative types.

My only wish after talking with the man was wanting to be in the position to take the man out for a drink, to have him talk about what it means to be a survivor in Hollywood, to hear what it takes to be relevant for a market that seems so fragmented thanks to the multitude of entertainment options an audience has at its disposal. He’s one of a kind, a man capable of crafting a fine film about porn and commerce, and there wouldn’t be anyone else I’d rather listen to all day than this man. Here’s to hoping he’ll consider being a mentor to those who have logenevity on the brain, to someday be as accomplished as he is.

MIDDLE MEN opens today and tune in next week for Part 2 where George talks about his thoughts on a much ballyhooed Midnight Run sequel, what it took to get it made, and much more.

middle_men_posterGEORGE GALLO: Hello.

CHRISTOPHER STIPP: Hello George.

GALLO: Christopher. What’s up, buddy?

CS: What’s happening?

GALLO: I’ve been trying to take it easy. I’ve been working so much and writing so much my brain is kind of mush.

(Laughs)

So, I’m trying to take it easy which is something I don’t know how to do in general but I’m doing my best to try and sit still and get some exercise and that kind of thing and not think about this person talks to that person and this person reacts over that person and then they can say this and they can say that and they can go here and they can go there”¦I just don’t want to think about it right now if that’s OK.

(Laughs)

CS: Well, are you are on any sort of schedule or regimen?

GALLO: Oh yeah. Generally I get up real early, like 6:00, 6:30, and then I start writing at about 7:00. Sometimes we go all day, literally all day. And that’s 5 days a week. I’m always writing something.

CS: How has that been? The last time I talked to you was for Local Color and now it’s for Middle Men. I look at your directorial filmography and compared to guys who want to knock out a film a year you’re very selective, yet you are intensely prolific with your writing. Do you write with the intent to make everything that you put to paper?

GALLO: No, I don’t. A lot of times I, because I started out as a writer and I still ““ I helped a lot of friends out. A lot of times I’ll write things to help friends that are directors out that I don’t even get credit on, you know? I am going to probably start something for Andy Davis now, you know. He’s a buddy and I’ll do about three weeks of a project for him. But I need a week off before I start it. To be honest with you some of it was by choice and some of it wasn’t by choice. I know I’m sort of a mainstream guy, but to be honest with you I never thought of perceived myself as that. There’s Hollywood movies that are the classic mainstream fast ball down the middle. Other than maybe Bad Boys, and even Midnight Run to me was sort of left handed. I never considered myself that mainstream down the middle. So a lot of those projects to me are kind of boring. They just sort of ““ not that I’m above making money ““ I’m not saying that ““ but I don’t know, they seem sort of boring to me and I just like something that has a little more teeth in it. And, like I say, I’ve written a few things that were commercial ““ not that I have a problem with it ““ it just takes so much time and energy to write a screen play and especially if you are directing the movie that when you are all done with it, hopefully, you won’t feel stupid that you spent that much time on it.

(Laughs)

It takes a long time. I still really care about this stuff. I have friends who make a lot more money than I do and they don’t care nearly as much as I do. I think some people just resign themselves to the fact that it’s a business and they see it more as a business than I do.

CS: It’s funny you mention that. I have been at events, press lines, what have you, in L.A. and what have you, but here in Phoenix when Middle Men was closing out the Phoenix Film Festival you had this dichotomy of these straitlaced, suburban couples with those in your entourage. It seemed to be the epitome of people who look very nice, very tan, very beautiful ““ there were dozens of them. It struck me that this business seems to be built on this cavalcade which includes showy, flamboyant, “Let’s go where the party is” kind of attitude. Is this ritual of the entourages, the hangers on, all that, just second nature to you, is it background noise at this point in your career?

GALLO: I’ll be honest with you, it’s funny that what you saw was a rare occurrence for me because I don’t ““ people who see me do this say I do it very well but I’m a true couch potato.

