Name: Mike
E-mail: SGbumjacket@aol.com

Dear Mr. Becker,

How can you make such gems of films like Alien Apocalypse and have the balls to bash Spielberg and the Coens'? just wonderin'...thanks!
- M

Have you seen "Alien Apocalypse"? How do you know it's not brilliant? Since, in my opinion, Spielberg and the Coens are so easy to bash, it really doesn't take very big balls to do so. And since any "critic" on any rag newspaper in the entire world can bash anybody they like, I don't get the same freedom just because I've made some movies?

Josh

Name: Matt David T.
E-mail: msturnbull@comcast.net

Josh! You're not dead at all!

Lots and LOTS of life left to live! You could still quite possibly do many (or already have done many as of my sending you this list) of the things on the following list:

* Make a truly great film.
* Inspire the next great filmmaker.
* Write a wonderful script, that's then made into a great film by someone else (who you likely inspired with your writing.)
* Meet the love of your life, and settle down with her (or him?) and live happily ever after with NO children!
* Kill a man in Reno just to watch him die.
* Break a world record.
* Learn to start fires with your mind.
* Get into the video game writing industry (interactive movies man, I'm telling you!)
* Have wild and crazy sex with twins! (Highly recommended, even if it's only one at a time.)
* Act in a cameo role in a film, and be discovered as a great character actor!
* Eat snow!
* Eat Snow peas! (I love snow peas.)

Whether or not you have any interest on anything on the list above, I'm sure you could easily create your own list of things, and accomplish all of them.

Basically, what I'm saying is that it's MUCH MUCH too early for you to regret your path in life. Each new day brings with it new opportunities, and new paths and directions to take your life. That's all :).

There's an obligatory question requirement for sending you mail, huh?

Umm... How are your... pets doing?

Hey, I'm not lamenting my life, someone asked a question and I tried to answer it honestly. Twins, huh? I made my decisions in life and I don't regret them. And I have some irons in the fire. It ain't over 'til it's over. My cats are fine, they're just going stir-crazy, they've had enough winter already.

Josh

Name: Trey Smith
E-mail: cobra_commander_of_cobra@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

I was just looking at the promo picture for Alien Apocalypse on Scifi.com and Bruce looks kinda old. Is this makeup to make him look aged since he's returing to Earth from space or is Bruce just starting to age in real life?

That's just what Bruce looks like now. Time makes fools of us all.

Josh

Name: Christine
E-mail: christine34@aol.com

Josh,

Do you regret focussing so much time on your career and not enough time on your personal life, e.g. wife and kids? Have you ever been in-love? I mean, besides with film! lol!

Christine

That's a good question. I have regretted it on occasion, but not usually. Someone once asked Stephen King why he chose to write horror stories and he replied, "Who chose." There are plenty of kids in the world, so no one really needs my contribution there. And no, I have never been in love, other than with film.

Josh

Name: Trey Smith
E-mail: cobra_commander_of_cobra@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

God, you really don't know how sad the world is until you read some of the imdb message boards. Some of these kids could be our future directors and they are completely ignorant to what a good film is.

Here are a few things I read:
1)According to one of these guys Citizen Kane is the most overrated movie in film history...next to Titantic.
2)The Usual Suspects and Pulp Fiction are better films than The Godfather.
3)According to this same guy The Godfather films are overrated.
4)This guy once more claims that if a movie is boring to anyone it is not one of the greatest films of all time since movies are made for entertainment.

Anyway, maybe these guys aren't our future directors...but they are part of the reason we haven't had a really good film in ages. Only a few since I was born.

Anyway, enough ranting. You probaly are wondering "Why the fuck are you telling me this???". I hope you still have some copies of "If I Had a Hammer"over the next few weeks....I'm broke at the moment but I REALLY want it. Maybe I'll be able to purchase it next week.

Really looking foward to Alien Apocalypse.

I've still got about 35 "Hammer" tapes, so don't worry. They seem to be moving at a rate of one a week. It's taken me nearly three years to move 200 of them. So, if they keep moving at this steady pace, I'll break even in just 1,000 years.

Josh

Name: Tom
E-mail: bellyoptopus@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Thanks for pointing the way to your interviews on Xena season one, I had completely forgotten about the extra disc with just the Directors. Still, I would have liked to have heard some commentaries from you on an episode or two (comedies specifically) that you directed in the later seasons!

I like your "Religion is Evil" essay too! You said it all better than I could...I found insightful and find it hard to keep myself from reading it from time to time.

"The Apartment" is favorite film of mine too and watch it every year as well. It never get's old at all even though technologically dates itself with an office building full of typewriters instead of computers...but it's part of it's charm! All the main Actors turn in performances of exceptionally complex characters which is part of why it's worth revisiting over and over again.

One thing I'm perplexed about is your assertion several times that because of the number of films you've watched that it's proof that your not wasting your life! Who's been telling you that you're wasting your life buy watching movies? You're a Director, so watching films is studying your craft!!! I just find it a puzzling and amusing statement!!!

It's a quote from "Love and Death," where Woody Allen's father has a piece of land, a square of sod he keeps with him. Later in the film he says that he's going to build a house on his piece of land, and Woody Allen says, "No one can say you've wasted your life." You see, everything is a movie reference. But these is a certain hint of truth in it, too. Watching movies isn't really living life. Or at least, not living it to the fullest. As a comedian said, My dad grew up during the Great Depression, fought in World War II, came home from Europe, got married, started a family, bought a house, then started a business. I have every episode of "I Dream of Jeannie" on video tape.

Josh

Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer@sbcglobal.net

Dear Josh,

I almost forgot...I think my favorite part of SUNSET BOULEVARD was when Norma and Joe are watching one of "Norma's" old silent films, projected by Max, and the film is Stroheim's QUEEN KELLY (which actually starred Gloria Swanson, was directed by Stroheim, and was probably the film that wrecked Swanson's career). I find the fact that Wilder used real has-been actors of the silent era to play has-beens fascinating, if a little creepy.

Darryl

Not the end of Gloria Swanson's career, the end of Erich Von Stroheim's career as a director. Gloria Swanson had the biggest hit of her whole career that year, 1928, with "Sadie Thompson," which she also produced. But after "Queen Kelly" Von Stroheim never directed again. What really gets me is that Gloria Swanson is 49 years old in "Sunset Blvd.," has been retired for nearly 20 years, and represents a completely different era. The actual title of the film is "Sunset Blvd." with boulevard abbreviated, which we see painted on a curb.

Josh

Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer@sbcglobal.net

Dear Josh,

There was a little of the morgue sequence in the DVD special features, but just the coroner's van pulling up to the morgue, and footage of William Holden being wheeled in on a gurney. None of the film had sound, so probably they put in all there was. As for your early films, maybe you could rotate them on the server, kind of a "Feature of the Month" sort of deal, so that you wouldn't have to use up too much server space. Just a thought....
Last night I watched THE PRISONER OF ZENDA, with Stewart Granger and James Mason, and was wondering what you thought of the film. To me, it seemed a little dated (definitely a product of the studio system), but it was very nicely photographed and the climatic fight scene between Granger and Mason was paced fast enough that it didn't look overly choreographed. Also, James Mason stole the show as the villanous Rupert of Hentzau.

Darryl

I've never seen that version. I think James Mason was basically always great, and frequently stole the show in his subtle way. If you get the chance, check out one of Mason's great early films, "Odd Man Out" (1947) directed by Carol Reed. When I was just in Bulgaria the French version of Turner Classic Movies (with an insanely repetitive schedule and commercials between the films), showed the 1953 Joseph Mankiewicz "Julius Caesar" over and over again, and even though I'd already seen it several times, I watched it several more times. James Mason's Brutus is really and truly brilliant, and I think he kind of shows up everybody in that cast, and that's some cast to show up: Marlon Brando, John Gielgud, Deborah Kerr, Greer Garson, and Louis Calhern (who was very interesting casting for Caesar).

Meanwhile, I think your idea of rotating the films is a good one, and I'll pursue it further. Thanks.

Josh

Name: Eric Zuesse
E-mail: cettel@shoreham.net

Dear Josh:

Like you, I am convinced that religion is evil. I'd like to discuss with you what is the best way to attack it. Under Bush, it's becoming a greater and greater threat. Few people are willing to counter-attack; even humanists and atheists don't seem to recognize the threat--they're just playing games, socializing, or whatever.

In the episode of "Star Trek," on the planet Vulcan, where Kirk and Spock must fight each other, Dr. McCoy says that the air is too thin for humans so it's not fair. Spok's mother says, "The air is the air, what can you do?" Bones holds up a syringe and says (oddly, wonderfully), "I'll compe'sate." Anyway, the point here is that humans are humans, what can you do? Of the nearly six and a half billion people alive right now, five and a half billion are actively involved with some sort of religion, and just shy of one billion people are listed as Athiest or Non-religious (as per my brand new almanac). So, that's over 5 to 1. What are you going to do, talk the other five out of their religious beliefs? This stuff was inculcated into their earliest memories by their parents and grandparents. To question it at all shows an amount of free will most humans don't have. To paraphrase Flannery O'Connor once again, Jesus is a trick on the slaves. It's what gets most people to work their lives away on some shitty job because religion assures them they'll have a better life in the next world. Well, living this life is the trick, and if you for one single second seriously believe that you're going to get a better life in the next world, then you're short-changing this life, and this is your real life. Anything other than this life is pure conjecture, and any attention paid to any other existence beside this one is a pure waste of time.

