JEFF BURR

Having spent my childhood loitering the local video stores I became with JEFF BURR long before seeing any of his films. The cover art for VHS titles like LEATHERFACE, THE OFFSPRING and PUMPKINHEAD 2 had left an impression on me and when I finally caught up with his films, I was hooked. Before I understood the ins & outs of filmmaking, I knew what I liked, and what I liked was style. Jeff would never consider himself an auteur but his films are all so distinctive that he certainly is one within the B-world. If ever substance is lacking, he compensates with strong textural aesthetics and vibrant colour schemes. What you are about to read is epic. This is something special and Jeff offers insights on his own career,  people he has worked with as well as discussing influences, back-stories and personal creeds. If you're a filmmaker you will find this fascinating and if you're just a good 'ol movie lover then you're about to get a rare look-see into the work of one of my favourite B-movie directors. Jeff Burr also happens to be a genuine and super nice guy and having bantered back and forth with him for this interview he has become one of my favourite humans.  

Jeff Burr (right) with director Bart Mastronardi.

What was your first memory of cinema?
​
My first memory of cinema is being taken to a James Bond film, THUNDERBALL, probably around 1966.  I was four, and I saw it in Florida.  I vividly remember being horrified at the moment where there is a guy trapped underwater by his seatbelt (he has an airhose because it was a planned water landing of a jet fighter) and the main villian Largo swims up to him in scuba gear, and takes out a knife, and you think he is going to cut the man free of his seatbelt. Instead, Largo cuts the man's airhose, leaving him to drown in rather graphic fashion. I loved the spectacle of the film, and have always loved the water, so it was a great film to see as a little kid. I have been a Bond fan ever since, to varying degrees, but one of the great things about being in Los Angeles is that you have a chance to meet people who worked on films you love. I got to meet and get to know Peter Hunt, the editor and second unit director of THUNDERBALL, (as well as many more Bond films, etc  Do yourself a favor and see OHMSS, the Bond he directed, and check out GOLD and SHOUT AT THE DEVIL for rollicking old fashioned adventure filmmaking, and check out THE IPCRESS FILE, a movie he edited that was very influential to 60's mainstream filmmakers)  He was very encouraging to me at a time when I needed much encouraging!  Probably the most affecting movie I saw as a kid was 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY.  I saw it at the Cinerama theater in Chattanooga, TN, and it haunted me from the first frame on.  That is one movie that I will see anywhere, any time on the big screen.  If you have never seen it in 70mm with a film print in a huge theater, you really haven't seen it.

---

Jeff (left) 1978. Age 15.

What was your favourite film as a child?

​I had many favorite films as a kid, as I think everyone has, and the ones that I saw at an early age that I fell in love with are like cinematic comfort food, making me smile every time I revisit them.  Some I love because I can remember the night I saw that particular film, who I was with, the mischief we got into after the movie, etc.  Here are some that come to mind right away...PHASE IV (I couldn't drive yet, and it opened for two days only at a drive-in in my town, so I begged, and I mean begged, my parents to take me to it after I saw the ad in the paper. So my mom and dad put me and my brother Bill in the car and took us to see ants infused with alien intelligence take over the planet. I can remember my dad from the backseat going "Jeffrey, what kind of bullshit is this???" )  EQUINOX (i saw it with my brother on a double-bill with THE BLOB, and both of us got pretty scared over EQUINOX), THE LAST SAFARI, GATOR, PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE, LAND THAT TIME FORGOT, DUCK YOU SUCKER, THE LONGEST YARD, SORCERER, DESTROY ALL MONSTERS, GODZILLA vs. THE SMOG MONSTER, RABID, DEATHDREAM, way too many to mention, and then on TV seeing the Universal monster movies, 50's sci-fi, the Roger Corman movies from the 50's and 60's, the Man With No Name trilogy with Eastwood, Jerry Lewis' movies, etc. 

---

Directing Sorcerer's Duel (8MM)

Was genre filmmaking something you had your sight set on or did you happen to fall into it?
​
I have always loved what is called genre filmmaking, and I have always loved lower-budget movies that had a rough edge. I love horror movies, always sought them out, and when I started making little super 8mm movies in the backyard, I made horror movies, sci-fi and action movies. So I was always deeply rooted in a love of horror, yes. But does that mean that is the only type of film I want to make as a filmmaker?   Hell no!

---

Jeff's late brother William (8mm film)

Your first film was FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM. How did this film come about and can you tell us about your transition from film school into actual film making?

​I started making little super 8mm movies when I was in probably sixth-seventh grade, and as I made them, it made me want to know more and make more.  I became more obsessed with each project and more ambitious, etc. These movies, with titles such as AGENT 005, LIFE IS SEMI-PRECIOUS, LET US PREY, TEENAGE FRIGHT, etc. are in many ways more "real" to me than many of the so-called professional films I have made. There were a few other people making movies in my hometown that I knew about, Mark Hannah, Allen Posten, Mike Malone, Tommy Kaye, (who all have gone on to creative careers, by the way) and we had a healthy competitive relationship, taking pointers from each other and seeing new ways to do things. If you have seen the movie SUPER 8, that is a fairly accurate description of kids making amateur movies at that time. (In fact, I am putting together a documentary of those days, called A DECADE UNDER THE INNOCENCE, which has some great stories of 8mm filmmaking...look for it as an extra on a blu-ray release of one of my films, or on my website www.jeffburr.com that is coming soon, finally!)

---

Rarely seen still from Divided We Fall

 So, to make a long story even longer, I always wanted a career (or thought I wanted it, as the case may be) in Hollywood directing mainstream movies. So I ended up getting accepted to the USC School of Cinema, and went there as a freshman right after high school. I learned so much out there, and saw many movies that I had only read about..(keep in mind that this was just at the dawn of the consumer video age, so the only way you could see a movie was in the theater or on tv later, chopped up)  USC was overall a good experience for me, and while there, I made an epic student film with a classmate named Kevin Meyer (look him up on imdb, he has some major credits and is extremely talented) titled DIVIDED WE FALL, which was a civil war western starring John Agar, Nicolas Guest, David Cloud, and Willard Pugh. It also featured cameos from RA Mihailoff and Michael Shamus Wiles. All those actors I would use later in various projects. DIVIDED really became our APOCALYPSE NOW, and we dropped out of school to finish it, etc. It won a lot of awards, and opened a few doors. Also, at the same time, I was working for about five months with Jim Wynorski at New World pictures, as his assistant, being involved with ad campaigns of various films, etc. Basically, DIVIDED became my portfolio, and inspired by EVIL DEAD and production stories like it, I teamed up with two people I had known at USC, Darin Scott and Courtney Joyner, and then Mike Malone and finally my brother William, who had moved out to California in early 1984, and we formed a company to make a feature film. We came up with the script for FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM, and my brother thought he could convince people to put money into it. He was a carpet salesman, and where I am from, Dalton, Georgia, is one of the world's foremost places for manufacturing carpet. So William went back to Dalton to talk to various carpet magnates, and I went with him to supply the enthusiasm for the project, etc. It took a while, but we raised the money for the film in late winter/early spring 1985 and shot the bulk of the film in august 1985. It is a much more complicated story than that, but those are the bullet points. All true. I am in the process of putting together a special edition blu-ray for FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM, and any and all questions will be answered by that documentary, I hope. 