(Laughs)

And my wife and I don’t like to go anywhere ““ which in some ways has gotten in the way of me making other films or making bigger films or whatever but I like to come home ““ she cooks, we eat dinner, we watch TV and shout at the television quite a bit. We rarely go out. This last year has been different because I don’t even like to fly. We flew to Cannes the year before, for Middle Men, that’s where it premiered, world premiere, and it was received really well. I’m happy that the movie has a very positive buzz and, yes, I’ve been going to a lot more of those types of things. But in general, I have to tell you, dude, my friends on the technical side of filmmaking, like editors and directors and stuff like that, cameramen ““ I like to hit golf balls at the driving range. I’m just not big on the circuit thing. I’ve never been that great at it.

CS: Let’s talk about the film a little bit. When I watched it I really know what to expect but I was surprised that I haven’t heard more about a movie made as well as this one.

GALLO: I’m so proud of this movie.

CS: To even look at it ““ I think your cinematographer, Lukas Ettlin, did an amazing job. I’m curious to know ““ it was based on the life and times of Chris Mell with Andy Weiss helping you write it.

GALLO: Yes, Andy was a friend of Chris’s. Andy introduced me to Chris and Chris started telling his story one night and I was on the edge of my seat and that’s how it happened.

CS: When you co-write a film like that, how does the process go? From him telling you this crazy story to you saying, “Alright, let’s make this a screen play.” How does that process start for you?

GALLO: For me I just started ““ Andy had known Chris longer and Andy knew the facts more than I did and oddly I was more interested in the tone of it, rather than the facts ““ at least from jump street. I just started sketching out what the movie could be and stuff like that. I guess my accuracy was off in the time line of events that happened. A lot of the stuff, about 80% of this actually happened. Maybe more, like 80 to 90% did happen. It didn’t necessarily happen in the order that we said it happened. So I sort of sketched out this outline. Andy and I did it together.

It was very much an interesting process. I can’t actually say who did what. It was a lot of talking back and forth. A lot of disagreeing, Andy and I both ““ we agreed on a lot of stuff but the one thing that we agreed on from the beginning was that it should not be linear. The story seemed the most interesting when it was told the way Chris told us the story. And when Chris told us the story, he had a tendency…he had a stream of conscious kind of way to jump all over the place, especially in the beginning. He was talking about one event, then he would talk about how he worked here and then this and then that. The way one tells a story and we both thought that was the most interesting way to lay the story out because it would seem the most honest. So we structured it that way and I wrote some scenes, Andy wrote some scenes, he rewrote my scenes, I rewrote his scenes. It was a tumultuous and fairly bloody process but at the same time we had a great time doing it and had sometimes very different ideas on how to present things and where to place things but in general you couldn’t have two guys who were more passionate about what we were doing. And, sometimes I would cave if I thought he was right and he would cave, that kind of thing.

CS: One of the things that holds a lot of great stories back is financing and I was impressed that you got as much as you did in order to make it. I think every penny is up on screen. Is that ever a process for you or has that ever impeded you from getting a film like this made?

middlemenparty2009cannesfilmfestivalwfax1fwalo9lGALLO: No. Chris produced the movie and it was his personal money to help make the film. He is the best partner I ever had in terms of a person that has skin in the game. I think he respected me because he knew I made Local Color with my own money and now here I was turning around and making a film using his money but I knew what it was like to be spending your own money every day. I’m always very respectful of other people’s dough. I know some filmmakers just don’t give a shit. I’m a working class kid. I watched my father go to work every morning and come home. I have an appreciation of what a dollar actually means to someone. Just flagrantly round around spending someone else’s money is just not who I am. I convinced Chris, certainly, that to make the movie look enormous without wasting money I do know how to make a movie and look, this was a fairly expensive movie, but I think that the picture looks twice as expensive as it is.

We shot all over the place. We shot a lot of it in Phoenix and we shot in LA and shot in Vegas. I don’t know. I just have been sorta smart about where to put a camera, how to tell a story. From Local Color I started out as a painter. I tend to see things in paintings to begin with and I know you can’t paint beyond the edges of the canvass so I’m usually pretty clear about where I want to look or where I want to point the camera. I don’t like setting up 3 blocks away and then shoot a close-up. I’ve always been very cognizant about how to tell stories through I wouldn’t say minimally, but certainly economically.