Josh

Name: Jonas Talkington
E-mail: jotek@fastmail.fm

Hi Josh.

Just wanted to congratulate you on Alien Apocalypse and the upcoming premiere this month. It was a pleasure working with you, and I can't wait to see it. I would even watch it if I wasn't in it :D
Hope things are going well, and looking forward to watching your next film after A.A.
-Jonas

It was a total pleasure working with you. I really enjoy working with people like you who are upbeat and energetic and are clearly enjoying the process. I hope you get to see the film there in Bulgaria somehow.

Josh

Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer@sbcglobal.net

Dear Josh,

I just watched SUNSET BOULEVARD again, and I forgot what an incredible film it is. I was wondering, however, if any finished footage of the film's original opening existed intact. My DVD copy has some lead in footage and the shooting script from the morgue sequence, but not a cut of the entire scene itself. If it exists and you know where to find it, I would be greatly interested.
Also, I just watched THE BLIND WAITER off of your website, and was wondering if any plans were in the works to make any more of your early films available in the same format. I would be particularly interested in seeing the original pilot version of STRYKER'S WAR, since I've only seen it in a poor quality bootleg. I know it's time-consuming to do the digital transfer, but I think you would have an audience for the films if you put them up. What do you think?

Darryl

It just takes up a lot of space on the server. I wouldn't mind putting up all of the old movies, but I don't want to pay for the extra memory. Yes, I just watched "Sunset Blvd." again, too, and it is an incredible movie. Entirely one of a kind, and totally unrepeatable. When she visits DeMille's set and the boom mike hits the feather in her hat and she waves it away, that's great stuff. And her "Waxworks" bridge pals: Buster Keaton, H.B. Warner (who played Jesus in DeMille's silent "King of Kings"), and Hedda Hopper. It's all too good. Anyway, I've never heard of any of that morgue footage still existing. Most footage that gets cut out of movies gets thrown away.

Josh

Name: DCM
E-mail: cartboard@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Hello there! I'm wondering where I can find a certain episode of Real Stories of the Highway Patrol. My wife was in one in the early 90's playing an undercover officer on a drug bust and I'd like to get a copy. Who do I get in touch with? I don't want to give her name in public. Could you e-mail me?

Thanks very much!

Look on the internet, some geek probably has them all. I certainly don't, and it's been about 13 years since I worked on that show. Good luck.

Josh

Name: Dee
E-mail:

Dear Josh:

You mentioned that you have TIVO now..Are you watching more television shows? I think I've read where you like the Simpsons, but what other shows on television do you think are geniunely funny or good?

P.S. If you haven't seen Arrested Development, you really need to..I find it to be the funniest show on television.

I use TiVo primarily for movies, and it's causing me to watch more mediocre movies than I've seen in a long time. I just caught a whole bunch of Oscar winners and nominees on TCM, like "Disreali" (Best Actor, George Arliss, 1929), "The Divorcee" (Best Acrtess, Norma Shearer, 1930), "A Free Soul" (Best Actor, Lionel Barrymore, 1931), "Smilin' Through" (1932), "Blossoms in the Dust" (1941), "Bright Victory (1951), etc. I do have "The Simpsons" in the TiVo memory, and I've come to the conclusion that any episode newer than 1999 just isn't funny. Maybe it was the death of Phil Hartman that caused it, or perhaps it was just that it had been on for ten years at that point. The only other TV shows I have in my TiVo are: American Experience, Nova, Frontline, and Inside the Actor's Studio. And everything related to boxing.

Josh

Name: john
E-mail:

Dear Josh:

The oscars sucked. Just proves how much hollywood movies suck. I mean, fuck, they even had P Diddy presenting. I mean, come the fuck on! Geez, I'm so totally sick of the hip/hop/rap everything. Can't we have real movies and music again? Sorry for the short rant, Josh. My question is: since the death of the midnight underground film and the takeover of the independent film by Hollywood, what new avenue do you think new filmmakers will use to get their films seen? The internet?

Do you watch movies on the internet? I don't. I don't mind seeing clips of things on the internet, but if I'm going to watch a whole movie, I need a good, large picture. But if the general populace only wants to see "Shrek 2" and "The Incredibles," what are you going to do?

Josh

Name: Mike
E-mail:

Hi Josh,

I finished "The Complete Guide to Low-Budget Feature Filmmaking" and enjoyed it immensely. I've read a lot of books on film making, both digital and 35mm/16mm, and yours is certainly one of the best out there. So they didn't like it because everyone's doing DV books these days, eh? Doesn't it seem ironic that publishing companies only want to put out DV film making books while the distributors are looking primarily for 35mm/16mm films? I guess there's a reason all those publishers are in the book business and not the film business.

I had some comments about some of the content:

Regarding the section on reshoots - do you have any other tips on ensuring that reshoots match the rest of your footage? What steps do you typically go through when you have to reshoot?

Also, in the lighting section would it be possible to give a brief rundown of lighting instruments? Nothing too complex - just an overview of the major types of lights.

Your section on LLCs and LPs was great! Along similar lines, what can you tell us about coming up with contracts for actors? What sorts of things should be included?

All of your information on assembling and composing shots & shot direction is fantastic. Clear, simple, and to the point. Ditto on your sections on depth of field & exposure. I've referred numerous people to your guide for those sections alone.

Your explanation of film processing, negative cutting, and so on were fantastic. As someone who's only worked on direct to video 16mm or DV projects I found those sections more enlightening and easier to follow than any other I've seen so far.

Similarly, your advice on working actors and crew were concise, helpful, and clearly based on practical experience. In fact, that's exactly how the entire book felt - it was as close to "learning by doing" as you can get from a book. As someone who's always valued learning in the field more than classroom education, I really appreciated the overall tone of your book.

I've always been happy to refer people to your site. Now when my non-film friends have questions I've just been sending them the link to your guide. Thank you so much for putting it out there - it's a prefect example of what the internet is good for. Bravo to you!

As always, keep up the great work, and fight the good fight.

Out!

Mike

Thanks for the nice review, and I'm glad you enjoyed it. Let's see . . .

Reshoots -- well, make sure to get the same actors and costumes, if humanly possible, and shoot on the same film stock. It's good if you can get back the same crew, specifically the hair and make-up people, so that matches. However, many times nothing matches anymore -- actors cut their hair, dye their hair blue, shave off facial hair -- so you do the best you can to recreate.

Lighting -- Quartz movie lights come in little kickers and inkies that are 250-500 Watts, 1000 Watts, 2000 Watts, 5000 Watts, and then you're into big, monster lights (the nicknames for these are 1K or 2K or 5K, meaning kilowatts). If they're Mole-Richardson brand, then they have names like Mini-Moles and Mighty-Moles. Then you have HMI lights, which are calibrated for daylight (as opposed to the quartz lights which are incandescent), and those come in the same sizes as quartz lights, but I think they go up to a 10,000 Watt light, or a 10K.

Actors contracts -- If I'm not mistaken, you can download a standard Screen Actor's Guild contract from their website, then make whatever changes you want to it.

Josh

Name: kdn
E-mail: jericho_legends@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Anything interesting happen at the oscars, I was sick so I said fuck it and watched THE GODFATHER PART 2, CITIZEN KANE, and BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI again. My favorite part in the godfather 2 was when Robert DeNiro was standing in the hallway with a towel wrapped around his gun and Don Fanucci is flickering the light not noticing he's about to be shot... just enough to wet his beak eh? I also watched DAY WITHOUT A MEXICAN... gee what a good example of what to do and what NOT to do on a digital camera, it looks like crap. I like the joke where they're asking the afghan actor guy if he's mexican and he gets pissed off saying he's always getting typecasted into the mexican roles, then in a later news shot, you see him in the recreation of a border patrol incident.

No, not much interesting happened at the Oscars, other than Martin Scorsese got snubbed yet again, and he's always getting beaten by actors-turned-directors, like Robert Redford, Kevin Costner, Mel Gibson, and now Clint Eastwood, too. Apparently, Scorsese's response was, "I get it." In case anyone's interested, Clint Eastwood winning his second Best Director Oscar puts him into the company of: David Lean, George Stevens, Lewis Milestone, Elia Kazan, Joseph Mankiewicz, Fred Zinnemann, Oliver Stone, Billy Wilder, Robert Wise, Leo McCarey, Frank Borzage and Frank Lloyd. The only directors with more than two Oscars are: William Wyler and Frank Capra, both with three; and John Ford with four. Hillary Swank, meanwhile, by winning a second Best Actress Oscar, joins the company of: Bette Davis, Ingrid Bergman, Luise Rainer, Elizabeth Taylor, Sally Field, Glenda Jackson, Meryl Streep, Vivian Leigh, and Olivia DeHavilland.

Josh

Name: Tom
E-mail: bellyoptopus@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Have you seen the documentary "Lost in La Mancha"? If not....basically it's about Director Terry Gilliam's attempt to try and make a film version of "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" and the series of unfortunate mishaps during pre-production and initial filming which only lasted 6 days then everthing came to a grinding halt! I think IFC has been playing it recently, but I rented it because of the extra 2 hour long interviews with Gilliam with an audience! Anyway, my question is... have you had any film projects that you thought for sure were going to get off the ground but were thwarted by circumstances out of your control?

Also, were you asked or were you just not interested in doing interviews/commentaries for the Xena/Hercules DVD sets? Do you try to distance yourself from your involvement in the two TV series?

Just wondering!!!

There's an interview with me on one of the extra disks in the 1st season collection of Xena. I've seen "Lost in La Mancha" twice. I found it highly amusing. I've never had a production canceled once it started shooting. But as I've said before, if I was the bonder on that film I would have shut him down, too. You never ever say to a bonder, "I don't know what we're going to do." What you've in fact just said is, "Shut me down." Terry Gilliam could have had an actor as good as Ben Kingsley on a plane and ready to shoot by Monday, but he didn't know how to handle the situation, so he deserved to be shut down.

Josh

Name: Jason McNeal
E-mail: jason.mcneal@comcast.net

Hiya Josh! Haven't been to your site in a while. I just moved and changed jobs and since I always write to tell you, here I am. I left the Library of Congress last June after spending 3 years preserving early Warner Bros. short subjects (saw a lot of pre-Stooges Shemp Howard stuff!). The gov't pays well but I had to work with idiots; people who really have no business in the field of film preservation. It's nice to know that the world's cinematic history is getting destroyed by people who don't give a shit. I'm now living in Atlanta working for CNN tranferring 20 year old news footage to some new fangled digital format. Nice and easy.
Just read "Religion Is Evil". Stupendous! Amazing! I thought I was the only one who felt that way! I'm sure you've upset quite a few people, but I guess that's nothing new for you! Interestingly, a lot of the stories I see on these old news tapes I work on have a decidedly Christian skew.
It's crazy and irritating.
Anyway, I hope the awesomeness of no-sales-tax Oregon is treating you well. Can't wait to see "Alien Apocalypse"!
Over and Out, Jason

Except that I now live in Detroit, where we do pay sales tax. I'm glad to hear that those early warner Bros. shorts are being preserved. Yeah, Shemp thought he had a career there for a while, without the Stooges, but it didn't really pan out. So it was perfect for him to step in for his ailing brother, Curly. Meanwhile, I'm reading a fascinating book, "The Metaphysical Club" by Louis Menand, which won the Pulitzer Prize in 2003 for history. It begins with the story of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, his experiences fighting in the Civil War (he was wounded three times), and how he came to not believe in beliefs. He felt that certitude leads to violence, and the paradox is that you can be certain of that. But that's what religions are all about, certitude, and that ultimately leads to violence. As has been said, the only truly tolerant people are those with no strong beliefs.

Josh

Name: Nick el Ass
E-mail: therealnickelass@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

After reading your site i was amazaed that no one brought up the death of Hunter S. Thompson.I was just wondering what your thoughts are on the man and his work.

It was brought up, and I did comment, unless that Q&A disappeared, too.

Josh

Name: Blake in Missouri
E-mail:

Dear Josh:

Oh, my gosh. I may disagree with you on the oscars, but I'll bet I've got something here that you agree with...

I just saw "Gun Crazy," and I've been knocked out. This is the first Joseph H. Lewis film I've ever seen. I hear I need to see "My Name is Julia Ross," "The Undercover Man," "The Big Combo," and "Terror in a Texas Town."

On "Gun Crazy," the opening shot of the rain filled street, with young Bart rounding the corner and coming toward us, then the camera quickly moves back to reveile the inside of a gun shop...Hell, absolutely excellent style, and the whole film just runs at you with this sort of stuff. But the heist, shot entirely inside the car totally shocked me, exspecially with it's contemporary feel, both with the shot itself, but the tension and nature of the actors...but when the camera dollies up to the front seat and out the window I almost lost my mind! I'm still just amazed. It's very easy to see Lewis' influence on a ton of directors. Even the ending in the mist filled bog I thought had a future Kurosawa feel to it. Lewis just had terrific intuition. I can see it just after one film. Every wanna be filmmaker should see this movie. There's not a dull moment and that's something to learn.

An interesting story I heard was that Joan Crawford after seeing "Gun Crazy," tried to seduce Lewis, who would have nothing to do with her. He seemed like a truly honorable man based on comments made by others, and his own interview with Bogdanovich in "Who The Devil Made It." At any rate, I've made a film discovery to enjoy further and that doesn't happen too much any more.

Blake

"Gun Crazy" is wonderful; a terrific B-film. I admire the hell out of directors like Joseph Lewis, Edgar Ulmer, and Anthony Mann, guys who could really make something out of nothing, and took pride in doing so. These guys generally had 5-day shooting schedules, for a feature film. Have you seen Anthony Mann's film noir movies? "Desperate," "Railroaded," "Side Street," "Raw Deal." They're really something, and if you haven't seen them, you should.

Josh

Name: BG
E-mail: fgrove1@triad.rr.com

Dear Josh:

I was reading these letters to one another and was wondering if you (Josh) ever even watched any of these movies?Hoffman is not playing an indian,Cazale is not gay(he even says so IN the movie)and your comment on Pt Ryan,DOH!Well anyway Netflix these sometime "Mr Director" and WATCH them.

It's like a little puzzle -- what on earth is he referring to? "Hoffman is not playing an indian." Is that in "Little Big Man"? "Cazale is not gay." In "Dog Day Afternoon"? Meanwhile, I dumped Netflix, which I enjoyed, but now I'm using TiVo instead. And I assure you that I watch many more movies than is probably good for me. I'm just about to break 4,000. I'm at 3,955. Nobody can say I've wasted my life.

Josh

Name: Frank Demne
E-mail:

Dear Josh:

What do you think of Woody Allen's films?

I was a major Woody Allen fan up to "Manhattan," which is where I think he stopped putting in the time on his scripts. Once he won the Oscar for"Annie Hall," and everybody decided he was a "genius," he's never recovered. He was much better off being a creepy little bespectacled Jewish comedian; there was plenty of humor there to mined. Being a genius, however, isn't very funny. If he never made another movie, that would be just fine with me.

Josh

Name: kdn
E-mail: jericho_legends@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Okay, I agree with you. Rosemary's Baby gave me the fuckin creeps. It doesn't even try to jump out at you with scare moments, it just does it by the look of the film and the subject matter. That, and, the spanish-indian family I married into has some witches in it (yeah, we avoid those people) and some pretty screwed up stories this film reminded me of. I liked how it kind of gives you the creeps mostly by its casting too. I'll have to check out the TENANT of REPULSION next. I also thought the SEVENTH SEAL was a really good dark comedy, I think its as good as CITIZEN KANE and THE APARTMENT (in my personal opinion, but I've still got 500 movies to go). I also finally checked out ALL OF ME, which I'm surprised it was funny cause its from the same people that did THE JERK and THE MAN WITH THE SCREAMING BRAIN. I think Jim Carrey's performance in ME, MYSELF, and IRENE was influenced by this. Have you ever met Danny Elfman, I just saw him play The Devil in FORBIDDEN ZONE, he was singing a weird riff on a Cab Calloway song, MINNIE THE MOOCH. I noticed His OOGIE BOOGIE MAN song in THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS also kind of sounded like Cab Calloway.

I think you're going overboard when you say that "The Seventh Seal" is as good as "Citzen Kane" and "The Apartment." I don't even think they're close. I liked "The Seventh Seal," but it's not a film I care to watch very often. Whereas, I could watch "Citzen Kane" and "The Apartment" every year for the rest of my life. I've never met Danny Elfman, although I've been at the same party at the same time. Definitely check out "The Tenant" and"Repulsion," which fit in nicely before and after "Rosemary's Baby." Real horror movies don't need the "jump out at you" scares, which are all ultimately lame, are really just a trick, and aren't legitimately scary. On the other hand, the moment in "Rosemary's Baby," during the brilliant, drug-induced dream sequence, when she's being fucked by something awful and she realizes, "This isn't a dream; this is really happening." Now that's scary.

Josh

Name: Anthony Earl
E-mail: aed2426@comcast.net

Dear Reader,

I just read your internet posting about religion and it's very nature being evil and I couldn't agree more! In fact, I have been feeling that something is inherently negative about organized religion as far back as I can remember.

You so eloquently state the obvious that I would like to ask your permission in copying your posting your words of wisdom in another forum. I will give you your rightful credit in doing so.

I clearly hope that you would consider allowing me to do so.

Sincerely,
Anthony

Certainly, be my guest. I can't tell you how much I deeply believe that all religions are bad, and are the basis of many of the ills of our species. They are entirely about divisiveness -- us and them. Here's my newest metaphor for religion: Life is a path through the jungle which is filled with man-eating lions and tigers, and no one makes it out the other side alive; everybody gets eaten by lions or tigers at some point. Religion is the guy in front of you saying, "Don't worry, it's all going to be okay. Not only that, but there's an oasis at the end of the trail where life is beautiful." Well, both of you know what he's saying is bullshit, but you both try your best to believe it by using "faith," the method whereby humans convince themselves that lies are true.

Josh

Name: Rich
E-mail: bigrich70@yahoo.com

Dear Josh,

I'm curious if you've ever used a camera move called a "Dutch Tilt" and/or could you explain what it is? I've read that Orson Welles employed this type of shot on occasion but I'm stumped as to what it actually is.

Also I'm wondering how you approached directing the sex scene in "Running Time"? I take it Bruce and Anita were really total professionals and it wasn't that big a deal? Reason I ask is that I know you mentioned doing sex scenes/nudity can be embarassing and I'm curious if you took any special steps or went out of your way to reassure the actress about the scene. I'm directing a scene along the same lines and am curious as to how you handled yours.

Best,

Rich

Any camera angle that is cocked to the right or the left is called a "Dutch Angle," although I can't tell you why since it's not like the Dutch Masters used cockeyed angles. Dutch angles were once used to give an unsettling feeling (like in "The Cabinet of Dr. Calgari"), but now they're somewhat ubiquitous. I used Dutch angles in "Hammer" when the characters are stoned. Meanwhile, the way to achieve Dutch angles is to use the Dutch Head on the tripod, which tilts sideways in both directions. You can also achieve this effect by lowering one of the legs of the tripod.

Regarding the sex scene in RT, we just rehearsed the scene a number of times in the week or two leading up to the shoot so that when it came to shooting it we'd already been there and done it several times and it was no big deal. Yes, Bruce and Anita are total pros and it really was no big deal, other than the truck we were shooting in was about 120 degrees inside. Anita needed no reassurance from me. At one point she grabbed Bruce's face hard (this was for the very last scene) and ordered, "Will you kiss me!" Bruce had been slightly holding back, and Anita wasn't having any of that. During the sex scene, I now recall, she told Bruce, "Do anything you want," meaning there's nothing you can do during the scene that will upset me as a woman, we're both actors so let's make this good. I must tell you, I take great joy in watching professional actors do their jobs well. Anyway, good luck with your film.

Josh

Name: Kathy Haizmann
E-mail: khnumber8@yahoo.com

Hi Again Josh. Thanks for responding to my comments about your article on William Wyler (I'm the one who adores Wyler too).
Why do you feel "Children's Hour" and "How to Steal a Million" were two of Wyler's only meriocre films? Although I don't think they are Wyler's best films, I thought Children's Hour was powerful (maybe not as much so as "These Three") and I found How to Steal a Million to be very clever and entertaining. Please comment if you would.

This just came up recently, but I'll repeat it. "The Children's Hour" just seemed like dated material by the time it was made in 1961, and all of the impact of working with controversial material was 25 years past. It's a surprisingly flat film for Wyler, and rather stilted. Nor was it well thought of when it came out. Regarding "How to Steal a Million," it's supposed to be funny and it isn't. In fact, it's slightly painful in its lack of humor. It's one of those films where I think to myself, "I guess they had a good time making it." And then there's "The Liberation of L.B. Jones" (1970), Wyler's last film, which is just plain old bad. He had a few earlier films that weren't so hot, either, like "The Gay Deception" (1935). All in all though, Wyler made the most good films of any director, and certainly the most in a row. As I said in the essay, Wyler's films had twice as many Oscar nominations and wins as the next two biggest directors put together.

Josh

Name: Johnny Cash
E-mail: john@juno.com

Dear Josh:

My question is... what's your problem? Why do you say that Unbreakable is such a bad movie? It's one of the best I've seen in years, and still one of my favorites to date. I believe that there's something wrong with you, not M. Night. Shyamalan. You obviously can't recognize a good story/plot when you see when. I'd like to see you direct, write and produce a movie as good as Unbreakable. You critics are all the same.

I'm not a critic, I'm just critical. So, Mr. Shyamalan has really proven himself to be some interesting filmmaker since "The Sixth Sense," huh? I'm being facetious, in case you're interested. Let's see, "Unbreakable" was that ridiculous movie with Sam Jackson as the silliest super-villian of all-time, Mr. Glass, who, if you fart in his presence he breaks to pieces, right? I guess I can't recognize a good story/plot when I see when.

Josh

Name: Brian
E-mail: are_you_my_caucasian@hotmail.com

Hey Josh-

I'm with you. I don't think Raimi is writing Evil Dead 4 for the simple fact that he's got Spider-Man, one of the most successful and profitable franchise out now, to make. ALthough, I can completly see him producing a shitty, mediocre remake of the original. I can't believe I wasted money on renting the grudge. And yeah, that's right I didn't put quotations around the grudge because it was fucking terrible and I don't believe it was a film, more like a steaming pile of horse shit packed for the masses and spewed in our faces.

Anyways, what do you think of Chris Rock hosting the oscars? I've always loved his stand-up routine but I have a feeling ABC will make him tone down and he won't even get to be boarderline edgy.

I think you're right. But I do like Chris Rock, and I think he's a funny comedian. I liked his routine about how people rarely discuss the good side of crack. That on the right day you can get a big-screen TV set for $25.

Josh

Name: john
E-mail: jdezsi@yahoo.com

Hey Josh, I am looking to shoot a feature film in the detroit area later this year and was wondering if you had any advice on a possible director of photography to hire from this area, such as George Lieber or Bob Anderson? Thanks

You seem to know everybody. I haven't shot anything in Detroit in about 15 years, I just live here. Good luck.

Josh

Name: Jim
E-mail:

Josh, a few days late in the game here, but what did you think about Hunter S. Thompson? I've always respected the guy on a certain level, although I've never been able to make it through any of his books, of which I own several. Is he just an oddball fringe character or did he have something special to offer the world? I think he made some important contributions, and I certainly agree with his stands philosophically. But I have to admit that his writing might have been overrated (or maybe I've just never been high enough to get it).

To me Hunter S. Thompson's entire career was exclusively the one book, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," which I read when it came out--I was in the 9th grade -- and I laughed so hard I thought I would shit my pants. Those Ralph Steadman illustrations still vividly stick in my mind 35 years later. But it was the first book with professional adult characters who used drugs constantly and carelessly throughout the story, but that wasn't what it was about, like "The Man With the Golden Arm" or something. Drugs had now become officially "casual." It said you could take LSD and still do your job, to some extent. That if everyone turns into reptiles, it's okay, it's just the acid.

Josh

Name: Kathy Haizmann
E-mail: khnumber8@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Thank you for your wonderful essay on why William Wyler is you favorite director. I'm not in the movie business, but I'm a movie nut, and I have intensely admired the films of Wyler all my life since I started being conscious of loving movies. Your article/essay on Wyler reflects my views of him, and is the best synopsis of why he was such a great director that I've ever read. Anyway... thanks. P.S. Why did you include Haya Harareet among the really "big" actors Wyler discovered? I really loved her in Ben-Hur, but she absolutely never made it in films.

That's called "a joke." Considering that Wyler discovered, or made famous, such names as: Humphrey Bogart, Henry Fonda, Laurence Olivier, Theresa Wright, and Barbara Streisand, I thought adding his one total failure of a discovery, Haya Harareet, was amusing. Unfortunately, Ms. Harareet had two big problems in "Ben-Hur:" 1). Her part is not very well-written, and she gets all the crappiest lines in the film, and 2). She's actually Israeli, whereas everyone else in the cast (except the Romans, that is) are Americans pretending to be Israelis, and she's so outnumbered that she doesn't fit in. Still, I think she gives a very heart-felt performance.

Josh

Name: Richard
E-mail: filmfan_1@hotmail.com

Josh,

I keep thinking about the state of current films, and your notion that there really isn't anything really that good anymore.

Well I saw one. I recently caught THE MACHINIST w/ Christian Bale and thought it was a pretty damn fine film.

I've written about six scripts myself, and while I don't think I'm the greatest writer in the world, I do know a bit about structure, timing, and how to tell a properly staged story. THE MACHINIST, along with a stunning performance by Bale (much more than just the weight loss), made this one of the smartest films I've seen in some time.

I heartily recommend that you see it, when you can.

I don't see how you could be too disappointed in this one.

Richard

My friend was, but I'll try to keep an open mind. I just saw "Osama," the Best Foreign Film Oscar-winner from 2003, and it was pretty good. It's a real indictment of Islam. I'm sorry, but any system or religion that abuses and marginalizes half of its members, isn't a good system.

Josh

Name: John Hunt
E-mail: Chowkidar@aol.com

Josh,

I'm sorry, I missed your posting about "The Origin of AIDS". I tried to go back and find the posting but could not, through several archived pages. This is an area of interest to me and I certainly would have responded.

I've mentioned before that my wife is a Medical Doctor and, while her primary field is General Surgery and Trauma, she has a long-standing interest on immunology, mostly with an eye towards transplant but also with virology. I've combined her interest in the field with my own which comes more from a historical perspective, but also includes biochemistry.

I have not seen "The Origin of AIDS" but I believe I am well-acquainted with its arguments. The theory, most strongly espoused by British journalist Edward Hooper, postulates that HIV1 and HIV2 migrated to humans in the late 1950's as a result of an Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) which was cultured in epithelial cells from chimpanzees and then widely distributed to Central-African populations.

There are several problems with this scenario. First, existing samples of the OPV show no signs of HIV or SIVcpz (the Simian precursor) virus, though, admittedly, the sample size is very small. Second, mitochondrial mutation rates in HIV1 and HIV2 both indicate zootic transfer in the late-twenties to mid-thirties, well before the 1957 OPC distribution. The earliest suspected cases of HIV in humans show up at the same time as the OPC, but HIV requires an incubation period of up to ten years, though it can develop into AIDS faster.

Hooper's theory has a few variants as well, most notably the idea that several forms of the virus had been present in human populations for decades or longer and that it was only when these human populations began intermingling after World War Two that strains could combine to become HIV. The OPV plays into this theory as the method of transmission; shared needles used in an injectable version of the vaccine would hav spread the disease.

The consensus seems to be that, while Hoopers OPV theory is possible it is highly implausible. Americans were also innoculated with a Polio vaccine which is known to have carried SIV and yet it produced no disease here. I think the book, "The River", and the movie serve a purpose in that they force researchers to defend their current thinking but it is unlikely that the OPV theory will hold up to science.

John

Apparently my earlier reference to the film just disappeared, although I've since summarized it again. You clearly understand the theory, and the book"The River" by Edward Hooper is at the center of the film. The film points out that every other virologist did not use Chimpanzee kidney cultures, the only one that did was this Polish doctor, who has vehemently denied it ever since. The film does prove very clearly -- which is not in the book -- that he in fact did use Chimpanzee cultures. It isn't saying that these people immediately developed AIDS, it's that they were the first people diagnosed as HIV positive. The "existing sample" of the vaccine, which didn't exist for twenty years, magically appeared just when it was needed and is highly suspect as to whether or not it is legitimate. However, since there is no other rational theory for the migration of the virus from chimpanzees to humans, one must give a lot of credence to the only theory going. It brings up other issues, too. Because if in fact this is how the virus got to humans, then that one man is entirely responsible for the worst plague to ever befall humanity (AIDS has caused more deaths than small pox or the bubonic plague). Had he not made that "test," there would be no HIV or AIDS. There has also been this lurking concept that the Africans (i.e. the blacks) gave AIDS to the rest of us (i.e. the whites), whereas, under these circumstances, it's the whites who gave it to the blacks. There's also this insidious, evil, lurking concept that god created AIDS to smite homosexuals (and Haitians and hemophiliacs, I suppose); but if this is how humans got it, we did it to ourselves.

Josh

Name: Mike
E-mail:

Hi Josh,

A few questions. Recently I saw "Lost Horizon" and was overall quite pleased with it. The cut was apparently as close to Frank Capra's original release as possible. There were a large number of extra features on the DVD about the saga of restoring the film, which I found fascinating, as well as details on less than good changes Columbia made to the final cut. Seems that "monsterization" was alive and well back then, too.

I was wondering what you thought of Capra as a director, both in terms of his finished products, and in terms of his process - one of the featurettes described him as a fast shooter, which I found surprising. Also, I found the ending a little obnoxious, as it's about 10 minutes of non-stop exposition where a bunch of people talk about the resolution of the plot but nothing is actually shown. What are your thoughts on that?

Anyway, for the most part I liked the movie and enjoyed the idea of a film which lauds a cooperative, responsible society coming out right on the eve of WWII. The sets were completely amazing (and won an Academy Award if I remember right), and the first act is nicely tense and mysterious.

Finally, I'm in the process of reading "The Complete Guide to Low-Budget Feature Filmmaking". I don't want to make any comments until I've read the whole thing, but I'm enjoying it a great deal so far.

Aus,

Mike

"Lost Horizon" is certainly an interesting film, although it's too long and it gets more sluggish as it goes along. It was considered a disappointment in 1937, and Frank Capra was not nominated even though the film was nominated for Best Picture (and Capra was the president of the DGA). It won Oscars for Interior Direction and Film Editing. It does begin very well, but once you get to Shangri-La there isn't anywhere for it to go except for people to finally leave. So you end up stalling their inevitable departure for about an hour. All in all, it's the most non-Capra-esque film he ever made.

Josh

Name: Jay
E-mail: actor587@yahoo.com

Josh,

I hope you weren't too annoyed with anything I said about ED4, I wasn't trying to start an argument... just trying to show you what I heard. Sorry if I caused any trouble.

I was wondering what your thoughts are on digital filmmaking. I read your recent comments about how digital filmmaking is starting to take over, but it hasn't yet. It got me thinking of how you felt about the digital age and films bein shot on MiniDv.

Thanks Josh, and again, hope i didn't cause any trouble.

Jay

You didn't casue any trouble. I'm just sick of all talk about sequels and remakes. Anyone that supports any sequels or remakes deserves every crappy film they get. It's this attitude of flocking to see these inept sequels and remakes that has caused the almost complete extinction of originality at this point. Hollwyood studios much prefer to work on precendent, like lawyers, than on originality, which they don't understand. So, if people will flock to see sequels and remakes, which have a precendent, then why ever bother with films that do not have a precendent? If you pay to see sequels and remakes you are actively supporting the death of originality.

Meanwhile, I don't think MiniDV is good enough for feature films. You could use HD, but there are still almost no films shot in any digital format that are being sold. My point is, do you just want to make a movie, or do you want to make a movie and actually sell it? Let's face it, you could shoot a feature on video tape for the past 30 years, but it never took off because it doesn't look very good. So far, DV doesn't look much better, and that's why distributors don't buy them. As I've said before, just turn on any of the premium cable movie channels and watch what's being shown, that's the acceptable format of the present moment, and it's still 35mm motion picture film.

Josh

Name: Frank Demne
E-mail:

"the most interesting by far was "The Origin of AIDS," which I brought up and summarized a few days ago, but no one responded."

Josh, I read your forum daily and didn't see a post about this; it sounds interesting though, especially what you mentioned about the polio vaccine's relation to AIDS. But where is your original post? I tried the search feature, too.

"The Origins of AIDS" is a 2004 French documentary that has been showing on Sundance. It tells about the the beginnings of the polio vaccinations in the late 1950s. Jonas Salk's vaccine (which has to be injected) was made from the kidney cultures of Macaque monkeys, from India and the Philippines. A Polish viroligist (whose name I can't remember) did a test with an oral polio vaccine on a million people in the Belgian Congo in 1958-59, which this documentary clearly proves was made from Chimpanzee kidney cultures. The point being, no one seemingly knows how SIV (the Simian form of HIV) got into humans. There's a vague theory that a sick Chimpanzee must have bit a human, but that's a far-fetched theory. However, as this film proves by speaking to many African medical assistants and nurses who were involved with these vaccinations, they rounded up 600 chimps and killed them for their kidneys, which was a huge ordeal that everyone there that's old enough still remembers. This Polish viroligist has always denied using chimp kidney cultures, but it's very obvious that he did. Well, the chances of one of those 600 chimps being sick with SIV is probable, then it was given to a million Africans. The whole oral polio vaccine concept was a failure, and the World Health Organization condemned the test at the time -- you don't run a test on a million people, you use ten or twenty. However, the very first known case of HIV was discovered the next year, 1960, in the Congo in one of the little villages where these vaccinations were given. Then every other early case of HIV came from where these vaccinations were given. The Congo is Ground Zero for AIDS, and there is no other possible explanation than these failed polio vaccinations. The medical and scientific communities have been denying and covering this up for years because they don't want the moral responsibility for having given humans AIDS, nor do they want to inhibit people from taking vaccinations.

Josh

Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer@sbcglobal.net

Dear Josh,

Evil Dead 4? It seems unlikely to me. As for an Evil Dead remake, pardon my language, but is someone out of their fucking mind?!! Sigh....given the state of Hollywood today, it seems altogether TOO likely. Lately, it seems that high-budget, low-quality remakes of classic horror films have become commonplace, and are generally painful to watch. The less said about that, the better.
I just read your book on filmaking, and found it extremely informative. Has it gone to the publisher yet? If not, my only suggestion would be to add a glossary at the back, with encapsulated definitions for the film terms you described in the main text, along with all the crew positions and their respective responsibilities. This would be handy as a quick reference for the novice filmaker.

Darryl

I actually thought of the same thing, which was why I italicized every term. I sincerely doubt that the book will be published anymore. It went out to a number of publishers and I got the same response from everybody -- there are already plenty of books on filmmaking, and no one cares about shooting on film anymore. However, I'm glad you enjoyed reading it, and hopefully got something out of it.

Josh

Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer@sbcglobal.net

Dear Josh,

How've you been? I just stopped by to check out the latest postings, and thought I'd throw my two cents in.
I just recently saw PROOF OF LIFE, with Russell Crowe and Meg Ryan, Taylor Hackford (DOLORES CLAIBORNE, and others) directing, and was curious to know what you thought about it. Personally, I was satisfied by the film, and thought it interesting. It had the virtue of telling a story about a previously unexplored topic (the new wave of international kidnapping and ransom, and the professional negotiators who are hired to deal with the kidnappers), and the performances were good. I know you don't think much of Russell Crowe, but in this instance, his flat delivery and emotionally contained demeanor actually aided him in his characterization. He is convincing as a seasoned professional who doesn't let his emotions get in the way of his job. Also, Mr. Hackford made interesting use of intercutting between Crowe's flat, jargon-laced report to his employers of his last mission, and the stark reality of the mission itself.
On a different tack, I noticed that everyone has been posting about music recently [I always seem to come in at the end of these great debates; I need to log on to your site more often, Josh!]. Anyway, I'll start by stating that my taste in music is eclectic, ranging from classical to hard rock, but I agree with you on many key points. I'm dissatisfied with the punk influence on modern rock. While punk itself is to me an interesting subgenre in its own right, it has turned the rest of the rock world into a wasteland where it sounds as if every half-assed garage band got a record deal, and all the songs sound pissed off and depressing for no particular reason. Anger and gloom without purpose are not compelling, and most modern rock repels me for this reason.
Well, I'll cut this short before I start ranting. I'll be looking forward to the premiere of ALIEN APOCALYPSE (I'm glad I didn't miss it, since I had originally thought that it was to air in January).

Regards,
Darryl

Welcome back. "Proof of Life" went in one ear and out the other. What shreds remain of it seemed okay, but nothing special in anyway. Russell Crowe seemed fine in the part, with his bland earnestness. But I don't mind him when he's doing his normal Australian accent. I did quite like Taylor Hackford's documentary "Hail! Hail! Rock & Roll" about Chuck Berry. I've watched nearly 50 movies since the year started, with the assistance of TiVo, and the most provocative by far was "The Origin of AIDS," which I brought up and summarized a few days ago, but no one responded. The idea that we humans gave HIV to ourselves through polio vaccinations is quite a revelation, I think. But maybe that doesn't matter to anyone else. Maybe all that really matters is whether or not there will be an "Evil Dead 4."

Josh

Name: Jay
E-mail: actor587@yahoo.com

Dear Josh,

I believe Evil Dead 4 has been confirmed. I found this about 2 weeks ago:

From bloody-disgusting.com:

Sam Raimi and Tapert, when asked if they were considering Sean Scott Williams for the part of Ash, looked at each other for a minute and then, together said, "Who is that?" Sam then said, "I don't think I've ever heard of him".

In regards to 'Evil Dead 4 Raimi says, "There will be an Evil Dead 4, and there will ALSO be an Evil Dead Remake. The remake will be produced by Ghost House pictures, (his company with Tapert) and it will star a new cast and a completely new director. The point of Ghost House is that we want to bring new directors (like Takashi Shimizu of "the Grudge" to Hollywood and give them a chnace to make a good horror film."

On WHAT inspired him to allow the remake, Raimi said, "I love the original Dawn of the Dead, and I also really enjoyed the new Dawn of the Dead. I mean, they are both really great horror films. I want to let somebody with a fresh vision bring The Evil Dead to a new generation and a new audience with a different vision..."

Contrary to what Raimi told Mr. D, the remake will be Evil Dead 1 and 2 together, but remade with a higher budget and a new cast and crew.

However, Raimi will be directing and producing Evil Dead 4, which will star Bruce Campbell as ASH and will also have many of the actors from the previous Evil Dead movies. Raimi says that "This is the project I really want to make. The remake can belong to someone else, but part 4 will be a continuation of the original".

Ted and Sam Raimi have begun writing Part 4, and will be developing it for production later this year. Bruce Campbell and Tapert will both be involved...

--------------------------------------------------------
There have also been other interviews with Raimi and/or tapert which said pretty much the same thing. They may have to call it Army of Darkness II though.

Yeah? I still don't think so. I can also bet you that Sam isn't writing it with Ted. Ultimately, though, I deeply and sincerely don't care. I don't think it should have gone to a third film, let alone a fourth. But Hollywood thrives on bad ideas, and this just seems like one more.

Josh

Name: kdn
E-mail: jericho_legends@yahoo.com

<<To me, just doing what you want isn't good enough. It's still got to add up to something.>>

I recently saw Werner Herzog's HEART OF GLASS... yes I suffered through the whole thing. It had a couple of GREAT scenery shots in it and the rest of the movie is pure shit, There is nothing artsy or crazy about a bunch of hypnotised people walking around in a daze, it could have had an interesting story if not for that experiment. I usually don't mind Herzog being hard to watch because I usually come away from it with an interesting story, good scenery, interesting lines but HEART OF GLASS flat out sucked. SHAUN OF THE DEAD was kind of funny but the screenplay structure sucks like the most of today's film, it did have a hilarious ending where all the living dead are put to work in low end supermarket jobs and crappy game shows. I do thank you for recommending SEA OF LOVE and GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS. Have you ever thought of making a play and shooting it as a movie like GLENGARRY, ARSENIC AND OLD LACE, or STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE?

No, I haven't. I think a play and a screenplay are very different items, and if you write something as a play you've gone out of your way to make it uncinematic to begin with. It's now sort of illogically all got to take place in one location, possibly two. Whereas, a screenplay needs to be approached from a visual POV. Most plays that become movies generally fail to be very good movies because the material was designed to be in one location on stage. Beyond that, working on the stage simply doesn't interest me.

Josh

Name: RoughDraft
E-mail: RoughDraft1@gmail.com

Becker,

Just an addendum on the punk rock conversation: I would suggest anyone with a lick of taste pick up Green Day's "American Idiot," a punk rock opera that was certainly the anthem for 2004. They have a way of marrying civil discontent with our nation's politics into a great series of beats. A shame that The Grammys chose to honor a mediocre Ray Charles purely out of sentiment while virtually ignoring the true Album of the Year. Not a single person I've recommended this to has been disappointed.

On the Oscars: for those inclined to bet, I'm fairly certain "Million Dollar Baby" will take home Best Picture, as this ceremony seems to delight in stiffing Scorcese in a decades-long variation on Keep-Away. (For God's sake, I loved the movie, but..."Rocky" getting the Oscar over "Taxi Driver"?)

Jamie Foxx seems pre-destined for an award, as does Hilary Swank. I'd like to see Virgina Madsen prevail over Kate Blanchett, as impressions (save for Foxx's) don't normally impress me. The character is already fully formed, with mannerisms, behavior, and attitude set. Where's the work?

I'd like to see "Eternal Sunshine" take Best Original Screenplay. I didn't necessarily "enjoy" the movie, melancholy as it was, but I have to confess that it was fairly imaginative and well-executed.

This was a lousy year for movies, IMO. Everything I've seen I've been underwhelmed with. I'm sorry to see your boy Raimi follow Hollywood into shallow waters, remaking a movie for no real purpose other than commerce. "Premiere" magazine used to periodically run articles on good scripts that had been collecting dust for years, and it's a shame many of them go unproduced because the studios are too scared to run with anything that isn't "branded" or pre-digested for - in Green Day's words - idiot America.

Oh, and RE: "Evil Dead 4." Sure, I'd like to see it, but fans getting excited over comments made during Sam's latest press junket should be reminded that he's been saying the same things for years. His sadistic attitude towards his actors would seem to be leaking into fandom. He enjoys the tease. I doubt it will ever happen - and it pains me to see filmmakers act like they have all the time in the world to revisit franchise opportunities. I'd be as excited to see a 50 year old Ash as I would be for a 70 year old Indiana Jones. You have to know when to quit.

I've been wrong plenty of times before, but "The Aviator" seems much more like a Best Picture than "Million Dollar Baby" -- it's serious, it's about a real person, and it's three hours long, and length is always a big factor in choosing the Best Picture. Generally, whichever films is the longest wins, and also wins Best Editing, too. The Oscars do like to make up for those they've overlooked in the past if that person can stick around long enough. Martin Scorsese seemed like some kind of threat to Hollywood in 1976 with "Taxi Driver;" now Scorsese is at the top-end of the Hollywood shit-pile, and I think it's his year. "Eternal Sunshine" seemed like a real piece of melancholy shit to me, and not well-written. And yes, Sam does like to tease and torture the fans.

Josh

Name: Trey Smith
E-mail: cobra_commander_of_cobra@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

Actually, in recent interviews Sam said he wants to do ED4 with Rob and have Bruce star and that once Spider-Man 3 is finished he wants to start working on a script. IMDB has the ED4 page up with Ted writing, but that's probaly not true since IMDB always posts things that aren't 100% sure yet. Like you said though, Sam is really big now and I don't know if it will ever happen...I'm not getting my hopes up, but Sam has said recently he really wants to do it...to continue the ED story and let another director helm the remake.

Also, how many copies do you have left of Hammer? I would like to purchase a copy and comeplete my "Josh Becker Film Library" haha. What's the total cost with shipping and all?

Yeah? I still don't think they're will be an ED4, but I could be wrong. Meanwhile, I've got about 40 copies of "Hammer" left. It's $22.95, with S&H.

Josh

Name: justme
E-mail: kattem_wereld2@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

How can you be taken seriously when you write so much shit about a movie that has one so many awards and acclaim?! I hope you don't do this for a living.

I don't know what film you're referring to, but it doesn't matter. You're saying if a film wins awards and acclaim, then it must be good and everybody ought to just fall into line and agree? That sounds like a fascist point of view to me. You see, I don't care what everybody else thinks, and that includes you.

Josh

Name: Frank Demne
E-mail:

Dear Josh:

Just ran across Leonard Maltin's "Guide to Classic Movies". If you don't already have it, you should get it; so much fun to browse thru all your favorites.

Now to my question. Would you recommend any of the "classic" horror/monster movies? I'm refering to "Dracula" (1931 - Bela Lagusi), "The Invisible Man" (Claude Rains), or "Nosterafu" (not sure on the spelling there) or the like?

Love the website. Keep on keeping on, Josh.

If you haven't seen those films, you probably ought to. Of those three films, I'll take "The Invisible Man." "Dracula" is a pretty lumpy early sound film, and Todd Browning was a lousy director, but Bela is very good."Nosferatu" is an interesting German silent film.

Josh

Name: Jay
E-mail: actor587@yahoo.com

Hey Josh,

I was sitting at my computer when two questions came to my mind.

1. Out of the 3, which was your favorite Evil Dead film.

2. I know I asked this about a month ago, but much has happend since then: Now that Sam and Rob have confirmed they are making Evil Dead remake AND Evil Dead 4, have they contacted you yet for a possible position on the production.

Thanks, Josh. Your rule.

They did not confirm that they were making "Evil Dead 4." Go to Bruce's site, he flatly says they're NOT making it. And why would Sam make that film now? He has no need. Meanwhile, there's no reason to contact me. I work in only two positions on a movie: director or writer (or both), and they sure don't want me for either of those things. Regarding question one, I would take the first film.

Josh

Name: Nate
E-mail: vlad1377@aol.com

Dear Mr. Becker,

What do you think about the latest albums by classic rock artists??? I know you believe that talent diminishes as one ages, but Springsteen and Neil Young, among others have made some pretty great albums recently (though there have also been some pretty bad albums as well).

You seem to enjoy well-crafted, mellow music (Moody Blues and Pink Floyd). Granted, not all of there music is mellow, but I think you understand what I mean. You may enjoy the band Sigur Ros. They are Icelandic and make some of the most beautiful music I have ever heard. Clearly, you don't have to actively seek this band out, that's up to you, but if you ever get the chance to listen to them, I would highly recommend it.

Lastly, I know that you aren't a huge fan of Alexander Payne, but do you have some element of respect for him??? He is making the movies he wants to make and isn't making them for the lowest common denominator.

Have a good one,
Nate

With all due respect to the man, and I haven't seen "Sideways," which is clearly his most well-received film so far, but I haven't really liked any of his other films, and I've seen them all. I did like quite a bit of the first first two acts of "Election," but not the whole film. I liked the idea behind "Citizen Ruth" much more than actually watching the film."About Schmidt" was just a piss-poor script. Maybe "Sideways" is brilliant, but since I haven't seen it, I'm not brimming with respect for the guy. To me, just doing what you want isn't good enough. It's still got to add up to something.

Josh

Name: john
E-mail: jdezsi@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

I just finished watching Hell's Angels and I wondered if you could clearify what James Whales did for the film as I don't see any sign of him having a hand in the technical aspect for the film? 1930 was also the year he released Journey's End, another war picture. Did you happen to see it or The Road Back, and if so what did you think of them? I can't wait to see Alien Apocalypse.

James Whale apparently directed quite a few of the dialog scenes, possibly all of them. The entire film had been made as a silent film with Greta Nissen, a Swedish actress he didn't speak English very well. So when Howard Hughes decided to reshoot the dialog scenes with sound and replace Nissen with newcomer Jean Harlow, which was 1929, ity just so happened that James Whale, a well-known British stage director, who also happened to be a veteran of World War I, was in Hollywood shooting the screen version of his stage hit, "Journey's End," a WWI story. Hughes hired Whale while he was in pre-production, and his film just waited for him. I have not seen"Journey's End." "The Road Back" was pretty dreary. "The Old Dark House" was kind of fun.

Josh

Name: Raoul
E-mail: ra0ul01@yahoo.com

Josh provokes:"...punk was the death knell for rock & roll. Here's why I say that (other than just not liking punk), it's a retrospective movement, not unlike the '50s rock revival that occurred just a few years earlier..."
I think you missunderstand punk. It wasn't a nostalgic movement like Sha-Na-Na or today's Beatles-fakers Oasis; it was a reaction to the path rock was taking post-Beatles: incorporating symphonic music and orchestral arrangements. Punk did something vital to all artforms: it stripped away all the various "innovations" that had built up around Rock & Roll and returned to the original inspirational form- Guitar, Bass & Drums playing three chord, three minute hi-energy music. Art grows and progresses as one generation builds on it's predecessor's works and ideas. But not all new innovations are 'good'; as a for instance: I hate Abstract art probably more thaan you dislike punk, and was glad to see the photorealist style of painting that developed in the late '60's & '70's. It could be said this was a return to the classic style of Vermeer or the Pre-Raphaelites, but it wasn't an emulation of those styles, it was a return to the basics of draftsmanship. I've heard Alfred Hitchcock talk about the need to periodically return to his basic suspense thriller roots after trying different variations like "The Trouble With Harry", "Psycho" > or "The Birds". I like the Kinks too, but The Clash definitely had songs of equal quality:'London Calling', 'Clampdown', 'Train In Vain', come to mind, and I haven't even heard half of their output. Your comments make me think the only Clash music you've heard were the singles 'Rock the Casbah' and 'Should I Stay or Should I Go', and we both know that record companies pick singles for reasons other than artistic merit. It reminds me of my brother's dissmissive comments towards Bruce Springsteen, circa 1980, based only on hearing the one single 'Hungry Heart'. ( And Bruce has certainly written his share of nostalgic, imitation '50's rock, which I know you enjoy.) Punk brought raw, unpolished energy back to rock as a reaction to Supertramp, James Taylor, et al., and was a huge influence on most new wave artists, as well as groups like U2 and REM. ( And don't get me started on grunge- Nirvana {and their direct inspiration, The Pixies,} restored my faith in Rock & Roll, God bless 'em.) I'll step off my high horse now, but I understand how an abrasive style could put you off an entire genre of music: I can't stand most Rap music, so my initial reaction was to dismiss the whole genre out of hand, but I've since heard some variations of rap that I enjoy, I'm just not interested in wading through all the simple-minded bullshit to discover the few nuggets I might like. So I'm not trying to convert you to punk, just to say 'The Clash' were a great, immensely influential rock band. Thanks for allowing your site to drift slightly away from film: it's all still art to me.

You do say twice in your rant that punk is a "return to" and that's my entire point. Good or bad, like it or don't like it, it's still "a return to," as opposed to "a step forward to . . ."

Furthermore, I believe there was an insidious message lurking in punk. In saying "Fuck Pink Floyd," which also meant Fuck ELP, The Moody Blues, Rick Wakeman, etc., basically my favorite bands, it was saying, "We want to return to the days of Question Mark and the Mysterians recording "96 Tears" in their garage in Ann Arbor, MI, for the price of a six-pack, because that's democratic and any kid can dream of doing it, sort of like that nobody gets rejected from little league anymore. But, to be Pink Floyd or ELP or The Moody Blues, you have to be talented and have studied your craft. It's not just an issue of dreaming. This is one of the various points I make in my film "If I Had a Hammer," when Phil says, "You don't have to be good to be famous." Yes, it's true, but it's a bullshit dream. Yes, in our society we must always throw new heroes up the pop-charts, so somebody's always going to be hot at any given moment, and frequently it's people with very little talent, *but that's not worth aspiring to.* It's like dreaming of winning the lottery. I say it's a whole lot better to be Keith Emerson or Roger Waters or Rick Wakeman than Sid Vicious or Joe Strummer or Kurt Cobain under any circumstances all the time. Talent and expertise absolutely do matter!

Josh

Name: Blake in Missouri
E-mail:

Dear Josh:

Re the Oscars...I'm actually pretty eager for the outcome this year.

I think this is the most promising year in ages. It's also the first time I've seen all five best picture nominee's before the telecast...And also the first time I haven't hated one, or all of them.

"Million Dollar Baby," hit really well with me. I'm surprised that you spoke of it with such malevolence. For me, it's clearly the best film Eastwood has ever directed, with "Unforgiven," and "Honkeytonk Man." And it may be better than those. Swank sold me completely as the rough backwater fighter and Freeman was just terrific...To say that he just mumbled is something I can't even comprehend. And Eastwood himself I thought gave the perfomance of his career. Now, I too was more than a little bewildered by Freeman creeping out suddenly from the dark corner in the hospital, and by the breathing machine never being reconnected. Also, the scenes where Swank meets her family back in Missouri were clearly NOT shot anywhere near MO, but rather under the bright skies of Southern Cal. However, for me these are small gripes. I was sucked into the entire film right away. It unfolded steadily and strongly. And the final shot still lingers in my mind. For my money it's the best film of the year. I was and still am impressed.

"Sideways," gave me a great jolt. Really funny and yet heartfelt. I don't hold my breath for positive words from yourself, particularly if you didn't get "About Schmidt," but I find Alexander Payne to be one of the really gifted American directors working today. The comedy\drama mix was kept to the right level throughout, the photography vivid, story well written and paced, and the acting uniformally excellent...The fact that Paul Giamatti wasn't nominated for his amazing performance is one of the true dumb-shit goofs the Academey must seemingly make every year. I thought it was a wonderful picture.

"The Aviator," surprised me. Having completely hated "Gangs of New York," may have been a large factor in my enjoyment, but I still like it a good deal in retrospect. Ole "Titanic" boy isn't my favorite actor by any streach, but I found that his take on Hughes was interesting and admirable. But Cate Blanchett stole the show! Absolutely amazing! To think that you didn't like her as the young Hepburn is hard for me to believe. She sounded and even looked very much like the hollywood great. She deserves the Oscar, one of the truly graceful and professional actresses of the current time.

"Ray," and "Finding Neverland," I flet to be more routine, but still commendable. Jamie Fox did do a spot-on imitation of Ray Charles, but the script did get tiresome toward the end. That's when I got fatigued, anyway. "Neverland," I may have liked more if I was interested in the writting of "Peter Pan," to begin with, but it has a lot going for it. The photography, production design, editing and acting are all first rate.

I do think some films were overlooked for larger nominations. Like them or not, "The Passion of the Christ," and Fahrenheit 911," stirred up more talk than any other films last year. As it is, Gibson's labor of love only garnished a few technical nods, while Moore's labor of irritation failed even to get a nomination for best documentary.

Hey, it's a pretty good year in general. Compaired to the last decade and beyond, it's down right great. I'm just glad to see no prefab hog wash in the running like such winners as, "Return of the King," "Chicago,"> "Gladiator," "Titanic," or "A Beautiful Mind."

Have a good one.

Blake

Bravo for getting us back onto the subject of movies. Seriously, to say that Cate Blanchett looks like Katherine Hepburn is craziness. That's like saying that Kate Beckinsdale looks like Ava Gardner. Sorry, no they don't. Blanchett may well be "graceful and professional," but she not terribly attractive. And, I must seriously disagree about "Million Dollar Baby" being in the same league as "Unforgiven." "Unforgiven" is so far ahead of every other Eastwood film it's not worth talking about. It is the one and only time he's ever had a great script, and the true miracle of that film is that he didn't fuck it up with his one-take bullshit. But "Million Dollar Baby" is not only not a great script, it's not even a good one one, or even a well-observed one. It's one more dumb boxing movie, this time with a girl, that has a horrible act III that made me want to scream. Yes, Hillary Swank is good. Clint is doing his standard Clint performance. And Morgan Freeman just doesn't have much of a part. It's an amiable enough film for the first two acts, so I understand why people like it, but it's really nothing special. Yes, "The Aviator" is better than "Gangs of New York," so at least it's got that going for it. But if the truth be known, and I had to sit through a film about Howard Hughes again, I think I'd rather sit through "The Carpetbaggers" one more time, and that film's junk, but at least it's kind of fun. By hour three of "The Aviator" I couldn't care less what happened to him. And if "Sideways" is anything like "About Schmidt," which was a legitimately bad movie, it won't appeal to me. Jamie Fox looks like he does a good imitation of Ray Charles, but "Ray" looks even less inspired and less insightful of a biopic than "The Aviator." So, maybe this is a better year for movies than the last few, but it still hasn't generated a seriously good film.

Josh

Name: John Hunt
E-mail: Chowkidar@aol.com

Josh,

I know you want to put the music question behind you but I'm going to throw out two thoughts (and, obviously, you need not post them).

First, on the subject of great albums of 1967, no one has yet mentioned "Disraeli Gears" which really opened up the blues for rock music. There is nothing dated on that album, whereas "Pepper's", for all its brilliance, still sounds as if it were made in the late sixties.

Second, Since the advent of the Punk era, how many innovative bands have there been? Three? I can think of The Police, U2 and REM, all of which leaned on punk imagery without using punk musical (in)sensibilities. Nirvana was not so much innovative (they sounded like a garage band) as they were timely. The Seattle movement did produce some solid bands, like Alice In Chains and Soundgarden. Grunge (for lack of a better term) also brought groups like Live, Stone Temple Pilots and Black Crows exposure they would likely not otherwise have achieved. But by about eight years ago, more or less, any rock band trying to do anything interesting with sound was reduced to bars, clubs and smaller venues and there they are likely to stay.

I understand the guys from Cream are planning a reunion tour of sorts this summer. That's a trio which might still have good things to offer. I've often thought that of The Police as well, but Sting and Copeland just will not get along.

On "Million Dollar Baby", it kills me that disabled-rights activists are all in arms over this movie, especially since the injury which leads to the objectionable decision will never happen in women's boxing. I hate when movies hold up a sign which says "I want an Oscar and this is my bid". Developments which follow are always melodramatic and disjointed from the original premise in some way.

This is getting over-long. Thanks,

John

I've brought up Clapton a couple times within this discussion, but certainly "Disreali Gears" is a main contender for Best Rock Album of 1967, and has several great songs, like "Sunshine of Your Love" and "Strange Brew," but nevertheless the album is still half filler. Cream's next record, "Wheels of Fire," is a better whole album. I agree that The Police, U2 and REM are what came of the punk era, and none of them are punk bands. And, oddly, U2 and REM are both still together. Regarding Cream's reunion, I think it might just be one performance at Royal Hall in London, which I'll bet they record and tape and show on HBO or something.

Josh

Name: Scott
E-mail: sspnyc66@mac.com

Josh,

I don't think Punk was really a step backwards, I think the music that could be blamed for that would be Disco!

Punk was just a reaction, mainly in the U.K. towards the terrible Economy and the bloated ideals of Thatcher and the state of affairs during that period.

The music was simple and it was meant to burnout in a short period of time. It was a quick rush of energy and a "fuck you" to the powers that be.

The bands that could see beyond that were the one's that progressed and went on to make excellent albums beyond their punk beginings, and two of the bands I mentioned "The Clash", and "The Damned" went on to dive into very interesting territories., and "Johnny Rotten's" "PIL" band was also quite inventive.

The album that Tom mentioned by "The Damned" called "The Black Album" was one of their most inventive and the cover and title are a humorous take on the "The Beatles" "White Album".

"The Damned" also did two great covers; "I feel alright " by "The Stooges", and "Looking at You" by "MC5". In fact, "The Damned's" version of "Looking at You" smokes compared to the original.

As for "New Wave", it pretty much developed around the same time as the late seventies punk movement and in fact there were quite a few crossover bands.

"The Kinks" are one of my favorite bands, and none of the Punk bands can touch Ray Davies lyrics, but the punk movement was very much like any rebelious movement in music, including jazz and rock of the 50's, and the early garage band stuff of the 60's.

I do agree about the jazz of the 50's, it was great and I have many jazz recordings from that era.

Robert Johnson's music is some of the greatest stuff ever written as well, he influenced everyone who played the blues. Hands down!

Anyhow, I care as much about the Oscars as I did about the Grammys. I haven't seen "The Aviator", but I will most likely see it. I liked "Sideways" and I think it will be up for a few awards.

Scott

I don't think disco was a step backward (even though I hated it at the time) because there wasn't anything quite like it before that. I don't think it was any kind of step forward, mind you, but it wasn't a backward-looking movement. Punk, on the other hand, was an imitation of bands like The Kinks, The Yardbirds, and The Stooges. It was a retro movement, as was grunge. It was an attempt to recapture the rebelliousness of an earlier day, which it didn't really manage to do. To me all punk bands are no different than Sha-Na-Na, they're trying to ape an earlier sound. And as long as you're going backward, you ain't moving forward. Me personally, I'll take Talking Heads' "Psycho Killer" or Elvis Costello's "Watching the Detectives" over every single song produced in the punk and grunge movements. Honestly, what's the competition? "Rock the Casbah"? "Smells Like Teen Spirit"? And don't start pulling out songs no one has ever heard of because that's not the point.

Josh

Name: Tom
E-mail: Bellyoptopus@yahoo.com

Dear Josh:

I received "If I Had A Hammer" today and watched it this evening! In a simple statement--it was really good and I liked it! It's too bad that you couldn't get some kind of distribution deal on it or played at Independent Film Festivals! Overall in my opinion it's your best an most well put together film! I think sometimes most Independents get made because they can pull somebody well known into them whether the scripts good or not! It's not really fair but having Bruce in "Running Time" get's more attention drawn to the film and therefore more commercial success. I think you've shown growth and more expertise from film to film! I liked the fluidity and placements of the camera, it kept the pace up but wasn't distracting either! Like so much of your other stuff, it's funny! I laughed out loud at quite a few scenes and I was watching all by myself (that's always a good sign). You got good performances out the Actors too, I especially liked the guy who played Phil's Dad. Thanks for sending it so promptly, it's real treat to actually get a movie from the Director himself and for it to be good is real plus! Because if it was mindless and terrible(like "Thou Shalt not Kill..." but it still pays off somewhat with the over the top battle at the end), I would definitely tell you! Not that what I think should matter to you, because I know a whole lot more about music than film!

On the topic of Punk Rock: I thought you weren't interested? Well! I think you just want to lecture us on your belief that Civilization is in it's twilight and our Art tells us so rhetoric!Lol!

I had fun poking and prodding you to defend "Sgt. Pepper" but debating over something you have no interest in other than you don't like it! That's kind of morbid! Obviously you're disenchanted and disengaged from any music that doesn't represent you or what you percieve to be your generation! I think we're somewhat part of the same! You're what...8,9,10 years older than me, maybe mid-teens by the time 1970 rolled around? That's fine, I know guys like you who feel the same way! It's tough being an idealist when history shows over and over the unexpected always happens and it continues to challenge all our beliefs. Rock music is in a lull right now, but there still many great bands popping up(I could list them but I know you don't care)just not not any that have caused a major tidal shift since Nirvana. But...we are in a new Century where there's some trepidation and people are more inclined to try to recapture the safety of a known past. I think it will take a while for something to happen...but it's a ways away yet! I'm just not ready to be a sourpuss or be told that I should be one! Like you at one time...I'm still an Idealist!

I'm glad you got and enjoyed "Hammer." I'm rather proud of it, actually. I'll just drop this music topic because, you're right, I don't care. I'll just keep listening to ELP and Dave Brubeck and shut up.

Josh

Name: Tom
E-mail: bellyoptopus@yahoo.com

Scott: "The same can be said for the "Love" album I mentioned in my last post; "Forever Changes". The album sold ok, but Arthur Lee did not want to tour outside of California, and there other problems when they actually did tour outside CA and L.A., the sales suffered for it, but given the year it came out, it is one of the most innovative albums of that time."

I meant to comment on Love's "Forever Changes" earlier but it slipped away from me. I agree with you this is a much overlooked classic from the sixties and a one of a kind album. I heard it the first time in 1985 and was entranced by it! None of the people I was hanging out with at the time, including people like Josh who lived through the sixies seemed to know it or know it well. But I do come from the midwest!

Scott:"I must also counter one of Tom's comments, which is also myth in the Punk world. Johnny Rotten did indeed wear an "I hate Pink Floyd shirt", but alas, it was just another publicity stunt concocted by Malcom McClaren to give the band the image that he wanted them portray."

I've got no arguement with you there!!! I was just citing some samples of a band not revering the past. I personally like John's early Public Image Ltd. better than the Sex Pistols stuff , he obviously liked experimental music.

A better example that not everyone was on board with "Sgt. Pepper" at the time is Frank Zappa's "We're only in it for the Money" album from 1968. Captain Beefheart also wrote a song called "Beatle bones and smokin' stones" that supposedly angered John Lennon.

Scott:"The Damned" were also fans of early Pink Floyd and Nick Mason went on to produce t