---

I rate the film highly but it is known to aficionados that your star Vincent Price later turned on the film. He's certainly starred in far worse - what was he like to work with?

​FROM A WHISPER was always a polarizing picture, in regard to reviews and audience reaction. It really surprises me to this day, with the cast we put together for that film (Vincent Price, Clu Gulager, Rosalind Cash, Cameron Mitchell, Terry Kiser, Lawrence Tierney, Angelo Rossitto, Martine Beswicke, Harry Caesar, Susan Tyrell)  that so few people really know about it!  I cast the film myself and approached the actors with total enthusiasm for what they were capable of doing, and willingness to experiment, as we certainly couldnt offer much money! With Vincent, we went to his house (I have told this story many times, and it is very complicated, so look to other interviews for the story, and it will be told in all its warty glory on the documentary) and got him to do the movie. He shot for two days, and he was nothing less than extraordinary to work with. It was a true honor to be able to direct him in my first movie. He made me feel comfortable, and made sure to tell me that he wanted direction. I dont know the actual reason why he "turned" on the movie, but it was a very bumpy path to get him to do the movie, which most certainly has something to do with it, and he also got an unsolicited letter from Forry Ackerman, saying the film would ruin him as an actor as it was the most disgusting, distasteful film Forry had ever seen. (the letter is hilarious, by the way, and will be included in the documentary. I had invited Forry to see the rough cut of the stories, as he had known Clu and Cameron through the years,etc. That is how Forry had seen it before we shot with Vincent)  The last contact I had with Vincent was in spring of 1988, as I had sent him reviews of the film from the LA Times, The Atlanta Journal, etc and he wrote me a nice letter saying he hadn't seen the film yet. We had invited him to many screenings, but he was having operations on his feet at the time and was pretty immobile) So I dont really know for sure if he ever even saw the completed film. But he was an amazing actor, and an amazing human being. What an artistic, creative, curious life he led. It was cinema's loss and the planet Earth's loss when he passed on in 1993.  

Pumpkinhead 2


You have contributed to some very big film properties, stepping into some very big shoes. Do you have a personal philosophy and approach when it comes to making sequels and picking up where others have left off?
​
No I dont.  Most of the sequels I have been involved with came at the last minute, or at least after a first or second draft had been developed internally. I would say my personal philosophy to that would be that you want to give people a new experience, building on the foundation from those who came before, but you dont to dishonor the original. But doing "number two" movies (and yes, I can see the critics having a field day with that term) I think are the hardest, as the producers are usually calling for a virtual remake of the first movie and you are trying to make it something honoring the original but your own.  PUMPKINHEAD 2's script wasn't designed to be a Pumpkinhead movie, it was a script from another project that was quickly retro-fitted into that world. The producer talks about it on the dvd documentary.  I didnt know that at the time, all I knew was that we had to be filming in two and a half weeks and it couldn't be pushed back. STEPFATHER 2 was designed to be a direct to video low budget film for ITC's video division. We had much less money and time than the original, and that was true with Pumpkinhead and almost all of the sequels I have done! But the bottom line is that all you can do in a situation like this, when you dont have complete control of the process, is to make the film as much your own as possible and do the best job you can do with it at the time, staying true to the thematics of the film and making it as entertaining and enjoyable as you can. I think that if I like it, or am excited about it, etc, that others will too. That is the only gauge you've got. If you start saying "Oh, the fangoria fans are going to love this effect" that is pandering, and taking the directing choice out of the organic arena. Looking back though, I guess you could make a case that there is something parasitic about some of my films, because they are organisms that have attached themselves to a host, and wouldnt be able to exist without that host. But, here's the bottom line for me, for what it's worth to your readers. I learned to be a professional film director via the sequels, so it really was a cinema education, and instead of graduating with a 3.5, I had a 2, 3, 4 and 5.

---

What are some of your favourite movie sequels in general? 
​
I really never think about my favorite sequels, etc. but let me include remakes and right off the bat my two favorite ones would be Carpenter's THE THING and Friedkin's SORCERER.  Both really are reimaging of the material not really remakes. GODFATHER 2 would be an obvious answer to the sequel question...

I remember being impressed with Richard Franklin's PSYCHO 2, just because that would have been such a daunting task, and he was the perfect guy to pull it off. GATOR is pretty much a sequel to WHITE LIGHTNING, and I love GATOR, so there is another one. And if you call FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE a sequel, that would be on the list too, as would GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY. 


Of course THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE is probably the biggest franchise you have built upon. I think that your director's cut of LEATHERFACE is one of the most underrated horror films around (the theatrical cut sucks). Is this a film you're proud of?
​
There is no question, if anyone knows me at all in film, it is because of LEATHERFACE. By far the most high-profile movie I have ever made (to date!). The irony of that is that it is the one that I spent the least amount of time working on!!! I got hired in early July and I finished my work (and/or was shown the door) in mid/late october. Am I proud of the movie? That is a complicated question and a complicated emotion. There is a lot of me in the uncut version, that survived the corporate process of that film, so I don't know if proud would be the word, but as I get older I am happy that some things got through. But I am never really happy with anything I have done, as there is always that nagging feeling of "Oh shit, if only i had thought of this, etc"  My films have always been low budget and fairly fast shoots, so the gap between what you thought of and what you were able to get on film is fairly wide.  Hopefully the gap closes with each film, as you learn more things every film you make. 

---

The new Sawyer family.

The film is something of an oddity and was the first instalment to move the story away from the Sawyer family (or at least the family members audiences had come to love). In many ways your film created a new lineage and backstory that's been exploited in later films. Was this always the intention. How much did the film change from first draught to final cut?

​The development process for LEATHERFACE was more internally New Line, so I really don't know the initial thoughts in the company on what they were trying to achieve with this movie, other than obviously to create another horror franchise to complement the NIGHTMARE series. I know New Line had handled distribution on some of the many re-issues of the original movie, so they obviously were aware of the status of the would-be franchise. Of course, Cannon had produced and distributed the second movie, and then when the rights were available to do another one, Bob Shaye secured them for New Line. I think that he handed off development to his protege Michael DeLuca, as Mike was passionate about horror and really wanted this project. They hired David J. Schow to write it, and so it went. I don't know who other than Mike was shepherding the development of the screenplay at that time. And I think there was a quick flirtation with Kim Henkel, who may have come up with a treatment that New Line didn't like (which later became the 4th movie). The reason I say this is that for Cannes that year (1989) there was a flyer for LEATHERFACE that had a synopsis of the plot of the film, which involved prom night, etc. All of this was very much before I became involved in the film. My first meeting at New Line regarding the film was when they were interviewing directors in the first round. Maybe this would have been April, May or so. My agent set up a screening of STEPFATHER 2 and sent them a tape of FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM.  

---

Jeff directing Ken Foree in Leatherface.

I read the draft of the script, which was from David Schow, and the producer at that time was a guy named Jeff Schectman (or Schecter, or something like that, I only met him once) I gave them my thoughts on the script, they asked me questions on how I liked to work, etc.  And that was the last of it, until my agent got a phone call in late June for me to come and meet again on the project. At this time, they had lost a director they had hired (Jonathan Betuel, MY SCIENCE PROJECT...who is a guy someone should interview about LEATHERFACE as he would have a lot of pieces of the pre-production puzzle)  and were scrambling for someone as the film had to start shooting no later than mid-July to have any hope of making the November 3rd release date. So I had another interview with the new producer Bob Engleman and Mike Deluca and Sara Rischer from New Line. It was obvious that Sara wanted nothing to do with this movie and thought it was disgusting and not the direction New Line should be going in, which immediately created negative feelings and needless tension. And of course, I was basically a new filmmaker, having really only one "professional" film under my belt, STEPFATHER 2.  FROM A WHISPER was a totally indie film that I had final cut on, and controlled every aspect of the production, from beginning to end. So LEATHERFACE also would be the first movie that I would do without any support on the producing side. I was alone with no one to really back up my vision of the movie. Which, basically is getting hired to direct a movie in Hollywood!!! So in no way am I blaming New Line and saying that all the problems on the film were their fault. I was a very inexperienced director, but that doesn't mean that I didn't know what I was doing. I needed some support from the production side, and that never happened. 

---

Jeff directing Viggo Morstensen in Leatherface.

The bottom line is that New Line really didn't want me to direct the movie, they would rather have had many other choices that just weren't available, for one reason or another. I was the only director at that time who they could tolerate who agreed to do the movie under the conditions.  So that ain't a great starting place for a creative partnership. Michael Deluca was the one most involved with the project for New Line, and he certainly was a horror fan and well versed in the history of the genre in all aspects.  But he wasn't at that time particularly production-savvy, and the line producer they hired, Bob Engleman, had the exact wrong background for this type of film.  His experience was in mainstream Hollywood production, AD'ing guys like Herbert Ross, etc. So through him, before I came on, a lot of decisions were made that impacted the film. Such as having to shoot in California, building the farmhouse from the ground up, etc. Also New Line had the final say on the crew I could hire, so I couldn't have my choice of cinematographers, etc. But again, for someone of my experience level and stature in the industry (none) this was very common. 

---

All of this is backstory to when I came on the movie. When I was hired to do the film, the machinery of production was already in motion, and Mick Strawn was building the gas station and the house already.  Of course I could make some adjustments, etc. but my focus from day one was visualising the film, casting the film and getting the script streamlined and doable for the budget and to make it something that would stand on its own.  I do remember my first question when I had a meeting with David was "what family is this and where did they come from, etc"  I always thought that seeing how Leatherface would find other people to make a new surrogate family would be an interesting approach to a sequel.  In any case, there wasn't a lot of time to do a production rewrite on the film, and David had a novel he was finishing I think, so he couldn't be around during the shoot.  He visited a few times though. So the real changes to the script from the time I came on to the final cut were mostly budgetary. The original end to the film involved a police station and a chase, and there was a whole subplot of the character Tinker dipping everything in metal and having a huge vat that he eventually falls into, etc. But the end that is on the theatrical cut was never in any draft of the film, that was a tacked-on studio thing that Deluca supervised, I am guessing. I remember I wanted to have Leatherface on a horse with that Excalibur saw chasing Michelle through the woods, bringing a bit of the Arthurian feel of the trailer to the film, but it didn't happen for budgetary reasons, etc. What is frustrating about the budget of these kind of low-budget films for established companies is that they always tell you there is no money for your ideas, but later in post-production, when the high-ranking executive has an incredibly stupid idea, there always seems to be money to act on it. Like I have said before, I know that my choices on a film are going to be more interesting than the executive's choices,  because I have lived and breathed the film in my head and my heart and for the executive it is one film of many.  And my mistakes on the film are going to be more interesting than the executive's mistakes, for the same reason.  So yes, I believe that if I had been left alone from the moment I was hired to the final cut, with support and enthusiasm from the financing company, it would have been a much better film.  I would say that about all of my films that I have been hired to do.  And probably every living director worth his salt would say the exact same thing!

---

Jeff with Tobe Hooper.

Did Tobe Hooper have much involvement with the film and if so, was he opinionated about the direction of the story?
​
He had no involvement from the time I came on. I cant speak about the months of writing and prep before I was involved.  But I was forbidden from talking to him, so I guess there may have been some bad feelings there. I wanted to call him (like I had called Joe Ruben when I did STEPFATHER 2) to pay my respects and to ask a few questions and to tell him how much I thought of his work. (I am an unabashed fan of his, I think LIFEFORCE is one of the most fun, underrated sci-fi films of the last thirty years)  After the movie had come out and died a quiet death, I did have a meeting with him in early 1990. I cant remember who set the meeting up, but I do remember the first thing he said to me.  "Jeff, I cant tell you how strange an experience it was to see LEATHERFACE in the theater". To which I said, "It was pretty strange for me too, Tobe!!"  I had not seen a shred of the revised ending, knew nothing about it other than Ken Foree wasn't dead, so here the movie says "Directed by Jeff Burr" and I, like the rest of the audience in the theater, didn't know how it ended!!! As for Tobe's reaction to the film, I didn't ask and he didn't tell, but how could anyone really like that theatrical cut, which (because of the MPAA cuts) made me (and the editor) look incompetent!! I later spent some time with him in Sitges, Spain, when he was premiering TOOLBOX MURDERS and I was premiering STRAIGHT INTO DARKNESS. I still haven't seen EGGSHELLS, which was his first film, shot in Austin in 1969 or so... I have seen some clips and it looks really interesting.

---

The foundation of my movie knowledge came from spending countless hours in video stores and one of the everlasting images that has stuck with me is the cover art for LEATHERFACE. That huge chainsaw with "The Saw Is Family" inscribed on it was certainly imposing and affective. I understand the size of the chainsaw was Robert Shaye's idea. As a drawcard gimmick it did do the trick but it ultimately made Leatherface himself less scary. What did you make of Shaye's input into the film?
​
Well, I didn't like the poster, so what do I know?? I thought it was lazy and not striking at all, but it worked for you.  I also hated the tag line..."the most controversial horror film is finally here" or something like that.  The only way to have that tagline be effective at all was to release the film totally unrated and include every shred of gore and disgust we shot!  Which couldn't have happened for a variety of reasons, not the least of which that RCA/COLUMBIA, who co-financed the movie, demanded an R rated film. They would not release an X or unrated film. As for Shaye's input, refer to answer #9.  I do remember he came into the editing room after a test screening, when he was worried that the film would be banned in many important revenue-producing foreign territories, he sat down, we ran the film on the moviola flatbed, and he basically pointed at the screen and said, "STOP...this goes, this shot goes, that shot goes, etc" and we would continue the reel, and then there would be another "STOP!!  This goes, what the fuck is that....get rid of that, leave that bullshit behind in film school, get rid of that, is that good filmmaking, I don't think so, etc"  (All real quotes from him that I remember as the film unspooled)  Filmmakers have to develop rhino skin, as this kind of thing happens over and over.  An insensitive executive who has the power to destroy because he has the power of the pocketbook is more common than uncommon, unfortunately, for the american film industry.  But other people got along great with Bob Shaye, so my experience was just that, my experience.  And I did always respect New Line for putting out some really interesting movies, like the John Waters stuff, The Evil Dead, Reefer Madness, etc etc. I was sorry to see them get absorbed into Warner Brothers, but I think they really became a defacto studio as opposed to an independent when Time Warner bought them in the early 90's. And one last comment about LEATHERFACE, for all the press that it engendered about it being a "troubled production" it really wasn't.  It wasn't over budget or over schedule, etc. It ran into unexpected trouble getting the R rating from the MPAA, which moved its release date, which was fatal for the film's box office, but the film came out, then came out on video, then came out on laserdisc, got reissued on video, on dvd, etc. It was a moderately profitable film for them, and thats the end of it.  Mark Ordesky, who was a junior executive under DeLuca at the time, said it best in the dvd documentary. He said something like "Leatherface wasn't a troubled production...I have been on troubled productions and this wasn't one of them.."

---

Bruce Campbell & Quentin Tarantino in Eddie Presley.

I have to ask you about EDDIE PRESLEY. The film featured cameos from Quentin Tarantino and Bruce Campbell. It also starred Laurence Tierney and Duane Whitaker who have both featured in Tarantino films. And of course Ted Raimi and Bruce Campbell are in cahoots with Scott Speigel who was instrumental in Tarantino's rise to fame. Were you moving in the same circles as QT back then?

​I can't tell from your question if you have seen EDDIE PRESLEY or not. That is a film that is close to my heart, even if it is far away from everyone else's! It was a film that I had total control over, it was produced by my brother William and Tom Denolf and Chuck WIlliams, and it was a labor of love.  Anyone reading this interview who has enjoyed my work and hasn't seen the movie, stop reading this interview and go on amazon or ebay and buy the two disc special edition, which you can get for next to nothing. Don't stream it as the two disc edition has a ton of special features you cant see otherwise, including more with Quentin and Bruce. Go ahead. I'll wait. And then write me and tell me what you think. I met Quentin at a screening of MANIAC COP 2 in 1990 I think. He was a ball of energy and I think had just optioned or sold TRUE ROMANCE to Bill Lustig, so that's why he was at that screening.  A friend of mine signed with Quentin's manager, Cathryn Jaymes, and I would see Quentin occasionally at parties, screenings, etc. He introduced me to Lawrence Bender, and I got to meet Monte Hellman at a party, etc etc. So I guess I would say that I was and am a friendly acquaintance of Quentin. I am a fan of his work, and I don't feel that he gets enough credit for one fact.. .from day one as a filmmaker, he has followed his own path and made the films he wanted to make. He didn't drift and do DIE HARD 3 or something, he followed his own voice. Now, that is pretty damn unusual in Hollywood, and of course it helps when your first film is a huge financial and critical hit, but still, he should be celebrated as a role model for that fact by all filmmakers. It doesn't even matter if you like his work or not, that is immaterial to what I am saying. Follow your own path as an artist. Fundamental advice.  I shot the film EDDIE PRESLEY in the summer of 1991, and it was shot at the same time as RESEVOIR DOGS, and we shared two actors, actually. Lawrence Tierney did a cameo for me, as I had known him since 1985, and Julie Rhode-Brown was an actor in EDDIE and she was working in the production office of RESERVOIR DOGS. We were using the same lab as DOGS, Foto-Kem, and this was back in the day when you would have projected dailies. So we would see each other sometimes either going in or coming out of the lab. I remember vividly looking at the screen through a projection window at Larry Tierney doing his "my way or the highway" speech in DOGS, waiting to see my own dailies. Bruce Campbell I met through Scott Spiegel, who I think I had met at Empire, Charles Band's company in the 1980's. I had been hired to do a film that never got made, called THE VAULT, and Scott had just made NIGHT CREW with Lawrence Bender.  And I think I met Ted Raimi through Scott too. Scott was and is a great guy and a very talented filmmaker in his own right. Going over to Scott's place was a cereal lover's dream, as he collected boxes of cereal from all over from various decades. It was like walking down a cereal aisle in the supermarket in the early 1970's going over to his place at that time!  Scott was very supportive of me and of EDDIE. And the cast for EDDIE was pretty amazing for a 16mm very low budget film. We had in no particular order... Duane Whitaker, Roscoe Lee Browne, Clu Gulager, Tim Thomerson, Lawrence Tierney, Ian Ogilvy, Willard Pugh, Ted Raimi, Quentin Tarantino, Bruce Campbell, RA Mihailoff, Michael Shamus Wiles, Harri James, Stacie Bougeouis/Randall, Daniel Roebuck. The film played some festivals, including the very first South by Southwest Film Festival, and played the Sundance Channel in america for two years. But it remains a virtually unknown movie, and it is also a love/hate movie. A small percentage of people who see it fall in love with it, and a larger percentage of people want to yell at the screen and tear their hair out. You be your own judge!     

Tarantino played an Elvis impersonator on an episode of The Golden Girls [See here] and of course Bruce Campbell went on to play an aged Elvis in BUBBA HO-TEP. This is more of a nerdy fan-boy observation than it is a question. lol

---

Your next two films were back to back entries into Charles Band's PUPPER MASTER series. My readers will know that I have a weakness for many of Band's movies from the 80s and 90s and he is responsible for my love of horror. From conversations and interviews I have had with other directors it seems that Charles is difficult to work with (seemingly common amongst independent studio heads). You worked with him again on WEREWOLF REBORN AND FRANKENSTEIN REBORN. What was your working relationship like with Charles?

​As you can well imagine, Charles Band is a complicated topic.  I can say that of all the films that I have directed that he has been involved with, either tangentially or more directly, there have been financial problems, issues, pains in the ass, etc. Being promised certain things both financially and creatively that didn't come to pass, etc. I don't feel that I "know" Charlie at all, even though I have done several films for him, and started by working on a film called THE VAULT in 1987, along with GHOST TOWN, that didn't get made (yes, Ghost Town did but it was a totally different movie, just the same title). We never really had a working relationship, just a few meetings before production and he would review a cut and make me take some things out, etc. He really never allotted a lot of time for any movie that I did with him, and when you were meeting with him, you always got the impression that his mind was on twenty other things and you never got his half-attention, much less his full.  He was very consistent with the movies he had produced, and I suppose you could say that he was/is the auteur of the films, as you certainly can spot an Empire or Full Moon film on the shelf at fifty paces.  I think he was ahead of his time in regard to the whole bullshit "branding" thing that every media company is so obsessed with these days. The "brand" was always bigger than the movie.  And the whole quantity vs. quality equation... he would rather make 50 bad movies than 15 good ones (not that money dictates quality however). He would take resources promised to one movie and apply it to three others. So I would say the frustration I had with him was due to the financial shenanigans that always went on, and also to the absolute paucity of creative/thematic ambition of the movies he wanted to make. To that end, there is NO comparison of Charlie Band to Roger Corman. They are entirely different minds. And maybe that is why you didn't see the crop of impactful new directors out of Empire and Full Moon that you did out of New World. I realize it was a slightly different era, but the comparisons can be made all the same. All that said, I must say that I enjoyed being around Albert Band, Charlie's dad, who truly loved movies and making them and being on the set, etc. I think Charlie really never truly loved making movies (directing) himself, even though he did a lot of it.  \I think his passions are more with working with artists for promotional materials, coming up with the ideas of the movies, comic books, merchandising, etc. 

---

How did working with puppetry on the two PUPPET MASTER films compare with the SFX on your previous films?

​The making of PUPPET MASTER 4 and 5 was a pretty rushed affair, as we shot both movies in about 24 days, with some second unit with the puppets concurrently and a little afterward. The effects were almost all practical, so the solutions to whatever problems had to be found on the set. There of course were the stop motion shots that David Allen and I talked over, and then there were some opticals and some very early CGI by Linda Obalil and Jim Stewart of Motion Opticals. So really it was a matter of hiding the various cables used to bring life to the puppets, and in scenes where there were multiple puppets that's where it got a little tricky. But in general, the SPFX didn't slow us down any more than anticipated, as the puppeteers and the mechanical effects guy (Mark Rappaport and his crew) were really really talented and fun to work with. Wayne Toth designed the large underworld creature SUTECK (or SUCK IT as some crew members called him) and that was a fun Sid and Marty Krofft-esque beastie. And that brings up my misgivings on that series...who are those movies for? Most if not all of them are R rated, but they are essentially little kids movies. So they should have been more amped up and fun for the moppets, or more strange and freaky for the rest of us.  I tried to give personality to the puppets in every shot, and specific business that related to their goals at the moment, etc. We had a lot of fun making that movie(s) and I have always contended that you could cut a fun 80 minute movie out of those two movies. Both are hopelessly padded to bring each to feature length. But I have a soft spot for PUPPET MASTER 5 especially, and I do like the dream sequence from that... the whole movie should have been more like it! But I hope that they are different looking and feeling from the other movies in the series, so at least I tried to bring something new to bear in regards to style and tone. The script for both movies (really one script the way we shot it) was god-fucking-awful, so we did what we could on set to make it more fun. That is what I hope I brought to those two movies, some sense of cinematic fun. And I loved looking at Pinhead because he always reminded me of Lawrence Tierney.   But the way those films were set up, it was really like doing some form of episodic television, as most of the crew was on staff, so you were "assigned" the movie and the crew was already there, and they had worked on the last four or five of the Full Moon movies, so they had certain (low) expectations that you tried to work around. A bright spot was having Doug Aarniokoski as my first AD. He had worked on EDDIE PRESLEY and it was a pleasant surprise to find him here. He also did a pass on the script before I came aboard, and sent it to a more humorous direction, which I encouraged during shooting.  All in all, for me, somewhat frustrating but some of each movie makes me smile. I did a commentary track for both movies for a German label, you can get those on amazon and they are region free I believe. Maybe they will be put out on BluRay, if so I hope to do a commentary track and have a little making-of documentary. 

---

Next was PUMPKINHEAD 2, which I think is undervalued... but it does bare little relation to the original. Can you tell us how the film came to you and what inspired the story to take an unrelated direction?
​
Originally, I was supposed to do OBLIVION 1-2 in Romania (which I really wanted to do, as I love westerns) and then DARK ANGEL in Romania. I had a meeting with Matthew Bright, who seemed pretty fucking dark about my script suggestions for that movie. It was delayed, then delayed again, so I had flashbacks to 1987 when I was supposed to go to Italy to do THE VAULT, and it got delayed, and delayed, etc. So I got a call to come in and meet on PUMPKINHEAD 2. I had known Brad Krevoy a little when he was with Roger Corman, and I had one degree of separation from the original. Cynthia Charette, the production designer of the original PUMPKINHEAD, was the production designer of my first film FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM, and at the time of PUMPKINHEAD, she was my brother William's girlfriend. So I had heard many tales of Pumpkinhead before I had my meeting on the sequel.  Krevoy and company sent me the script, and again, there was another director hired before me that had developed the script and then bailed on the project because of delays or a better offer, etc. Tony Randel was the director, and I guess he left to direct TICKS.  The script was pretty darn bad, and made little sense when put into the context of the previous movie. I found out later (it is on the Lionsgate dvd mini-documentary) that the script was originally written to be something else, then retro-fitted into the Pumpkinhead universe.  The timeframe was crucial because the film had to be in production at a certain date to fill some contractual clause. I met with the production executive Jed Weintrob, who told me that it looked like MGM would put more money into the production, and release it theatrically, all of which sounded good, but there was precious little time to rewrite the script. In retrospect, I should have just said, let me rewrite the script totally, throw out everything but the page numbers. Then we might have had a fighting chance at doing something good.  But I really tried to make this chicken-shit script into chicken salad.  I didn't make it, but maybe the effort shows. I brought back Mark Patrick Carducci and Gary Gerani for a few days to consult on it, and they are in the movie in the cockfight scene. I didn't know Mark that well, but I was very sad when I learned about his death. He made a terrific documentary on the making of PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE that anyone reading this should see. Stop reading this interview and go to Amazon or ebay and look for FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD. Go ahead.  I'll wait. In any case, the movie was shot in 24 or so days, for under a million bucks, all around LA. We had some casting hiccups, and Timothy Bottoms dropped out at the last minute, and Andrew Robinson filled in for him. Andy is a truly gifted actor and artist, and he is another guy who was an honor to direct.  I tried to inject as much style as I could in the short time, and I had some "creative differences" with some of the crew members, but I really enjoyed working with Gloria Hendry, Ami Dolenz, Soleil Moon Frye, Hill Harper, Alexander Polinsky and Trevor Edmond.  At the end of the day, it is basically a creature on the loose revenge tale, more in feeling with 1950's monster romps like MONSTER FROM PIEDRAS BLANCAS or MONSTER ON THE CAMPUS than the 90's stuff. I think if I had seen it as a teenager in a drive-in in the 1970's, I would have gotten a few laughs from it, but I would have cursed the filmmakers for not getting Ami Dolenz naked! (the reason I mention that is that one of the first things Ami told me was that "Brad Krevoy has been trying to get me naked for three movies and it's never going to happen!") On that film, I was glad I could bring on Joe Unger, Kane Hodder  and RA Mihailoff from LEATHERFACE to join the fun, and to have Will Huston (who I knew from USC and had worked on FROM A WHISPER) play a small but pivotal role that made me laugh, even though he showed up an hour late for his call, which is unconscionable, especially for a low budget film.  Directors never forget.  

---

Let Us Prey - Keep reading for details

A lot of awesome any gnarly footage has been cut out of your films to avoid the dreaded X or NC-17 rating. Are you like a father having his child ripped away when this happens?

​On FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM, we had to trim a little of the "Glass Eater" getting shredded scene, those were the only cuts we made, and it amounted to maybe four seconds. What happened with that is that the original negative got used with the revised soundtrack for the release prints, which is why it goes out of sync for a few shots...but the sequence is so stylized that it really doesn't get noticed. There is an adage in film... if multiple versions of a scene/print/negative/soundtrack exist, the wrong one will always be used. But in the UK, WHISPER was more heavily cut for the 18 certificate... it lost about two minutes or so. STEPFATHER 2 was cut for an R, originally rated X, for a sequence where the ex-husband gets killed with a broken bottle. The full version of the scene is on the dvd from Synapse, as a special feature, and is also on the original dvd from Miramax. The uncut scene is much more effective. I was truly surprised at that rating problem, because I had seen more graphic stuff in many R rated films. And then LEATHERFACE. Those problems were/are fairly well documented, but the thing you should know is that BEFORE we took it to the ratings board, Bob Shaye had come in and cut back everything that was graphic and nasty, for he was worried about foreign banning of the movie (which did happen, in the UK and other countries it was banned outright). So I felt that the MPAA might make a few very very minor cuts, but nothing that would really change what was already watered down. So imagine my surprise when THE WATERED DOWN VERSION has to be submitted 11 times to get the R, and misses the release date! In later films, NIGHT OF THE SCARECROW was originally NC17, and we had to cut down a few moments from the orgy sequence and of the character of Gary Lockwood getting skewered. PUMPKINHEAD 2 I think we had to cut down the decapitation of Trevor Edmond just a little, and I think remove one shot of Linnea Quigley on top of RA Mihailoff. I got the R on the first submission of STRAIGHT INTO DARKNESS, and a lot of the later films didn't get an MPAA rating, as they were made for tv, etc.  But I did have to cut down on the green gore from a kids movie called PHANTOM TOWN, as the cable executives thought it was "too intense" for their young viewers.    

---

Rarely seen eye gouge from Let Us Prey (8mm)

These days the limits of gore and excess are far higher. How do you feel about gore and violence in today's cinema? 
​
I would say that yes, the R rating today is much more lenient with gore than it was twenty or so years ago. And what is shown on network tv in shows like CSI, etc would make Leatherface blush. I dont think this is "bad" in and of itself, a non-censored media is what I would always want. But with those conditions, the responsibility of who watches what falls with the parents, caregivers, etc. Which is where that responsibility should fall. I am all for a ratings system that calls attention to the content of what you are about to see, but the decision to watch or not rests with the individual. Does that mean that I would want a 4 year old to watch THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE? Of course not. I wouldn't want a 40 year old to watch it!  But again, that decision has to be with the parents or partners of that 4 year old or 40 year old.  No easy answers, and I think every filmmaker has questioned at one time or another the effect of some of the images they have created onto the world at large. I saw DAWN OF THE DEAD when it first came out, in a theater, and I was about 15. As you can imagine, I fucking loved it and it was like something I had never seen, an atmosphere I had never encountered before. But the difference was there was an IDEA behind it, and even me as a 15 year old responded to those ideas as well as the machete through the head. Around that same time, I saw THE WIZARD OF GORE as the bottom half of a drive-in double feature, and it left me bored and cold. I was thinking, why am I watching this?? There was no emotional effect at all. SO I never really liked gore for gore's sake alone, I guess. And the funny thing about gore and violence, often you can get a much bigger audience reaction to a character getting a paper cut than a head being blown off. It's all about what is relatable, emotional, and character and idea-driven. Sam Peckinpah is one of my favorite filmmakers, and look at his movies. Yes of course they are violent, and placed in a violent world, but they are character driven and EMOTIONAL.  That's what it's all about. Deep emotion, that's one of the things cinema is all about. And on the subject of gore, I am going to send you a picture from one of my super 8mm movies entitled LET US PREY, which features maybe my most effective piece of gore in my amateur films. Bob Pike is the victim and Mark Lancaster is the villain.  The film involves two astronauts stranded on a remote planet, and they try to stay alive, but Mark descends into vicious savagery, and ends up plucking the eyes out of Pike with his fingers  (you find out later that it was all a test to make sure Lancaster is worthy of being the Devil's son, so it is justified!!!). Also, regarding a lot of today's studio films, I am more appalled by the lack of ambition and ideas in them than any amount of gore! And lastly, I know it is oft-said, but there is something very telling about our country where in a movie if you cut off a nipple, you will get an R rating, and if you lick a nipple, you might get an NC17 (a paraphrase of what Jack Nicholson said, along with many other people).

---

Now that audiences consume their movie content through download and VOD what are your thoughts about independent filmmaking in 2013?
​
Here are my thoughts on indie filmmaking in 2013. The great thing is that it is now possible for almost anyone to make something that looks like a "real" movie.  The bad thing is that it is now possible for almost anyone to make something that looks like a real movie.
 
There are so many movies out there, in so many forms, that it is very difficult to sift through the tremendous cinema white noise.Finding that independent gem, one that hasn't been anointed by the major festivals or picked up and promoted heavily, is tough.  And with so many things competing for attention, like all of the media available on the internet, videogames, etc most people aint gonna bother to look. So, in many respects, the traditional "movie", a narrative film close to two hours long, is much less important culturally today than it was say thirty years ago. Entertainment is being provided by other media and other venues, and the attention span for a lot of the audience has shrunk to ten minutes or less, and in many platforms, ten minutes seems like an enternity. And most studio movies are not striving for any kind of cultural shelf life, they are all about the opening weekend domestically and the opening two weeks in China. And quite frankly the audience has gotten less dramatically sophisticated and much more visually sophisticated.  And it is very difficult, for a multitude of reasons, for the audience to "give themselves over" to the movie, to totally submit to the story and experience about to be told. They are too busy texting their friends about the experience of getting to the theater, who they have seen there, how the fucking popcorn butter was cold, taking pictures of the gum under their seat to instagram their BFF who couldn't come, etc etc etc.  That is what I find sad about the whole thing... the ritual of going to a darkened theater and really sharing what you are seeing with the audience. All of this coincides with the death of film as an origin medium, and it is all related. Something shot on film and projected on film has a different physiological effect on humans than something captured electronically/digitally and projected digitally. I am not saying that change is not good, it is ESSENTIAL for any art form. But to know that very soon it will be IMPOSSIBLE to shoot something on film stock and project it on a film projector makes me very very sad... but only to  people my age, not to much younger people starting out.
 
All of that said, it is a wonderful time to be a filmmaker for so many reasons. But only if you take joy in the process, not the result.  If you are in it thinking you are going to be the next big thing, and you want to reap those rewards, it is not for you. If you love having an idea and being  able to visualize it quickly and artistically, well this is a great time for you. The bottom line is that anyone who HAS to do it will find a way to do it, and keep doing it. It is that way in any art form. And there will always be people to inspire you, no matter what your tastes and sensibilities. Pay attention to the positive people and leave the negatives and the naysayers in the dust. You are either "IN" or you are "IN THE WAY". And, as I have stated before, follow your own path and your own voice (Yes, I know that is funny advice for a guy who has made a shitload of sequels predicated on other people's work!  But that doesn't make it less true...don't try to be the next Scorsese, be the first you.) And one shameless plug... if you are interested in indie filmmaking, take a look at Tom Callaway's BROKE SKY, of which I was one of the producers, and my film STRAIGHT INTO DARKNESS.  They are both totally indie productions from the very beginning to the very end. 

---

Click to visit official SID website.

STRAIGHT INTO DARKNESS was a war film. Did you feel like a fish out of water with the change of genre? It's a beautiful looking film and surprisingly fresh for a WWII picture. Did you look at other films for inspiration?

​No, I didn't feel like a fish out of water, it was a film I really wanted to make and got made. It had been in my head for a while, and I was able to partner with a Romanian company called Silver Bullet (co-run by a DP I had worked with extensively, Viorel Sergevici, Jr, who was and is an incredibly talented guy and a great friend) and we made it for a very low budget considering what the film entailed. Thank you for saying it is beautiful looking and fresh! I did not look to other war films for inspiration, the film was really in my head, and it was really pictures from WW2 that inspired the look of the film, as well as images I knew I wanted to get. And the film was totally influenced by being shot in eastern europe, as some scenes were written around locations I knew, etc etc. Basically it was using some of the Romanian children's films as pre-production for my own movie! But I couldn't have made it the way I made it without the producer Mark Hannah, and his co-producers Chuck Williams and Dan Vornicu, and with a big assist from Will Huston too. If anyone is at all interested in this film, stop reading this interview and go to ebay or amazon and order the dvd of STRAIGHT INTO DARKNESS.  The dvd has a very extensive documentary about the making of the movie, directed by Dave Parker, which will answer many questions, and it has a short film that I made called CHILD'S PLAY that has some thematic connections, so thats why to get the dvd and not watch it streaming. Go ahead, I'll wait. It premiered at Sitges in 2003, and played festivals for about a year, and didn't come out in America until June of 2006. Again, it seems to be a polarizing picture, with some people being very affected by it, and others thinking it is obtuse and slow and exploitive. Go figure.  But you be the judge, once again!

---

Your film MIL MASCARAS VS THE AZTEC MUMMY - sadly I am yet to see it but I have been curious about your credit as ANDREW QUINT. What's the story there?
​ 
MIL was a completely indie film that I just got a call out of the blue, from Jeff Uhlman, in late 2003.  I was finishing writing (with the late, great Brian Muir) Monster Man 2 and 3 for Lionsgate, and Jeff was ready to start shooting in December because of commitments with Mil. It sounded like a lot of fun, and I brought Tom Callaway into the mix as DP and Dan Golden as AD and associate producer. The film was designed to be a joint venture between Jeff and the university of Missouri, where he was a teacher. It didn't exactly work out that way, but we got a lot of cooperation from the university. It was a totally indie film, and Jeff had written the script and gotten Mil's OK. The only way to make a lucha libre reboot at this time is to do it totally straight, but up the ante of what those films were. Jeff and I saw eye to eye about many things, but at the end of the day, he took the football and went home. It was his project, and he wanted to have the control of it and see it through his way, after the vast majority had been shot. He worked with another director who did a very few scenes... and got a co-directing credit, which was the wrong credit to give.  He should have gotten the credit "additional scenes by". I saw the finished movie in a theater in Atlanta on its theatrical run, and I timed the scenes I didn't direct...something like five minutes or less. I however didn't edit the film, so that is why I took a pseudonym on the film, as I see that as a totally necessary part of the directing job. But, the final film is still a lot of fun if you are a fan of the Santo movies of the sixties, so anyone interested can get the dvd from amazon. It hasn't had a dvd release yet, but there is a festival version for sale. I hope it does come out on BluRay, as a lot of work went into that film. My biggest disappointment is that the original end wasn't used (or filmed, for that matter) where Mil grows to be one hundred feet and fights the Aztec Mummy who is also one hundred feet, using power lines as wrestling rings around Mexico City. My name "Andrew Quint" is from one of my favorite films, I'LL NEVER FORGET WHAT'S 'IS NAME, starring Oliver Reed and Orson Welles, directed by the late, great insane Michael Winner.

---

 What do you consider to be the high point of your career? What what has been your low? 

I would say that the high point of my career was the first shooting day on FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM, but I would really say that the high point of my career hasn't come yet. The low might be finding out that the negative cut on a film I co-wrote and directed AMERICAN HERO was botched and the film ended up as an insurance settlement, and about one year of work down the drain never to be seen by anyone, but there are other lows too, too many to mention.

What is your favourite film of all time?
​
If prodded, it would be 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY on the big screen in 70mm film print.  But I have so many films that I love that a question like that (besides it being one of the most obvious questions to ask anyone!) is usually meaningless.  Ask me for a list of 50 or 100 films that shaped me would be far more telling.

With John Rhys-Davies

I live in Melbourne, Australia and ask most of my guests what their favourite Aussie film is. Do you have one?

I have more than one favorite Australian film, but the first that comes to mind is THE ROAD WARRIOR.  Kevin Meyer and I saw that film in the summer of 1982, while in the throws of finishing DIVIDED WE FALL, and both of us were totally blown away. Seeing it in 70mm at the Bruin or the Village (I forget which) in Westwood in Los Angeles was jaw-dropping. WALKABOUT, which technically isn't an Australian film, I love, and OUTBACK, aka WAKE IN FRIGHT.  And your island neighbor New Zealand has two films I really like, GOODBYE PORK PIE and THE QUIET EARTH.  Saw both of them in the theater when they first came out in LA. And I remember an Aussie film that I saw as a kid, at a drive-in in Florida in 1979, on a double bill with EASY RIDER...20th CENTURY OZ.  I just remember thinking, what the fuck is this?????

Do you know anything about that film?

Yes. Down here it's known as OZ: A Rock N Roll Road Movie and it's become something of a cult movie along with similar Ozploitation films like STONE and RUNNING ON EMPTY. It was released on DVD but has since fallen out of distribution. 
​
And speaking of Australia, I would like to give a shout-out to the great Melbourne-based Justine Ryan and the other Ryan's daughters. I met them all at a convention in Atlanta and Justine is a totally energetic and very knowledgeable cult film lover, and she has a group she has helped form called CINEMANIACS, doing some great screenings in Melbourne and beyond.

---

Who are some of your favourite directors?

Some of my favorite directors are.... Sam Peckinpah, Orson Welles, Robert Aldrich, Jerry Lewis, Nicholas Roeg, Werner Herzog, Stanley Kubrick, Francis Coppola, Steven Spielberg, David Cronenberg, Clint Eastwood, John Carpenter, Dario Argento, Mario Bava, Roger Corman, Martin Scorsese, Paul Thomas Anderson, Jacques Tati, too many to mention...in general I love all filmmakers who put their heart and soul into their work and it shows

What's your favourite food?

Favorite food...man that is as tough as the favorite film.  But I would say my favorite restaurant (at least the answer is food related) would be Musso and Franks in Los Angeles. Larry Tierney used to take me there, and I have many happy memories of it.  

What's a question you've never been asked in an interview before?

What are your religious beliefs?

Would you care to answer it now?

No. 

What's the first Jeff Burr movie someone should watch first if they've never seen one before?

It depends on the person I suppose.  But the films I have made that people have come up to me with real passion  in their eyes and voices when they talk about them are FROM A WHISPER TO A SCREAM, EDDIE PRESLEY, LEATHERFACE and STRAIGHT INTO DARKNESS. 

What's next for you?
​
And there are a few movies that aren't mentioned on imdb at the moment, and that is A-fucking OK with me. I am still plugging away, and have been teaching, and writing, and I am trying to put together a few films to be shot in the state of Georgia, where I did my first movie. It's always good to return to the scene of the crime

Your films were staple additions to any good VHS horror collection throughout the 90s. Thanks for making some truly stylish and ballsy movies and thank you for taking the time to field my questions. I mostly interview people who have influenced my own creative endeavours and so much of your work has found its way into my own stories. Cheers, mate!

I want to really personally thank anyone who has followed my work, who has purchased my work, or who is curious about my work. It means a heck of a lot to me, and I really want to reward everyone who has believed in me over the years by making a really good movie, one that justifies my potential. I haven't done it yet, but I know it is within me. A REALLY GOOD MOVIE, with no qualifiers, no excuses or explanations, just one that is REALLY...REALLY...GOOD. That is my goal, my pursuit, and my passion.  

And thank you Glenn for this interview...sorry it was so long but it is a form of therapy and reflection for me, which I don't do often.