CS: One of the questions about that, on the same subject, are there workshops for directors to help keep up with new techniques you can use in future films? Kind of like doctors where they have continuing education, is there anything you do to stay fresh as a director?

GALLO: Yes. I watch everything. I watch a lot of movies and even TV commercials. I just watch stuff and I’m always asking, “How was that done?” In terms of style, I think the rules of filmmaking are changing, certainly, and I think the way stories are being told is changing. I think people retain more information now, very quickly, and how many shots and cuts you can do inside of a minute. I think the whole language of film is changing. It’s always evolving. I’m always watching that stuff and trying to learn and don’t want to do the same tricks I did in the last one.

The great thing about Middle Men was that it really afforded me an opportunity to stretch and do a lot of those things because I’ve never done a film that like at the core was chaotic. Some of the comedies were just out and out comedies. You can’t really reach or pushing the bounds of cinema ““ you are trying to tell jokes and do visual sight gags. To be honest with you, Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplain they did it with minimal means and it’s hard to top what they did anyway. So with comedy you don’t need a lot in terms of goofing around with the cameras and stuff. It’s more like what goes on inside of the frame as opposed to deliciously wacky angles and stuff. With Middle Men because it was such a chaotic drug induced sexual universe where everybody was so paranoid and acting so crazy, I could make the camera crazy. I could make the colors louder. I could be more voyeuristic or perverse. We do a lot of both shoulders and opposites and just stuff like that. It was a lot of fun. I got to stretch and just had a blast doing it.

CS: I think the casting deserves equal credit as well. Someone who really steals the show is Giovanni Ribisi. They guy is just talented beyond a lot of his peers and I think ““ I don’t want to say he gets overlooked – but I wish I could see that guy in more movies. He is just phenomenally crazy in this movie.

GALLO: He’s terrific and really a good guy. I think he’s so good because he’s humble. And I think the second ego creeps into your work, you are finished. He’s just so humble and so without ego and so “How can I make it better”, “What can I do to make it better?” Almost to the point where you think he’s kidding. He’s that humble and gracious about the work. And I’m that way because to me it’s just an honor to get a chance to do this stuff. I still paint every chance I get. I paint a few days a week. But to paint on a canvass as large as a movie screen and all the money and all the equipment and all the talent that goes along with it to make a film, considering I did not come from a showbiz family ““ I did this because I wanted to. I came out to LA and went through the trials and tribulations to get to where I got and I consider it an honor whenever you are on a movie set and you are working you should thank your lucky stars and thank God that you are there. I have the same feeling of humility about it so that’s why we got along so well. We would just sit around and talk about how to make it better. How can we make it better? How can we express this idea? That sort of thing.

CS: To that point, one of the things about filmmaking is actually visualizing your initial thoughts on the page. Did you have any happy surprises that you had on paper that you didn’t realize were there as you filmed? Any moments when the words weren’t working?

middlemenparty2009cannesfilmfestivalc8oskcmvprolGALLO: I would say, yeah. Almost everyday was a surprise. The script was solid structurally. And a lot of the dialogue that was written is still in the movie but I think a fair amount isn’t and the one thing I do as a director that I think you have to do as a director is that you have to keep your writer hat on when you’re writing and throw that hat away when you are directing. There may be other directors that may tell you differently ““ Tarantino might have a different view on it ““ but I’m not as into the sanctity of the word but what I am into is absolutely believing everything that I’m seeing in front of me.

Sometimes you can write half a page of dialogue and an actor can get that moment across with just a look or a wink or a nod or something and I think you can throw that half a page away. And a lot of Giovanni and Gabriel sometimes would go off on these improvs that were frankly better than what was written and I would just tell the cameraman just keep shooting”¦keep shooting”¦keep shooting. When that delicious stuff starts to happen, it’s not just people hitting marks and saying lines but it starts getting into that other place and a lot of that happened everyday. It just started ““ people just became those people and you’re witnessing it and you know that what you are seeing is just special because it doesn’t happen that often. It happened on Local Color with Armin Mueller-Stahl and Trevor Morgan, Samantha Mathis and everybody. We had great moments but it was a different kind of storytelling. It was a very internal, deliberately paced film where this film, Middle Men, is just craziness and people doing massive amounts of cocaine were not acting in their best interest at any time. To me the whole movie was like driving across a bridge ““ the bridge is out ““ but they just keep driving. Me personally, that stuff just makes me laugh. Sort of like he was being his best and worst all at once. I hope I am answering your question.

CS: Yes, you are.

GALLO: Everyday was a surprise. Jimmy Caan, who I think is terrific in the movie. I think he really reached. He said he didn’t want to do what we call a safe performance. Because a guy with a movie persona like that can always lean on the 100 or so movies that he’s done and he didn’t want to do that on this one. He really wanted to reach. He wanted to create a character that was legitimately creepy, not creepy in a movie sense. We had a lot of discussions about things that never ended up in the movie ““ things that wouldn’t end up in the movie but we created a whole backstory for him. Like things he has been doing for the last 20 years of his life that led to this type of behavior and I said not one shred of it is in the movie but it is in the movie because of some of the bizarre choices he made. Creepy choices he made as an actor. I really respect that he reached the way he did because he could have just said “I’ll be James Caan, tough guy” as opposed to doing what he did.

CS: And I was just going to pop in with that before you did. He made me feel uneasy. The whole time I saw him on the screen, it was a great performance because it wasn’t bombastic, it wasn’t over the top, it was just enough to make you feel that whatever this guy is selling, don’t buy it.

GALLO: Yeah. He said to me at one point he based it on a couple people he knew. He wouldn’t tell me who they were but he said they were guys he met in his life that after you shook hands with them you literally wanted to boil your hand. Sleazy business types, lawyers and I think he just took some of those creeps that we all meet in our lives and he put them all in a blender and he became that person. It’s a terrific performance. It’s almost like he’s sexually ambiguous. There was a kind of rage in him that was very interesting. He’s also very charming at times but you know that everything that’s coming out of his mouth is an out and out lie and that it’s all self-serving. If he says the words good morning, he’s already angling. There’s an agenda to everything with this guy. It’s out and out creepy and at the same time he had the ability to make it fun. Because, let’s face it, he’s as creepy as hell and we know he’s probably capable of murder but somehow we keep laughing at that.

(Laughs)

And a lot of times when we were making the movie, we were laughing a lot and saying why are we laughing? But we were laughing all day long and said, there’s something good going on here.

CS: I think something else too ““ I can’t let an interview go by but Rade Serbedzija ““ he could read the bible and I think I would buy that DVD.

GALLO: He’s terrific. He’s absolutely terrific. With him for instance, I kept saying I don’t want to do the standard Russian mob guy that’s always posing and you’ve seen it in a million movies. My personal problem with a lot of the films today I think it’s because some of the directors are so self-conscious in the choices that they are making they don’t feel comfortable ““ it might be ego or insecurities ““ but they don’t feel comfortable just telling the story. They have to let you know every 5 seconds that they were also there behind the camera. I find it quite annoying. You look at Hitchcock and you look at Frank Capra and look at William Wilder and look at even some of the later guys ““ John Frankenheimer, certainly Sidney Lumet, you got to look at their films several times before you start to realize the tricks an chicanery they were doing. It is so well hidden. I’m a real student of this stuff. I really watch films but those guys were storytellers first. And they would say “What’s the story, what’s the story about, what’s the subtext about, what are these people feeling, what do their homes look like?”

If you watch a lot of Hitchcock films, those people didn’t know they were in a thriller. They were just normal people that got caught up in a situation and they just happened to be in a Hitchcock movie. They weren’t doing a lot of posing. I find in a lot of the movies today the director says “I’m making a thriller so I’m going to have people in a pose-y, kind of thriller way””¦and I’m like, “What?” That’s bullshit. Am I making any sense?

CS: Absolutely.

GALLO: And with Middle Men these people don’t know they are in this movie I’m making. They are just trying to get through their day. Obviously they have a whole lot of issues and problems and stuff like that but I’m going to shot them in a certain way but they don’t know they are in this movie. I wanted to make it as natural as I could in terms of their performances and then try to catch the soul of what they were doing using cameras and lenses and lights. Those are my tools. Same things like paint brushes and paint.

CS: You choose to shoot a lot of it here in Phoenix. What drew you here instead of shooting it down in So Cal where porn is king.

GALLO: To be completely honest, that was a choice of the producers because of the tax credit. You get 30 or 25% back. Whatever it was, it was very enticing for the filmmakers ““ for the producers. For Chris. Because you can throw that money back in post production which is what we did. That’s how we got all the Stones music and all that stuff ““ soundtrack is loaded.

CS: Insane.

GALLO: Yeah. That was one of my big things when I was cutting the movie. I cut the movie with a lot of those tunes because I’m a big music buff too. I love music. I play saxophone and guitar. I just love music and to me music was a character in the movie. It had to drive the movie. It is a movie certainly about a sub-culture in the United States yet it is something that most people, fairly intimately familiar with it whether they want to talk to it or not but at the same time when you think of a porn star or your think of a Russian mob guy you don’t necessarily thing that they go home and listen to the Rolling Stones.

(Laughs)

But the truth is they probably do or they listen to something that we’ve all heard so I wanted to constantly make it accessible and remind you that these are all very ““ they have different lives but they certainly are our neighbors or certainly live in the same city that we do. I wanted to keep driving that idea home. These are not alien space creatures. These are very normal people who some of them went to school with you and they spun out and led the lives that they did. I always wanted to have that reminder be at the center of the movie all the time. That’s why we made the music choices that we made.

CS: One of the other subtle things that happens with this movie is it never feels judgmental in any way about the subject matter.

GALLO: I went out of my way to not be pro or con. It just is. It’s here. This is what’s going on. I met some people and interviewed them and I was very surprised that you can’t make assumptions about anybody. I was shocked. Especially with the porn stars. I don’t deal much with the porn stars in the movie other than Laura Ramsey, her character. Some of the women I talked to, and again I don’t want to make an assumption that a porn star is stupid, but sometimes you could just say oh the bimbo and put them in a box instantly but I found that to be more not the case. I found most of the women ““ yeah, there was certainly that like central casting bimbo ““ but at the same time there are some people I would say are crass capitalists. I’m talking about the women. I found the whole world to be very fascinating. Once you get over your initial discomfort dealing with it, it does, certainly in the early stages of researching this and talking to people, I would catch myself being uncomfortable or embarrassed because you are dropping a lot of those layers or boundaries. At first I was very uncomfortable with it and that sort of went away because I had to deal with and I had to deal with my own feelings about it.

CS: You work your way through it. Luke Wilson’s character had to work through it in a way ““ he’s not doing anything but it’s a business. It’s commerce. That’s basically what it is.

GALLO: I think at the same time his character does have something knocking. Something in his subconscious that is knocking constantly and in the end he just doesn’t feel right about it and without giving too much away but it does eat at him. An interesting thing ““ we had a test preview with the cards and stuff which is sort of useful process to make movies and I think people misuse the information a lot of times. They don’t understand how to really use that process properly. But with 300 people in the audience and 280 get confused in a scene you should certainly listen to that. But, the movie ““ we screened it and it tested insanely high and we were shocked that all four quadrants scored into the 90’s. I literally was shocked. How the hell? I mean Tom Sherak, who was the head of distribution at Fox and Revolution, his son William is one of the producers he laughed and said how the hell did you make a movie about the porn business that ends up being a date movie and I said, “I don’t know.”

(Laughs)

But it scored the highest with older women.

CS: Really?

GALLO: And we were shocked at that. Like mid-high 90’s with older women. And I was like why? I think ultimately it was because I don’t think any of the women were portrayed badly and I think Luke just wants to go home. He wants to go back to his wife and kids and doesn’t know how to do it anymore. He gets exposed to something that effects him and he just wants to go back. I think that made it so powerful for everyone.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress