Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I was going to comment further in a political vein, but it just depresses me horribly. We are indeed truly fucked. It is agony to value honor and to be forced to work for people who don't even know the word.
On a lighter note, did you ever see the 1973 version of '1984' with Michael Redgrave? If so, what did you think of it, and how did it compare to the later version with John Hurt? Just curious to see if it was worth digging up and watching.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
I didn't even know there was a 1973 version. I've seen the 1956 version
with Edmond O'Brien and Michael Redgrave, which is okay. Could Redgrave be
in two versions? My books don't list a 1973 version. I must say I find
both the 1956 and the 1984 versions gloomy and depressing. Meanwhile, I
just saw a damn good movie I'd never seen before, that I think you, sir,
would enjoy -- "The Purple Plain" (1954) with Gregory Peck, about fliers in
Burma during WWII. Aside from the fact that it's actually shot on location,
and is absolutely gorgeous, shot in Technicolor by the great Geoffrey
Unsworth, it's a good solid story of determination and heroism to an extent
that I haven't seen very often. Peck's as terrific as he ever was, and
that's pretty damn terrific. I saw it on TCM, so I'm sure it'll show again
at some point. Interestingly, at least for me, is that it was edited by
Clive Donner, who would later go on to a full-fledged directing career.
Josh |
Name: David R.
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
I'm kind of surprised not to see "Bad Day at Black Rock" on your favorites list. I thought that was a very solid picture from John Sturges. |
Dear David:
It is a perfectly solid film, with a great cast, but it's a one joke
premise, and once you know the ending you really never have to see it again.
I've actually seen it several times over the years and it doesn't hold up
for me. Regarding John Sturges, I'll take "The Great Escape" and "The
Magnificent Seven."
Josh |
Name: John Hunt
E-mail: Chowkidar@aol.com
Josh,
I wonder if Bush can finagle a presidential pardon for Cheney and Rumsfeld BEFORE they get charged with any crimes. I would not put it past him. Or the administration could file a whole series of charges so that Cheney et. al. could receive pardons. I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory stuff, but...
It seems to me that the Justice Department corruption scandals are where the Bush administration will be most vulnerable to future prosecution. They don't get as much attention right now but the paper/witness trail will be stronger and the law more clear.
Referencing Abu Ghraib; Retired General Sanchez on Friday on Fresh Air (public radio) said that prisoner abuse was widespread and universally known in DC, even prior to the Iraq invasion (Afghanistan). He was theater commander during Abu Ghraib and so has incentive for spreading the blame, but his recent book apparently damns Bush and Co. on wide array of topics relating to the war. I haven't read the book but in his interview he was incredibly harsh on the Bush administration.
Congrats on "Rushes". I'm about nine books behind on my reading list but "Rushes" will come in at tenth.
John |
Dear John:
There's no possible way at this late date to be incredibly harsh enough with
Bush & Co. Listening to John Stewart's interview last night with Douglas
Feith, former assistant to Rumsfeld and one of the architect's of the Iraq
war, really pissed me off. Stewart did a brilliant job of not being
offensive, but asking the right questions. Starting with, "Didn't you
mislead us into war?"
Feith's defense was, "Just because we were wrong, doesn't mean we were
deceptive," which both John Stewart and myself didn't buy for a second.
It's complete and utter bullshit. If you say, "I suspect there could be
weapons of mass destruction," and there aren't, that's being wrong. Bush,
Cheney and Powell, on the other hand, all flatly said, "There *are* weapons
of mass destruction." That's a lie. That's deception. They should all be
prosecuted for high crimes, but no one's even talking about it, so they'll
just slip off into the night.
Josh |
Name: James C
E-mail: phsyco670@hotmail.com
Dear Josh:
i completely agree. religion is evil. it is what causes all problems in this world. it causes most wars in this world. it is a complete waste of time. people should be focusing on their own lives and their families and friends instead of worshipping some god that doesnt exist. |
Dear James C:
I suspect that responses like these, which I get regularly, must come from
people putting "Religion is Evil" into Google, and since I've been on the
web so damn long, my essay is the first thing you get. You do know that you
spelled psycho wrong, right?
Josh |
Name: Jeff
E-mail:
Josh,
Just received Rushes yesterday and read some of the essays, bouncing around a little. Very nice, although some of the pictures inside didn't turn out great.
I didn't realize how huge the debt for Hammer had been. I admire your focus and the fact you just keep slogging on.
Although I'm sure your nerves would give out, I hope you get called for Harpies 2. That essay had me laughing so hard I hurt myself and I'd love to read a sequel.
Good luck with the book! |
Dear Jeff:
I haven't even seen the finished book. That's too bad about the photos.
Man, I think I'd shoot myself before doing "Harpies 2."
Josh |
Name: David R.
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
So I take it "Rushes" is being released in paperback only? |
Dear David:
It seems so. The hardcover run of "Complete Guide" was very short, and
meant entirely for libraries. I guess they didn't feel libraries would
necessarily be as interested in this book.
Josh |
Name: Papa Pornin
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
In IF I HAD A HAMMER, there's a scene where Lorraine is asked if she's doing this for her own self image, clearly the look in her eyes says "yes". Later in the film, she seems more upset that she had to throw out her potato salad than about the five boys in jail. It seems like she never even visited them.
Was this meant to be an attempt at the "Right Thing for the Wrong Reasons"? |
Dear PP:
Indeed it is. The question is: how committed are you, and for what reasons?
That's the theme of the movie, so you went right to the heart of it.
Josh |
Name: Re: Beckerspoof
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
<<It's actually kind of amusing, but don't you have something -- anything -- better to do with your time? Try masturbating or counting the leaves on trees.>>
I suppose I could see SPEED RACER, but it won't be better than masturbating or counting leaves. |
Dear Beckerspoof:
No, it was nice of you and I appreciate it. There was a time, ten years ago
when we started this website, when I thought of having the alternate to My
Favorite Films, like My Least Favorite Films, and I suppose it would have
looked just like that. Very quickly into making that list, however, I
realized that not only would many of my friends' films be on the list, but
so would my own. So I dropped it. But thanks.
Josh |
Name: Alice Schultz
E-mail: aeschultz333@hotmail.com
Hi Josh,
I could be wrong, but I kind of think maybe Beckerspoof meant it as a tribute, as other good spoofs are tributes, but is taking it down soon anyway in case anyone gets it wrong. I check my film impressions against your favourites list myself all the time. Call me an idealist but -- OK I am an idealist but -- I find it hard to believe anyone smart enough to come up with as an imitation like this would do it and transmit it from a stupid motive. As for the spoof list of titles -- I know you've said you're not that keen for discussions of bad movies instead of good ones, but if you do look at this as a way of expressing concurrence about what's a really silly movie, this is really funny and clever.
Well I'd been planning to ask whether you know about the "Sex and the City" movie that's being released on May 30. It has all four original main actresses and also Chris Noth. Remembering what you've said about the TV series, do you think this might be one you'd turn out for?
Alice |
Dear Alice:
No, I'm sure you're right about the Beckerspoof list, and I know who did it,
and I just think he should be using his time more wisely, that's all.
Regarding "Sex and the City," I loved the show, and saw most every episode,
so naturally I'm interested. Let's see what everyone else thinks.
Meanwhile, there was an article in the NY Times about the new Indiana Jones
movie, and that some early reviews slipped out on AintItCool, one of which
said it was the worst Indy movie yet. I find that very hard to believe,
considering how utterly god awful "Temple of Doom" was. If it's worse than
that, there's trouble brewing. Of course, they can always do what they did
with "Spider Man III," which is release it in the whole rest of the world
before releasing it here in America.
Josh |
Name: Tim
E-mail: NansemondNative
Good Evening Josh.
I'm with you on Carpenter. John's scores seemed better than his movies most of the time. I found the score from "The Fog" to be particularly haunting and have it along with many digital source cues from the movie.
I found "Starman" to be among his best as well and I just like watching Karen Allen in most anything. Remember at the opening of the movie, Karen's character is sitting there watching those old Super-8 home movies? You won't find too many Super-8 projectors on the kitchen table these days.What about that redneck..."HEY! What happened to the goddamn deer?"
STARMAN replies..."He went there." and points out to an open area.Right after that he gets decked. What about "KID NAP PED"? Pretty funny shit there Josh.
You and John have that thing in common in that you are both able to work miracles with extremely low budgets. Love him or hate him he is a kindred spirit.
I am presently reading Stephen King's "Storm of the Century". I have already seen the movie and find it better than most movies based on his stories. The book is written in script form and Steve has outlined all the camera movements and everything.
Most scripts I have read do not include camera movements written in. He has even outlined all the props and things of that nature in all caps. I guess you can write a script that way if you have a done deal...A sure thing. The thought crossed my mind that the movie might not have been made if it wasn't close or damn close to what Steve had envisioned for the story. He seems to be able to command a whole lot of creative control.
Any thoughts Josh?
Have a good one.
Tim |
Dear Tim:
Stephen King can do whatever he wants, he's Stephen King, but for everyone
else it's a mistake to put camera moves into screenplays. I think it's a
mistake to make any reference to film lingo or equipment of any kind. You
don't need to say, "Close-up of Jack smiling." You can say, "Jack smiles,"
and my brain will decide what the shot is. One of the egregious examples of
putting camera information into a script was in Harlan Ellison's otherwise
excellent teleplay for the Star Trek episode "The City on the Edge of
Forever," where he says shit like, "Arriflex shot," which I think he meant
"hand-held," but even that shouldn't be there.
Josh |
Name: Papa Pornin
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
Do you remember what the date was for the first official theater screening of IF I HAD A HAMMER? What were the most intelligent questions asked at the screening? |
Dear PP:
It's never officially been released. No, I don't remember any questions.
Have you got one?
Josh |
Name: Beckerspoof.com
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
Your worst nightmare:
http://coppolascocaine.awesomewebspace.com/beckerspoof.html
I'll take it down tommorrow. I love my dreamweaver (evil grin) |
Dear Beckerspoof.com:
It's actually kind of amusing, but don't you have
something -- anything -- better to do with your time? Try masturbating or
counting the leaves on trees.
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
Not having read the memorandum you mentioned, I cannot adequately comment on it. However, I can say that at battalion level and lower, particularly with the Military Police presence in Baghdad in 2003, the command emphasis was on 'rebuilding' the Iraqi Police Service and the Army. A specific part of this mission was getting the Iraqi police and the Iraqi Army to abide by the Geneva Convention rules and due process and to stop using torture to extract information. Prisoners that U.S. forces took for crimes against Coalition Forces (planting IEDs, attacking U.S. forces, sabotaging the Iraqi infrastructure, etc) were usually sent to Camp Victory at the airport, and passed outside my view. Criminal suspects were turned over to the police, and usually ended up at Abu Ghraib Prison or later Camp Cropper after a lengthy stay in a precint holding cell. Whenever we dealt with prisoners we were required to deal with them decently, sometimes to the point of tying our own hands tactically. I remember when the word came down that we couldn't put sandbags over prisoners' heads (more effective than a blindfold), which while it makes us look prettier and more humane, also lets that prisoner get a great look at the inside of a U.S. FOB, complete with pace-counted distances for an insurgent mortar when the beaurocracy inevitably releases the prisoner. As for orders to ignore the Geneva Convention and torture prisoners, I never saw one.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
Donald Rumsfeld didn't send you a copy? I'm sure it was an oversight. No,
it's true, I'm sorry to tell you. What's truly horrible is that the CIA had
Osama bin Laden pinpointed in the Tora Bora Mountains, called for military
reinforcements, and Rumsfeld didn't send them for over a month because he
and Cheney didn't want the CIA in charge of the operation, thus letting bin
Laden escape. The fact that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld aren't on trial as
traitors, war profiteers, and for sheer incompetence, makes all Americans
look like idiots.
Josh |
Name: Scott
E-mail: sspnyc66@mac.com
Hey Josh,
Yeah, this incentive thing in Michigan sounds good. I think the infrastructure will return, and it really started to decline a little over ten years ago just before I left to move to NYC.
Victor Duncan closed its Detroit office because it was bought out by Panavision and the Detroit office was one of the slowest of all the Victor Duncans at that time (1995).
I interned there right out of college and I learned a lot about both Arri cameras and Panavision cameras from a great repair guy they had there, his name was Rick. He was great and he could machine just about anything and new those cameras inside and out.
He used to come in early for me, so we could go over different cameras that I was not familiar with, but had to use on assisting jobs. All those early mornings were invaluable to me, and I have still retained all of that info which in turn also helped me when I started shooting as well.
I think after Victor Duncan closed in 1995, that became the big downward spiral for the infrastructure in Detroit.
You still have Mid-America Cine Support for lighting though, and they are very good. I used to know Doug Wandrei very well when he was still alive, and his daughter Cheryl started running the company after he passed on about 6 or 7 years ago. he always had great crew stories from the Jack Handy days and when he worked on the "Route 66" TV show as well as when he was a combat cameraman in the Korean war..
I hope things do get better in Detroit, because I think it really is a terrific place to shoot barring the weather problems and it's great to have those incentives now. Plus, its my home man!
-Scott |
Dear Scott:
There's also Stratton Camera Rental, and Lon Stratton's got most everything.
But once Victor-Duncan, Producer's Color, and Allied closed, that seemed
like the big nail in the coffin here. I sure do hope it all comes back, and
then maybe even you, too, will return. It's cheaper than NYC, and most of
us speak English here.
Josh |
Name: Kristie
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
I'd say "The Graduate" is one of the five or ten greatest films of the sixties. I'll also second your vote for "Carnal Knowledge" - one of the great American films, gloriously vulgar, heartfelt, witty, somber. Along with "Five Easy Pieces," it's also the best place to appreciate Nicholson in all his young, early glory. "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" is also essential, and I must say I'm moved to tears everytime I watch it. All three are also lensed by brillant DPs(Surtees, Rotunno, Wexler).
For his more recent work, did you catch "Angels in America?" And yes, do give your opinion on "Charlie Wilson's War" when you see it.
I've certainly never loved any of Noyce's films, either (although I liked the remake of "The Quiet American," even a little more than the original, and "Newsfront" is good), but if he's passionate enough about the material and is able to properly nuance the novel into a great screenplay we may have something. And yes, while Paul Bettany has a strange, interesting face, I wouldn't cast him either.
Oh, and "The Making of Harpies" what what I meant when I wrote "Making of Alien Apocalypse," which of course is one of your most entertaining 'making of' stories.
Kristie |
Dear Kristie:
I do agree that "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" is essential viewing, and
one of the greatest play to screen adaptations, with gorgeous black and
white photography, and four brilliant performances, and yet I find it harder
and harder to watch as the years go by. Probably because it's all so cruel
and vicious. And yes, I did see "Angels in America," and I didn't like it.
It seemed like such a total mish-mosh of ideas that never coalesced into a
whole. What the hell have Ethel Rosenberg and Roy Cohen got to do with each
other, other than both being Jewish? Why was Meryl Streep unconvincingly
playing a male rabbi? It seemed like it was full of in-jokes that I wasn't
in on. With AIDS and angels smeared over the top to give it a patina of
seriousness. Meanwhile, I love at the end of "Carnal Knowledge" when Jack
Nicholson is showing Art Garfunkel and Carol Kane his slide show of "Ball
Busters on Parade," and saying things like, "Now this fuckin' cunt really
busted my balls," then a photo of Candice Bergen comes up, who was
Garfunkle's girlfriend, and he quickly changes it.
Josh |
Name: Kristie
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
I just ordered "Rushes!" It'll be nice to have your essays in a volume (revised and expanded too, correct?) and I look forward to "The Making of Alien Apocalypse." Hopefully it won't be too long before your memoirs see the light of day.
On the new movie front, "Charlie Wilson's War" by Mike Nichols was a lot better than I was expecting (like you, I'm a first generation Nichols fan, even though he's made some crap). Tom Hanks and Philip Seymor-Hoffman were well-suited to the material, though (predictably) Julia Roberts lays her role a little thick (but she isn't awful). It's good to see Ned Beatty again. And being Nichols, it looks very nice and is peppered with some interesting sexuality. The dialogue exchanges are also entertaining, particularly since there isn't exactly a glut of films these days that really try for snappy, well-written dialogue (and succeed, that is). I'd be interested in your opinion when you catch it.
I also saw a 2008 film, "Elegy," Nichols Meyer's latest adaptation of Philip Roth, starring Ben Kingsley, and that was interesting and intelligent. Might be up your alley.
Speaking of that, word on the street is that Chris Doyle is now attatched as DP for Noyce's film of "American Pastoral," so it'll look gorgeous, and actor Paul Bettany reportedly gave a hell of an audition for Levov, but nobody's been cast yet. I'm waiting for more announcements, though... this project has 'potentially great movie' written all over it so I'm always on the look out around town for news.
Kristie |
Dear Kristie:
Yes, the essays in "Rushes" are revised and expanded, as well as the
premiere of "The Making of 'Harpies'." The essay on Xena and Herc got way
expanded, and it's about 35 pages long. I had Rob Tapert vet it, since I
thought I might be coming off just a tad insulting, but he was fine with it.
I even added more into the "'Evil Dead' Journal" between the journal
entries.
Meanwhile, I'm most certainly a fan of Mike Nichols, although he
hasn't done much for me lately. I do love "The Graduate" and "Carnal
Knowledge." When "Charlie Wilson's War" pops up on HBO I'll definitely
watch it. And though I really loved the book "American Pastoral," and if
Chris Doyle shoots it then it will be gorgeous, but Phillip Noyce has never
made a movie I even came close to loving, so I have my doubts. And if they
cast a gentile as Levov, I'll be pissed.
Josh |
Name: Eric
E-mail: hoheisele@aol.com
Dear Josh,
"As was stated, though, Michigan presently doesn't have the infrastructure to support spending the entire budget here."
What parts of the infrastructure are missing?
Thanks, |
Dear Eric:
25 years ago we used to have three film labs: Producers Color Service,
Allied and Filmcraft. Now we only have one, Filmcraft, that really
specializes in 16mm and isn't really prepared to run 35mm anymore. We once
had several beautifully equipped soundtages, Victor-Duncan camera rental
(that was a Panavision outlet), Jack Frost lighting rental, movie catering
services, walkie-talkie rental, editing services, everything. Now most of
that's gone. There's still a lot of good crew people here, and if you look
hard enough there are some cameras and lights, but not a lot. Hopefully,
it'll all come back now.
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I'm not saying you don't have a point, but I do protest using the Abu Ghraib incident as an example. In context, it was not a matter of deliberate U.S. policy to 'torture' those prisoners. It was a handful of stupid punk kid privates put in charge of prisoners and having their moronic, sophomoric fun with them. If there was any culpability, it was with their company commander and battalion commander for not standing up and taking their lumps for piss poor leadership. I honestly don't believe that anyone above company level knew of the prisoner abuse, but rather than admit that the officers and NCOs failed to discourage this type of behavior, they instead covered their asses and pinned the whole thing on two or three junior enlisted personnel. Come on, a GED female private from West Virginia the mastermind of a secret torture conspiracy?
Then of course the hardened Iraqi mafia thugs, carjackers, and carbombers, used to being routinely beaten by the Iraqi police for information, emerge from a U.S. run jail where they received three meals a day, sanitation, and medical attention (things you don't get in an Iraqi-run jail) and complain of 'torture' for being forced to stand naked with dog collars on their necks? Call me a dumb, brainwashed soldier if you want, but it sounds suspiciously to me like...gee, they were exploiting the incident in the media to get a bigger reparation payout from the U.S. government and possible release from prison. And of course there's no one in Iraq who might want to play up that incident and use it to embarass the American government for their own political advantage. I was in Baghdad when this story broke, and it made me groan for two reasons: first, it was a stupid, heinous, unprofessional thing to do, and second, it was going to give the Army a black eye publically. Soldiers forget that when you wear the uniform you represent the entire Army as a whole to the public, and whatever you do, the public assumes you were ordered to do it as a matter of deliberate policy. These losers made the whole Army look guilty.
As for the 'torture' that Iraqi prisoners 'suffered,' it really added up to little more than stupid fraternity type hazing. It shouldn't surprise me that a public who complain if they have to wait in line at Dunkin' Donuts would consider standing naked with a dog collar on your neck [something, I might add, that many Americans do quite willingly in their own bedrooms] to be torture. Come on, we're talking about Iraq, a country where REAL torture (physical beatings, car battery leads attached to your testicles, being whipped in the guts with a chunk of rubber hose, having teeth ripped out, and other means of persuasion) were and are routine police procedure. I'm sorry, but to call what those idiots did at Abu Ghraib 'abuse' or 'hazing' is appropriate, but to call it 'torture' in a country where they have the real thing is grossly inappropriate.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
As always, you make good points. But the orders for happened at Abu Ghraib
came directly from Donald Rumsfeld, who specifically stated that all Geneva
Convention codes regarding torture were to be ignored. "Frontline" did a
very thorough report on this a few years ago, and showed the memorandum with
that asshole Rumsfeld's signature. I personally don't give a shit what
Iraqis do to other Iraqis, but I do care a lot when it's American soldiers.
Until Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, I thought America stood for something good.
After eight years of this madness, I think we now stand for torture,
humilation and waterboarding. Terror "suspects" are regularly taken away
and tortured, kept in isolation for years with no legal representation.
Well, as far as I know, if you're a suspect, then nobody's proven anything
and innocent people are being tortured. But keep disputing me, I enjoy it.
Josh |
Name: Wait wait wait, what?
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
So are you saying that if I could get 50 grand together, from wherever, and then go use it to shoot the movie in Michigan, I would get 40% back, meaning that I'd only really be spending a little over 25 grand for 50 grands worth of production value?
Is that what you're saying, or is there a catch I'm missing? |
Dear Wait wait wait, what?:
Yep that's the deal. Everybody here in Michigan is very excited it about,
and it already seems to working and drawing in the productions. It's really
wonderful that they're finally fixing this situation, because Michigan has
always been a joke regarding movie production, with no real film office and
no incentive program. Scripts are always being written with Detroit as the
setting, then always ended up being shot in Toronto or Houston or L.A. or
Chicago or even London, England (that's where Mike Binder shot "The Upside
of Anger," that was supposed to take place in the town where I live,
Bloomfield Hills. He actually pulled it off pretty damn well, too).
Josh |
Name: Matthew
E-mail: curiousmattp@yahoo.com
Dear Josh:
I just found your site and I particularly enjoyed the Q and A section, so I thought I'd come up with a question myself. I recently discovered Jim Jarmusch's films and believe on the merit of GhostDog and Dead Man alone that he is truly one of the under-exposed film making geniuses of our time. What do you think about him? |
Dear Matthew:
Gee, all of his exposures seem just fine to me. But I jest. To me Mr
Jarmusch is a one-trick pony who completely, utterly, and totally shot his
wad with "Stranger Than Paradise." Everyone one of his films since then has
seemed dull, pretentious, and pointless. I recall very clearly seeing "Down
By Law" right when it came out. As soon as it began cutting to standard
coverage, not mention that horrible Benigni person, I lost all respect for
him. I do like the fact that he's shot black and white several times.
Josh |
Name: steven burton
E-mail: ramapoughnative1@hotmail.com
Hey Josh!
I was in Sofia the same year in september for a month. You make me laugh! You are "spot on" with your observations and some of them I forgot about. I'll be traveling back this september for another month. I didn't know about Murphy's but I do know where the Dunkin' Donut is located, so i'll check it out. When I go, I stay at the Hilton which is another scary place with the gangsters that hang out at the bar there. Thanks for the laughs!
Steven |
Dear steven:
I'm glad you enjoyed my observations, and found them "spot on." A Bulgarian
wrote in not too long ago and told me, at length, how utterly wrong and full
of shit I was. Meanwhile, yes, you must check out J.J. Murphy's. Have fun.
Josh |
Name: Gary Huff
E-mail: gwhuff@gmail.com
Josh,
I've always been interested in what directors do between projects. You mentioned a while ago that you were working on your second Sci-Fi Channel movie (Harpies I would assume) and that you needed the money so you were working for 25% less than your previous fee. In the downtime between films, how do you usually go about your day? |
Dear Gary:
With great difficulty. I've written 35 screenplays and three books, the
second, "Rushes," has just become available. So that's kept me sort of
busy. I also keep trying to hustle up new movie deals, although I haven't
had much luck lately. As Thomas Edison once said, "Good things come to he
who hustles while he waits," and I've tried to live by that.
Josh |
Name: Anthony Palmer
E-mail:
Josh,
Did "Running Time" play at any film festivals? |
Dear Anthony:
Well, let's see if I can remember. Helsinki, Finalnd; Sao Paulo, Brazil;
Phoenix (it won 1st place); NY Underground; Chicago Underground; Orlando,
and it got into the Goteborg Festival in Sweden, but I couldn't make it, and
that's all can recall right now. It did not, however, get into any major
festivals, which I must say still boggles me.
Josh |
Name: Brian
E-mail: mackbrockton@aol.com
Dear Josh,
Kind of a random question, but what do you think of the films of John Carpenter? I'm a big fan, and it seems like you guys would have a lot in common, given Hollywood's knack for passing over real talent.
PS. I've been dying to see Thou Shalt Not Kill...Except, but Netflix has it down as a "long wait." Is the commercial dvd really that rare?
-Sincerely,
Bri |
Dear Brian:
It shouldn't be such a long wait, but what do I know? If I ever complete
this deal with Synapse Films, who bought the video rights to TSNKE, it ought
to be more available. Sadly, no, I'm not a big John Carpenter fan. There's
no film of his I find exceptional. For me I guess I'd say "Starman" is his
best film, and it's not all that good, although Jeff Bridges is terrific.
Josh |
Name: Pierre
E-mail: pierreducard2009@yahoo.com
Mr. Becker,
You are a very informed person in many topics. But, most people know what the media tells them, which often isn't true. The CIA and MI6 removed the Shah from power and put in the Ayatollah as part of the "arc of fire" strategy created by Brezinski and Kissinger.
I must ask...what is your animosity toward the idea of God? The Judeo-Christian God is the most loving being, and Christianity has helped many people. Why have you forsaken your Jewish background.
Pierre |
Dear Pierre:
The CIA removed the Shah of Iran's father, then reinstated him. Then
reinstated the Shah as well. The American CIA screwed around with Iran's
government years. Meanwhile, I have nothing against the Judeo-Christian
god, other than I don't believe there is such a thing. As I've said before,
I do believe in coherence and gravity, just not any human conception of
"god," which all seem incredibly silly to me. If I have to choose a human
conception of god, I'm going with the Inuit's giant seal.
Josh |
Name: Blake Eckard
E-mail: bseckard@jagtec.net
Dear Josh:
Saw Robert Altman's "3 Women" for the first time last night and thought I'd weigh in with it here. Never a big Altman fan (with the exceptions of "MASH," "The Long Goodbye," and "The Player"), this, I think, is very possibly one of his best. Today I can't think of anything wrong with it, and yet, it's so bizarre, so much of it's own thing, I don't really know why any of it works at all. His signature long shots (long lenses), zooms, and overlapping dialogue, which so often put me off, were an absolute perfect match for this story. And I never knew Shelley Duvall could be so brilliant (although she's pretty damn impressive in Kubrick's "The Shining"). I found her incredibly moving here, and very funny in a truthful, pitiful way. She won the best actress award at Cannes as a result, and this is one case where they got it right. And I just love when Sissy Spacek pours salt into her beer at the saloon, blows off the foam, chugs the entire mug, wipes her mouth, then belches several times. (She actually chugged two beers for this. Immediately after the first one, she threw up onto the stool next to her, but told Altman she could do it again, did it, and that's the take they used...now that's my kind of girl!)
Had Altman not just had several Oscar nominations for "Nashville," I really doubt that anyone would have ever, ever financed a film like this (although Fox distributed several more Altman films right after this, all of them very uncommercial). Proof that sometimes films do escape. Likely what can be summed up as a happy accident, but it's a very welcome one.
I did recently see "The Player" for the first time in years, and it holds up exceedingly well. Any thoughts on this film, or Altman in general? I've always been sort of surprised that he was 45 years old before his wild filmmaking career really began. More hope for us all. |
Dear Blake:
Sorry for the delay in answering. "3 Women" impressed me, and I agree, it's
one of Altman's very best films. I was acquainted with the artist who
painted the very creepy paintings for the film, Bodhi Wind, who has since
died. I saw the film twice when it came out, but not since, and it remains
pretty vivid in my brain after all this time. I also like "McCabe and Mrs.
Miller." Meanwhile, I wish there wasn't a cut in Altman's big opening shot
of "The Player," but it is a good film.
Josh |
Name: Edwin Fritzmeier
E-mail: efritzmeier@yahoo.com
Dear Josh:
I have a story about my Father and how his church turned against him for speaking his mind about how blindly people believe in the bible. How you should ask questions and how when it was written people where writing down things the way that they understood them back then, there perception.
Anyways they fired him, now I've hated religion way before this happened but it sure didn't help. I HATE RELIGION !!! The meanest most evil people I have ever met were religious. Let me tell you another story real quick.
I was at a gas station one day in a small town of about 200 real small. So anyways I'm sitten in my friends truck, on the door of the store theres a sign that's advertising a computer for sale. There are two kids playing outside when this old lady pulls up gets out and heads for the door, when one of the kids asks her " hey what does that sign say? and she says "somebody is looking for a computer" A blatant fucking lie, then in the same breath turns too another lady sitting in her car and says " Oh hello Doris are you going to church tonight?" now what the fuck is that shit? I mean come on your gona lie and talk about going to church in the same sentence. Anyways I could go on and on for days about this kind of stuff, my father was a pastor for forty years just to be screwed by the church.. E.S.F |
Dear Edwin:
Thanks for sharing.
Josh |
Name: Barry
E-mail: bocajay@Hotmail.com
Josh,
I think I have read/seen just about everything (available in public) you have written, directed, whatever. I appreciate your contributions toward helping artists and, especially, your frankness.
My question is about the movie script market: does a "new-face" really stand much of a chance to interest anyone in, let alone sell, a script?
Like many wannabes, I think I'm a damn good writer. I've read a lot of screen plays, even a few good ones, and know I can do as well. I've written a bunch but, I look at the odds and it seems pretty hopeless.
Is there any reason for a striving writer to even try to sell a movie script? |
Dear Barry:
If you've got to do it, then you do it. Maybe you should follow Eric's
advice and write it as a novel first, get it published, then sell the movie
rights and demand that you write the script. It's worked before, it'll
probably work again. That's what Leon Uris did with "Battle Cry."
Josh |
Name: Thomas
E-mail: devildog4evr@hotmail.com
Dear Josh:
The Police officer who Brought out Crowley was a New York city detective named Johnny Broderick |
Dear Thomas:
Interesting. How do you know that? For everybody else, he's referring to
"Two-Gun" Crowley, a famous gangster from the 1930s. He was a 17-year-old
kid who had admittedly seen too many gangster movies. He went to the
electric chair.
Josh |
Name: Brett Greene
E-mail: brettmgreene@gmail.com
Hi Josh,
Two questions for you today, about our current digital age.
1) Have you considered using the digitized version of If I Had A Hammer for torrent uploads? You could charge for download access. Thereafter, users could stream the film on their computers or burn it to disc, but it would have no overhead cost to you and the film would get some greater exposure.
2) You're obviously well read and have read many books about film, which I think shows a dedication and passion about the subject. What do you think has been the impact of sites like IMDb which can provide a wealth of information but no real effort from its users? |
Dear Brett:
In regard to your first question, I don't have either a decent video
transfer, nor a decent digitized version of "Hammer." There's only that
exceptionally low-rez version on YouTube. As to your second question, I
think IMDB is an invaluable resource--I use it all the time--but it hasn't
got anything to do with reading books. It's like an extremely fat reference
book, and you don't really sit down and read reference books.
Josh |
Name: Eric
E-mail: hoheisele@aol.com
Hi Josh,
Okay, so you have what you think is a good 'high concept' idea for a feature film. You could either write the story as a screenplay or a novel, wouldn't it make more sense to spend your time writing it as a novel?
By writing your story as novel you greatly increase the marketing possibilites, because there are many more publishers than companies that are interested in buying screenplays. And, if you sell the novel, that would only help the possibility of selling the screen rights.
Please let me know if you think that my reasoning here is faulty.
Thanks |
Dear Eric:
I think you're exactly right, particularly if you're a good prose writer.
One thing to keep in mind is that there is a lot more writing involved in a
novel. Screenplays have very few words in them, with big margins, and many
spaces. That's why I'm constantly trying to get it across to potential
screenwriters that most of screenwriting occurs in your head, in outlines,
and in notes, previous to ever sitting down to write the actual script. If
you don't know in advance why every scene is there, and how it moves you
forward to your conclusion, you're not doing it right. But anyway, I'm
totally with you -- write it as a novel first and get it published, it will
only be worth more later. It's a fine plan.
Josh |
Name: Jason Roth
E-mail: scootermcgurk@yahoo.com
Hi Josh,
As a fellow Michigan resident, I'm curious to hear what you think of the new tax incentive deal. I've talked to a few people that went to the Grace & Wild meeting. Most seem fairly enthused about the potential.
Going way back in the Q&A, I have to say thanks for recommending Elvis Meets Nixon on here. What a great little movie. I probably wouldn't have seen it without your review.
Looking forward to Rushes!
Best,
Jason Roth |
Dear Jason:
The meeting was great, and really got me enthused. I must figure out a way
to take advantage of this incentive. You get a 40% rebate for all money
spent in Michigan, once you've spent a minimum of 50 grand (everybody else
is at a million dollar minimum, and the highest rebate is 30%). They'll
also set up a 0% interest loan against the rebate. It sounds terrific. As
was stated, though, Michigan presently doesn't have the infrastructure to
support spending the entire budget here. That's a bitch because we used to.
Unfortunately for me (but good for him), Bruce Campbell is entirely
unavailable for over the next year, so I can't attempt to set up either of
the last two comedy scripts I've written. But I'll think of something.
Anyway, yeah, "Elvis Meets Nixon," funny movie. I love when he stops at the
donut shop in the bad part of Washington, D.C. "Gimme a couple of them
donuts with the sprinkles on 'em," and the fact that he has a refrigerator
full of candy bars in his closet so he has something to eat while he chooses
his outfits.
Josh |
Name: angry
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
what are you shooting a movie or something? answer some goddamn questions. we miss your jaded, cynical, out-of-touch insights. |
Dear angry:
I'm not shooting a movie, but I sure would like to be. People have to send
in the questions for me to answer them, right? Out-of-touch, eh? That
could be.
Josh |
Name: Dana
E-mail: danamichelle3972@yahoo.com
Hi Josh... I liked your story. Very creepy. How have you been, it's been a while? |
Dear Dana:
Which story?
Josh |
Name: Tim
E-mail: NansemondNative
Josh,
Are you still with us? Everything cool?
What's new?
Tim |
Dear Tim:
I'm still with you. I'm going to a meeting tonight at Grace & Wild studios,
right near me here, that will be hosted by Mitch Albom, regarding the new
40% rebate from the Michigan Film Commission. It's very dimmly possible
that I, being both a feature film director and a Michigan resident, could
come in handy to productions wanting to keep the whole director's fee in
state, and therefore rebatable. Anyway, that's one of the rumours I've
heard. Meanwhile, my editor swore to me to today that "Rushes" will be up
and available on Amazon within two weeks. Everything cool with you?
Josh |
Name: Dawn
E-mail: dcornwall@stny.rr.com
Josh -
Found your site by typing in "religion is evil". It's one of my personal favorite mantras and I like to see what it scours from the web. I love your treatise. One point of contention - I think you give people too much premeditative credit. Most are just cows following the herd and would worship shopping malls and video games with the same vigor. Oh wait - that's the US. Hmmmmm. You should make a short about that poor kid in the service who is being harrassed for being an Atheist. The morons he is dealing with are so programmed that they have tried to define Atheism as if it is its own religion. Atheism just means you understand enough to realize you will never understand it all, and that you do not need fairy tales to make you feel better. |
Dear Dawn:
Apparently, that's how quite a few others have stumbled upon my website. To
me religion becomes more and more absurd every minute I'm alive. Christians
believe that the son of god was Jewish? Ergo, god is Jewish, right?
Meanwhile, Muslims believe that they have the right to kill anyone who isn't
Muslim? Then they get to go straight to heaven? Jews believe that you need
to cover your head all the time, bind yourself with a leather strap, then
bounce up and down to show your respect for god. Mormon's show their
respect for god by having multiple wives while having sex with minors.
Catholics just like having sex with minors, as long as it's homosexual sex.
As Bill Maher so aptly said, "If the pope were the CEO of a chain of day
care centers, he'd be in jail." The Inuit eskimoes believe that god is a
giant seal, which makes every bit as much sense as any other religion.
Hell, if you're going to be delusional, then have decent delusion.
Josh |
Name: Dustin Buckley
E-mail: duttyroo08@yahoo.com
Hey Josh what is the best way to copyright a finished work without a headache? |
Dear Dustin:
Do you mean a finished script or a finished film? In either case, go to
www.loc.gov/copyright, which is the Library of Congress, download the Form
PA (meaning Performing Arts), fill it out, include a copy of your script
without any brads or binders, and a check, and there it is. For a finished
film, before you show it anywhere, use the same form and send in a DVD or
videotape. The copyright office considers any paid showing of your film
"publication," in which case it must be copyright in its original form,
meaning a 35mm or 16mm print, if that's how you shot it. It's really not
much of a headache.
Josh |
Name: Dr Pepper
E-mail: 23flavors@hotmail.com
Josh,
Is MOVIE MOVIE out of copyright yet? I noticed some websites sell DVD-Rs from the 70s and 80s, and this one was very hard to find. |
Dear Dr Pepper:
I don't know, but I don't think stuff from the mid-70s in falling into the
public domain yet.
Josh |
Name: Henry
E-mail:
Dear Josh,
Watch this video by filmmaking "genius" Uwe Boll and tell us what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWqCNmfJ1hY
Always interesting to hear your perspective.
Henry |
Dear Henry:
I've already seen it. Since I've never seen any of Mr. Boll's films I could
care less whether he keeps making them or not.
Josh |
Name: Mark Baccay
E-mail: 1@espncentral.com
Dear Josh:
Hi, after reading your story about selling a screenplay I have a question. Will they read manuscripts, or do I need to convert my story into a screenplay first? Also, how much did they pay you?
Thanks,
-Mark |
Dear Mark:
Nobody in Hollywood wants to read manuscripts, short stories, or even
treatments. It must be in screenplay form, just to prove that it can be a
screenplay. There's far too much history of buying the rights to a book or
story, then never being able to get a workable script out of it. I got
$68,000 for "Cycles," but that was a long time ago, back when Hollywood
still bought a lot of spec scripts. Good luck.
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I do recall that WMD was the main reason cited for the need to topple Saddam; my comment was that he was a ready scapegoat, particularly to a shocked and devastated public. If we had never had any dealings with Saddam Hussein prior to 2001, the invasion would've been a harder sell. However, there was an underlying sentiment in this country that Iraq was unfinished business. Certainly when I was in basic training in 1996, all the drill sergeants (Gulf War vets all of them) assured us that sooner or later we would fight Iraq again, or as SSG Zamora put it "finish the job."
Paint Saddam as a supporter of terrorists much like the ones who hit the WTC and Pentagon, and you've got all the political support you need to sell a war in Iraq.
As for the American public, we are despite our faults generally a generous and kind-hearted people. Scarcely a disaster, man made or natural, occurs on this planet that the American people don't help the victims of with food, medicine, clothes, and money. Adversity tends to publically unite us, particularly when our leaders give us a clear course of action. Certain public officials realized that, once the fires were put out in New York and the dead were buried, the American public would want to know what to do next. They took advantage of this weak moment in the public consciousness to promote their own agenda. That's why I say that it is not the American people who are evil, but the people who lied to the American people that may be called such.
Regarding Charlton Heston, I imagine he felt that Khartoum was his greatest stretch as an actor, which is perhaps why he was so fond of the role. I saw the interview you were talking about, and even have it on tape somewhere. I think that Robert Osbourne does the best interviews in Hollywood; his knowledge of film and respectful, conversational style really get his subjects to open up and be candid. What do you think? But anyway, Charlton Heston always seemed to be Charlton Heston in every role he played, but I always enjoyed that about his performances. Apart from BEN HUR, I rather liked his performance in SOYLENT GREEN; he plays a character significantly younger than he is, his back-and-forth with Edward G. Robinson [who hands in an outstanding final performance] is great, and I particularly liked the fight scene where he kicks Chuck Connors in the balls, which was obviously choreographed but not some ludicrous martial arts extravaganza.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
As a cop will tell you if, say, you pass someone on the right, then explain,
"I didn't know that was against the law," "Ignorance of the law is no
defense." As John Mellencamp said (and I paraphrase), "We Americans from
small towns want to believe everything we're told on TV." Well, if what you
hear on TV is lying bullshit, but you believe it anyway because you're too
lazy to check out the facts, then your ignorance is no defense. It's not
very different from the people who lived in Munich during WWII acting like
they had no idea what was going on at Dachau, located at the city limits.
The rest of the world never bought the German people's plea of ignorance,
and I think many people feel (as I do) that the German people were culpable
in the Nazi's murder of 12 million civilians. Well, the American people are
also culpable in the deaths of over a million Iraqi civilians because we so
ignorantly clamored for war and revenge after 9/11 that we didn't care on
whom we wreaked our vengence. Our CIA toppled the democratically elected
government of Iran in the 1950s under Eisenhower, putting the feared and
hated Shah back in power for 26 more years. You think Iran, or anyone in
the middle east, has forgotten that? Our meddling is what caused the
Iranians to happily accept the Ayatollah Khomeini, which is the real
beginning of the rise of fundamentalist Islamic power. Seriously, who
killed more people? The 9/11 terrorists or the U.S. military in our initial
"Shock and Awe" bombardment of Baghdad? And this was after the U.N. weapons
inspectors had found no WMDs, and Saddam had finally given them free run of
the country. Even though Abu Grahib has fallen off our short American
attention spans, you think anyone in the middle east has forgotten it? As
long as we continue this pretense that Americans are good and everyone else
is bad, particularly Muslims, we have absolutely no perspective on world
events.
Meanwhile, I agree with you about Robert Osborne, who does wonderful
interviews. I'll personally take Heston in "Planet of the Apes" or "Omega
Man" over "Soylent Green," which seemed like a rather lame, one-joke idea.
I liked Heston's story about the great stunt director, Yakima Canutt, who
co-directed the chariot race in "Ben-Hur" (with Andrew Marton), saying to
him, "Take my word for it, you're gonna win this race." But when you see
Heston in something like "Julius Caesar" or "A Man for All Seasons," then
you see how limited he was as an actor.
Josh |
Name: Tim
E-mail: Nansemondnative
Good Morning Josh.
The one moment in "The Deer Hunter" that did stick wth me was the scene with Deniro, I think it was Deniro,in a submerged lock-up so to speak. He was imprisoned in a bamboo cage and submerged in water and given barely enough room to stick his lips up through the bars and take a breath of air. Meanwhile, there are rats running around on top of the cage adding to the misery. We had a discussion once about "World Trade Center" and that helpless, trapped, claustrophobic feeling that was conveyed in most of that movie. The water prison reminded me of that same kind of hopeless outlook.
I had a boss one time who had been a Command Sargeant Major in the Army and he did two tours of Vietnam. He would never really say much about operations over there but he did on occasion talk about "Charlie" and the viciousness of the guerilla warfare they employed. I will not expand on what he told me but my thoughts on it tie back to something you once said. You said something to the effect that human monsters were more scary than anything fictional and then you tied in WWII Germany and the atrocities committed by Hitler. You couldn't have stated anything more true and to the point.
Last but not least, I saw a 1922 silent film I think you might enjoy entitled "Shadows" with Lon Chaney and Harrison Ford.
The film provides a very interesting character study and it touched on many things I would never have believed would be present in a 1922 movie.
Lon Chaney's character, Yen Sin, gets beached after a storm at sea. He finds refuge in a small fishing village that is also predominately Christian. Yen finds himself caught up in the intricate web some of the human Christians weave. Yen does convert over to Christianity to save a friend that is being blackmailed. Chaney's performance was very entertaining. I thought Marguerite De La Motte's performance was very good as well. I'm divided on Harrison Ford just as I am with his modern day counterpart. Overall, it was very enjoyable. Certainly not bad for $1.00.
Have a good one.
Tim |
Dear Tim:
Lon Chaney, Sr. had a fascinating career, and made some truly oddball,
interesting, important movies. For some reason I keep thinking about "He
Who Gets Slapped" (1924), one of the early big hits for MGM. Chaney is a
world famous scientist whose best friend steals his great discovery, as well
as his wife, then slaps him in front of all the great scientists.
Naturally, he gives up science and becomes a circus clown. His entire act
is being slapped by everyone, while the audience roars with laughter. His
clown name is He Who Gets Slapped and people call him He for short. The
second and third leads are Norma Shearer and John Gilbert, who would
subsequently go on to be huge stars. It was directed by the great Swedish
director Victor Seastrom, who, 33 years later, would star in Ingmar
Bergman's film, "Wild Strawberries." Not to mention all the weird movies
Lon Chaney made with Tod Browning, like "The Unholy Three" (1925) and "West
of Zanzibar" (1928). Chaney's "Hunchback of Notre Dame" is really great,
too.
Josh |
Name: RUSSIAN ROULETTE
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
You wrote:
" He said, "Have a character put a gun against their head and you've created suspense, but there's nowhere to go with it.""
I suspect that's because the only place you can go with it is to shoot the lead character, which isn't fucking likely, so that kills the suspense right there.
On the other hand, Maestro Rex Harrison DID shoot himself, and it was GLORIOUS! And then he comes back to reality, and can't even load the gun properly. |
Dear RR:
Now you're talking about a good movie, "Unfaithfully Yours," and the Russian
Roulette in it is for comedy, not suspense. Mr. DeMartino's example of real
suspense, which was always how Alfred Hitchcock used it, was of a woman
standing on a cliff about to dive into a beautiful lagoon. She gets into
perfect diving position, rises up on her toes, then decides to put on more
suntan lotion, turns around and begins applying the lotion to her leg.
Behind her in the lagoon, a big green tentacle comes out of the water, then
quickly submerges. The woman turns back around and proceeds to get back
into diving position. Now we have information that she doesn't have, so
we're all thinking, "Don't dive in the water!" That's suspense.
Hitchcock's example was, a guy holding a suitcase goes into a crowded
restaurant. He sits down at a table, puts the suitcase underneath, then
stands up and hastily exits the restaurant, leaving his suitcase under the
table. Is it a bomb? We don't know, but we do know he left the suitcase
there and split in hurry. Now you can cut to all the various people in the
place, talking, joking, laughing, and every second the suspense is building,
even if it's not a bomb.
Josh |
Name: Diana Hawkes
E-mail: crazyfelinelady@yahoo.com
Dear Josh:
I wanted to pass the word that R.J. Stewart has responded with his answers to fan questions:
http://xena.yuku.com/topic/17042/t/RJ-Stewart-answers-our-questions.html?page=1
Just as with Rob's Q&A, I'm amused at our (fans') ability to ask incredibly detailed questions hoping for specific reactions and long involved answers, only to be met occasionally with "Sorry, don't recall."
LOL! *blush*
I guess we've seen these eps 1000 more times than you Powers-That-Be. I asked the "people assume we'd be embarrassed to be fans" and Peter Berg questions; R.J.'s anecdote about showing pride to a collegue in being associated with XWP gave me the warm fuzzies.
Anyway, such a treat you all are receptive to communicating with us. Sounds like we'll be attempting to ask Chris Manheim and Liz Freidman next (Liz seems like a hoot.) |
Dear Diana:
I appreciate that Xena has it's fans, I'm just not one of them. Had I not
worked on it I would have never watched it.
Josh |
Name: X
E-mail: x@xxxrated.com
Dear Mr. Becker,
The current wars and politics is a frequent topic on your forum. I must tell you that both gulf wars were fought for oil. 9-11 was done by remote controlling the planes and there were no hijackers. The government knows where Bin Laden is, he had nothing to do with it. He is in that mountain region between Pakistan and Afghanistan I believe.
There are bigger and darker secrets. Are you interested. As a film director, you can imagine the Apollo moon landings were faked on a film set, can you? What do you think of that.
X |
Dear X:
It's this kind of discourse that causes serious discussions of world events
and politics to turn to utter nonsense. It's your privilege to believe
whetever you want, but I personally think you're clueless.
Josh |
Name: DEER HUNTER
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
You wrote:
"In a way, "Deer Hunter" is the beginning of modern Hollywood movies, in that it had everything -- big budget, great cast, gorgeous cinematography -- and basically no script."
-----------------------
I noticed that the first time I watched it. I had been conditioned by countless viewings of LORD OF THE RINGS and other long movies, so I couldn't see what was wrong with DEER HUNTER.
But if you watch THE GODFATHER, during the opening wedding scene, there is a lot of great dialogue, setups, and storytelling to keep the momentum going.
Meanwhile, I re-checked it. The release date fiasco isn't on the official imdb trivia in any form. I posted it on Chud and this one fan implied it was justified by the movie's "brilliance", even if it wasn't as good as GODFATHER. |
Dear DH:
There's an old expression that goes, "That which people don't understand,
they admire." In my case I rarely if ever believe that any movie is over my
head. When a story doesn't make sense to me I know it's because the writers
don't know what they're doing, not that I'm not smart enough to understand
them. When you're watching a film with a good script, particularly the
second time, you see all of the set-ups going on in Act I, which is the
point of Act I. As you pointed out, "The Godfather" also begins with a
wedding, except in the case of "The Godfather," it's loaded with set-ups.
The first thing you see is the mortician asking the Godfather for a favor,
which we immediately learn he can't turn down on the day of his daughter's
wedding. The mortician returns later when Sonny is killed ("Look how they
massacred my boy. I don't want his mother to see him this way. Use all
your powers"). But you also learn from that scene that Don Corleone has his
own sense of justice, and won't kill the men who beat up the mortician's
daughter. We meet Johnny Fontaine, who can't get the part he wants in the
movie, and this too comes back with Jack Woltz and the horse's head. We
meet Michael and Kay, and Michael says he's not part of the family business,
which is what the whole story is about. We meet Sonny, who smashes a
photographer's camera, then goes upstairs and has sex with one of the
guests. We even see Sonny's wife indicating to other women how big of a
penis Sonny has. We meet Tom Hagen, and learn his back story. We meet
Fredo, who's drunk and ineffectual. Just about everything that's said or
done in that first 30 minutes is a set-up for something else coming later.
Not so with "The Deer Hunter." It's just begins with an exceptionally long
wedding scene. What do we learn? These guys are buddies. Uh-huh? And
they need 45 minutes to establish that? Then suddenly we're in Vietnam and
the captured soldiers are forced to play Russian Roulette, which very
probably never occurred in the long history of that war. The man who taught
me more about screenwriting than anyone else, Inigo DeMartino, Sr., who had
written 35 films in the 1940s and 50s in Mexico, just happened to use as his
example of "cheap, fake suspense" Russian Roulette. He said, "Have a
character put a gun against their head and you've created suspense, but
there's nowhere to go with it." Then the soldiers come home and have
trouble readjusting, and now shooting deer isn't as much fun as it used to
be. Yeah, so? Therefore, the point of "The Deer Hunter" as I see it is:
War makes hunting animals less fun. And they needed three hours and three
minutes to tell us that story? I don't think there's a legitimately
memorable, honest moment in that movie.
Josh |
Name: Hubba Bubba Tubba
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
What do you think of Led Zeppelin? I've never heard you talk about them before. |
Dear HBT:
I've always been a Led Zeppelin fan. I bought their first album the week it
came out, as well as their second album (both came out in 1969), and both of
which I feel are really great records, particularly the first one. I grew
somewhat disenchanted with their third album, but I came back into the fold
with IV. "Houses of the Holy" was their last completely good record, then
after that it's sort of hit or miss. I'd say that Led Zeppelin is vying
with Pink Floyd for Most-Overplayed-Rock-Band. XM actually had a all-Led
Zeppelin channel, but they've stopped it.
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I heard about Charlton Heston's death over the weekend, and wanted to say a few words about him publicly. I know that you didn't think much of his acting ability, but I admired the many roles he attempted, and the mature aspect he brought to the screen. He put the MAN in leading man, as opposed to the crop of spoiled whining pretty boy lead actors that we're saddled with today.
As for his politics, well, you know my stance on gun rights, so to me Mr. Heston was a hero. It takes a good deal of courage and sand to stand by your principles, do what you believe is right, and all the while be a gentleman about it.
I know that in eulogies, a man's bad traits are all sanitized and his good deeds inflated, but I believe in this instance that Mr. Heston's merits do outweigh his faults. I for one will miss him.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
Charlton Heston was part of a whole crop of leading men who were MEN, like:
Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Robert Mitchum and Gregory Peck. Heston was a
real movie star, and bigger than life. He did have a tendency to kind of
just belt out all of his lines loudly. I just watched a a very good
interview he did with Robert Osborne on TCM, and he said he thought his best
performance was in "Khartoum," a performance I think is ridiculous,
particularly his phony-baloney English accent. Of the actors I mentioned,
I'd Heston was the worst actor in bunch, but the biggest star. I still
think his best performance was in Wyler's "The Big Country," a perfect blend
of actor and role.
Josh |
Name: Ben
E-mail: sphere6@gmail.com
Dear Josh:
I've been writing a lot lately and I keep getting caught up on dialog. Do you have any advice on writing it? Anything to help it move along? |
Dear Ben:
You're a bit vague about why you're getting "caught up" on the dialog. Does
that mean you can't get it started, or you can't get it to end? This is
where the concepts of the Theme, the Plot, and the Point come in. If the
scene exists to move the plot along, which is called an expository scene,
then make your plot points and keep moving. However, if you haven't got any
big plot points to make, then it's incredibly helpful to have a theme, and
that's what the scene should be about. A theme, BTW, is generally one word,
like Duty or Trust. If indeed you actually have a point to make regarding
your theme, then you can investigate it in the dialog, without necessarily
coming flat out and stating it. And a lot of dialog works on a question and
answer basis. If this hasn't answered your question, then trying asking it
again with more details. Good luck.
Josh |
Name: August
E-mail: joxerfan@hotmail.com
Dear Josh,
In response to a couple of recent topics, according to the IMDB, Deer Hunter was released in LA only on Dec. 8, 1978, and then nationally on Feb. 23, 1979. Which might mean one theatre in NYC and one in Chicago. And then wide release probably after it won the Oscar. Although I seem to recall seeing it in Nashville before it actually won, but that's a long time and many brain cells ago.
The musical Robert Shaw, according to Wikipedia, was a Grammy-winning conductor of the Cleveland Orchestra and Chorus, and the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus, who did various things with NBC in the early years.
OK, now my question relates to something you once mentioned about your directing days down in NZ. I recall you said that some guest directors had more success than others, and it didn't seem entirely logical to have a constantly revolving slate of directors, some of whom had never worked on the show before. I have noticed that the ABC series Lost sometimes uses guest directors... but about 2/3 of the episodes have been directed by the same two guys, who both were given Exec. Producer status. Both had been "regular" directors who had worked with the show's creators on previous shows, so presumably that was part of the deal from day one. Is this something that is becoming more common in tv nowadays? And do you think that's a good move to ensure continuity, as well as allowing a director to not only have creative input, but actually get screen credit (and presumably compensation) for it?
Thanks,
August |
Dear August:
Always good to hear from you. The Oscar nominations were announced on Feb.
20, 1979, for the 1978 awards, and then they did the limited platform
release, with one print in some major cities, and then they went wide with
the release after the Oscars in April. So, you ended up with a film that
basically swept the Oscars (five, including Best Picture, Director, and
Supporting Actor) that almost nobody had seen. I'd already seen it on an
early sneak preview in Detroit, and was aghast that this ruse was being
foisted on everyone, and that they were all buying it. My only respite at
the time was saying, "You just wait until Michael Cimino's next movie, then
we'll see if the guy's got any talent." His follow-up, of course, was
"Heaven's Gate," one of the biggest bomb stinkers of all time, that nearly
single-handedly sunk United Artists. And that was the good part of his
career. I still do have a fondness for his first film, though, "Thunderbolt
and Lightfoot."
Meanwhile, having directors on staff on a TV show and giving them executive
producer credits isn't new. ER was doing that back in the mid-90s. The
argument can be made that switching directors all the time keeps your show
fresh; but on the other hand, as the production designer said on Xena
regarding new directors all the time, "We're constantly reinventing the
wheel."
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I never agreed with the million Iraqi death toll, it not being based on definite counts but rather vague estimates. That being said, I don't know if you can call America's stance in this evil. Our leaders presented us with evidence of Saddam Hussein's involvement with terrorist activity, and people were still smarting and in shock over 9/11. Here was a culprit who was a legitimate bad guy and whom, despite being militarily humiliated in the 1991 Gulf War, many felt had not been dealt with thoroughly enough. Girded by that fact, the memory of our swift victory in '91 [without the memory of the six-month military buildup it took to accomplish that 100 hour victory], and the promise that Iraq would be swiftly liberated and on the way to democracy, we invaded. By the time the war fever had been tempered and people first began to question the administration's assertions, we were already knee deep in the quagmire that was the inevitable power vacuum in Iraq after toppling Saddam, and the administration had made only the most cursory and feeble plans for this eventuality. Evil? I would call it tragic.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
That just shows a good-hearted, trusting fellow you are. If you'll recall,
we didn't attack Iraq to bring down Saddam, we attacked because we suspected
that Iraq had WMDs, even though the experts on the ground, Hans Blix and the
U.N. weapons inspectors, had not found one tiny shred of evidence. Colin
Powell's speech before the U.N. Security Council, which got us into the war,
was possibly the most embarrassing, ridiculous moment in U.S. history.
Powell showed drawings of mobile weapon labs, then fuzzy satellite photos of
a truck and a pile of sandbags, which we were assured beyond any doubt were
weapons labs. When no WMDs were found, THEN the mission became kill Saddam,
and once he was captured, it then changed to exporting democracy. Now we're
just in a quagmire, an eventuality I've been predicting from the outset.
The bottom-line still remains that the Neo-Cons put the Iraq invasion plans
on the table the night of 9/11, knowing full well that Iraq had nothing to
do with 9/11, which is entirely about securing their oil for our purposes,
as well as having a base near Iran, since we'd just been kicked out of Saudi
Arabia. Bush and co. never had an exit strategy because they never intend
to leave Iraq! If indeed our purpose in Iraq is securing their oil and
building military bases, not WMDs, then the entire invasion was disingenous,
our being there is based on a lie, and all the deaths this has caused have
been for nefarious purposes, and thus evil.
Josh |
Name: RE: DEER HUNTER
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
you wrote:
"I wrote that article sixteen years ago, so you'll forgive me if I don't remember my sources anymore. However, that whole shenanigans with Allan Carr and the one week release were all pretty well known at the time of the film's release and subsequent Oscar wins in 1978."
I don't doubt it, I'm trying to get it on the legitimate imdb trivia section. I did find two other reviews that mention it, although they say it like it's a good thing.
I read Allan Carr never worked in Hollywood again because he fucked up the 61st Annual Academy Awards and got sued by Walt Disney. Alls well that ends well. |
Dear Deer:
It certainly was a good thing for the film, Michael Cimino, and Universal
Pictures, it's just the rest of us that had to suffer. In a way, "Deer
Hunter" is the beginning of modern Hollywood movies, in that it had
everything -- big budget, great cast, gorgeous cinematography -- and
basically no script. By the time the wedding at the opening of the film was
over, 45 minutes in, I was ready to stop watching movies forever.
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I don't disagree with the idea of helping people or meeting struggling citizens halfway, but the past century has shown that our government beaurocracy is NOT the organization to successfully do so. An office holder who helps pass a bill, that blooms into a social program, that doesn't in fact help as it was intended but does waste billions of dollars and thousands of man-hours of effort, IS in fact making things worse. Ending the Iraq debacle will certainly make things better, but if it's followed up by yet more wasteful domestic spending, that's effort and treasure still lost.
As for me, I would have to say that in all of this I'm center-right. I emphatically do not agree with the oppressive attitudes and warmongering of the religious zealots on the far right, but nor do I care for the left creating committees and agencies for every problem under the sun, with the citizens of this country footing the bill. I also feel that the progressivists would and have thrown away certain cultural traits that I value: the concept of self-discipline, individual responsibility for one's own actions, and civic and national pride. Some public and private ethics wouldn't hurt, either.
I'm sorry for getting off on a political tangent on what's supposed to be a movie site, but you took a definite position and deserve a definite and thought-out response. It seems that our aims and sentiments are the same; we simply disagree on how to get there.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
Hey, I challenged you, and you responded, now I respond back. It's all good
for me. Meanwhile, I agree with the conservative concept of smaller
government, it's just too bad the conservatives never follow up on the idea.
Instead, Bush has increased the size of our government by adding the third
largest government agency, Homeland Security, which is just a bloated,
intrusive joke. The big problem with the right is they talk a lot of talk,
but they never mean it. They talk about straightening out the economy, then
sink us in debt with a lie of a war that did not need to be fought for any
reason. Sadly, the right's intense paranoia overrides all of their other
ideas. But if the government is going to be expanded, and it probably will,
I'll take any social program, no matter how foolish or poorly conceived, to
anymore military build up or anymore wars. In my opinion there's very
little difference between the far right Neo-Cons and the Islamic Jihad, both
of which are an assault on liberal Democracy, and both are equally
wrong-headed. The difference -- and Americans don't want to hear shit like
this -- is that the American Neo-Cons always achieve a much higher body
count than the Islamic fundamentalists. The terrorists kill 3,000 people
on 9/11, so we attack Iraq and are now responsible for over a million
deaths! So, who's more evil, us or them?
Josh |
Name: David R.
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
Hey Josh you ever see an old Delmer Daves western called "The Hanging Tree"? I don't think it's very well known but it probably deserves to be. I wasn't much of a fan of Gary Cooper's before this but he gives a really interesting performance (for a particularly interesting character). He is amazingly kind and patient at turns but then distant and hostile at others. Good film! |
Dear David:
I haven't seen that movie since I was a kid, and I barely remember it,
although I immediately remembered George C. Scott in it. As it happens,
it's Scott's first film. I'd like to see it again.
Josh |
Name: Tim
E-mail: NansemondNative
Josh,
You are right on time with your observations concerning Close Encounters.
I had not seen the original version in so long that I remember asking my wife if she remembered seeing the ship in the desert. She hadn't of course because the scene wasn't in there.
The ship was actually a huge model shot through a forced perspective to create that illusion. A beautiful fit!
The next version of the movie had the ship in the desert and the press conference had been deleted. The press conference featured the old man describing his encounter with Bigfoot. Apparently, Bigfoot had a foot "37 inches long" from heel to toe. Also, you can see all the Angenieux 12-120 zoom lenses on all of the old film cameras that the newsmen had to record the conference. Very cool I thought when comparing that to what is used today.
Garr's performance as the sexy drama queen wife was quite good but I was ready for her to go when she did. I tended to side with Roy throughout the whole thing. I felt she wasn't trying hard enough to understand Roy's experience and in the long run he was better off without her anyway.
One scene that still gets a big laugh is after Roy's encounter he comes home and wakes everybody up to go see the aliens..."It's better than Goofy Golf! C'mon wake up!" The little girl fighting sleep with her butt in the air,the boys hanging off their bunk beds, the trashed rooms and that nosey ass neighbor lady of theirs! Great scene!
What about at the dinner table with the little girl..."I hate these potatoes. There's a dead fly in my potatoes." Hilarious.
You know that when we see the Mother Ship for the first time we are actually seeing city lights shot at night superimposed on the base of the ship coming down. I cannot remember which city but possibly Bakersfield, California.
I could go on and on about this movie but another thing I always found interesting about it were some of the night shots. For example, there are a couple shots where we hear the engine of a propeller plane in the distance and we can actually see small plane lights flashing up in the night sky. Nice touch I thought. The night shadow of one of the alien ships flying over the road and the field was another nice touch.
Finally, I agree with you on Roy's entrance to the ship. We see Roy approaching a state of hyperventilation along with the ensuing light show. I think Spielberg himself acknowledged somewhere he should have left what the inside of the ship looked like to each viewer's imagination. I agree Stevie boy!
Ok Josh. My term paper on Close Encounters is finshed.
Tim |
Dear Tim:
I also like the scene when Dreyfuss is caught and Francois Truffaut and Bob
Balaban arrive. Dreyfuss says, "I want to speak to the man in charge."
Balaban says, "I assure you that Monsieur Lacombe is of the highest
authority," and Dreyfuss says, "He's not even American." Then they show him
the paintings and drawings of Devil's Tower and ask if he's seen anything
like that, and he says, dismissively, "Yeah, I've got one in my living
room."
Josh |
Name: DEER HUNTER
E-mail:
Dear Josh:
On your "What do the Oscars really mean?" essay, you mention a story about THE DEER HUNTER only being released for one week on one screen to qualify for the Academy Awards, then not being released until it won them so that the studio advertising had something to sell it with.
Out of curiosity, what were your sources on this? |
Dear DH:
I wrote that article sixteen years ago, so you'll forgive me if I don't
remember my sources anymore. However, that whole shenanigans with Allan
Carr and the one week release were all pretty well known at the time of the
film's release and subsequent Oscar wins in 1978.
Josh |
Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
I was feeling bitter when I wrote that last post, and I should've been more clear that I was referring to my specific academic experience, not national politics. By 'leftist,' I meant the progressive educational policies of American schools that have become entrenched in the last thirty years: the feel-good mentality of holding back the smart kids so that the slower or lazier kids won't feel bad about not performing as well; the constant dumbing-down of academic achievement tests so that more students pass and the schools can boast better test scores; and specific to history (my major) the changing of the course curriculum to no longer require students to memorize specific dates or events, but rather to comment on general 'movements' and 'trends' in human history. I hold these policies to blame for the erosion of learning in American public schools, and the appalling spectacle of high school students graduating with diplomas that they cannot read.
As for community college, much of what you say is true. However, I still found that going to Gateway Community College in New Haven, Connecticut, at night was more rewarding than attending the University of Connecticut up in Storrs. While some of the professors were losers, many were reputable professors moonlighting from other universities. The ones I spoke with said they did it not for extra money, but because the community college students were more mature and goal-oriented and often worked harder than students at the big schools.
I hope I clarified my statement.
Darryl |
Dear Darryl:
You seem to have a "leftist" bug up your butt. Look at the Republican
created program No Child Left Behind, where their brilliant concept is to
penalize teachers if kids don't get good grades, so to save themselves from
perscution the teachers now give everybody a good grade. Anyway, our public
education system isn't all that great, and in the last 20 years we've had
more Republicans than Democrats in power. So, what does that mean? I'd say
it's a problem that's bigger and deeper than you can blame on either party.
Josh |
Name: Jim Beaver
E-mail: jumblejim@prodigy.net
Dear Josh:
The Robert Shaw who has a record on his star is not the actor/playwright, but a musician. |
Dear Jim:
I assumed as much. Any idea who the musical Robert Shaw was?
Josh |
Name: Carol Golembiewski
E-mail: redcarol57@yahoo.com
Dear Josh:
I'm currently working on a screenplay called "Two From the Cubist Mist". It's a sci-fi type film that revolves around the art work in the near future.
My question is this. If my work should get optioned and resold, is there anyway to structure the contract so that I'd still be able to have the Screenplay Writers Guild acknowledge my work and let me in.
I'm thinking that with the Guild having fought for writers to get a percentage of DVD sales, it would be a total rip if they wouldn't acknowledge my contribution should my script be developed and produced. I know it's a long shot, but I'm wondering about that.
Thanks in advance,
Carol Golembiewski |
Dear Carol:
First of all, it depends on with whom you make a deal, and are they
signatory to the WGA? If it's a non-signatory company, as most low-budget
film companies are, then no WGA rules apply, and the sale will have no
effect in getting into the guild. If you make a deal with a WGA signatory
company, then you use WGA contracts, and the WGA will decide who gets what
credit.
Josh |
| Name: Darryl Mesaros
E-mail: simonferrer102@yahoo.com
Dear Josh,
Your reply to my academic post gave me some food for thought in terms of politics, which I felt was better reserved for a separate post. I'm not denying the egregious and glaring faults of the Republican party in terms of this war: they're facts and thus undeniable. I served in Iraq and still don't believe that we should've invaded. The intelligence on WMD was hazy at best, trumped up bullshit at worst. Also, democracy is not for everyone, and the Iraqis in my experience are far too corrupt, violent, and plain old ignorant to make a go of it in this generation. Change is happening, but at a rate much slower than expected. For it to have any lasting permanence, we would have to sit out a tectonic cultural change and the passing of at least two generations of Iraqis. That seems to be more effort than most Americans are willing to invest, particularly in a country that doesn't seem to want to pick itself up [we spend a trillion dollars to rebuild Iraq, and the Iraqi government is sitting on almost $300 billion dollars of surplus oil revenue. You'd think if they were serious about getting their shit together and getting us out of their country, they'd start footing the bill for some of their own problems].
But the left also has it's faults. Whatever good intention for which they were conceived doesn't balance out the cost of the Democrat's poorly designed social engineering programs over the years: welfare in all its varieties (which has created a whole government dependent subclass), social security (mismanaged and overdrawn to the point where I must still pay into it, but most likely will never see a Social Security check when I retire), affirmative action (government sponsored race quotas), and finally the entire concept of beaurocracy being the solution for every social ill. Not to mention that Democrats are also capable of escalating an unpopular war [anyone remember Lyndon Johnson?].
The current candidates for President reflect these party problems. McCain is an authoritarian, and actually wants to increase the U.S. presence in Iraq. Hillary and Obama want to pull out and focus more on economic issues, one by using tax dollars to bail out U.S. mortgage firms while forgiving mortgage payers their debts [and some people thought Reaganomics didn't make any sense], while the other wants to cure world poverty by giving a big chunk of the U.S. GDP to developing nations and signing multiple free trade agreements (say goodbye to the last of your industrial base, America). As I see it, arguing over which one of these clowns would make a better President is like arguing over which venereal disease you'd like to have: gonorrhea, syphilis, or genital warts. All of them are going to be uncomfortable, get in the way, and make your life worse. Sorry for the long post, Josh.
Darryl
P.S. Whatever the candidates say about pulling out of Iraq quickly, they are either ignorant or lying if they're talking about speedy troop withdrawals. To accomplish a complete stand down and withdrawal of all U.S. forces and assets in Iraq (to include millions of tons of heavy equipment which must be funneled through limited Iraqi and Kuwaiti port facilities onto ships) would take at least a year of unceasing effort. Like it or not, a withdrawal will take time. |
Dear Darryl:
No, none of the candidates will make my life worse, not compared to George
Bush and Dick Cheney. Life can only improve. Will it be easy to pull out
of Iraq? Certainly not, but we should still do it ASAP. Let's get the
process started. Particularly now that we're in the middle of the Shiite's
internal conflicts. And I completely don't buy Colin Powell's
you-broke-it-you-bought-it theory. We removed their fascist dictator, now
let's go home. Regarding mismanaged social programs, which I'm not arguing
with you about, but should we not have these things? Shouldn't we be
helping the poorest, the oldest and the sickest in our society? Hammurabi's
First law is, "The strong shall not take advantage of the weak," and
furthermore, the strong must look after the weak. That's what makes a
society a civilization, as opposed to being barbarians and cannibals. Way
back when Bill Clinton was president and there was a surplus of money,
nobody was predicting the collapse of social security. But we will never
get our economy straightened out while we're spending a million dollars a
second fighting a war in Iraq. Meanwhile, the reason I'm on the left is
because I'm convinced that everything on the right is wrong.
Josh |
Name: Tim
E-mail: NansemondNative
Good Morning Josh.
On the subject of the atom bomb I find it extrememly interesting that H.G. Wells was talking about them 30 years prior to the Gadget test in 1945.
Little Boy , which was about the length of two dining tables put end to end and about 2 feet or so in circumference,destroyed an entire city. Tens of thousands were literally turned to ashes in an instant. If you watch the Bikini footage in slow motion you can quickly ascertain that by the time you see the flash it's all over. Everything destroyed in the mile range. That is 21 kilos. Our world governments have multi-megaton bombs. The flash you see in those megaton tests produce fireballs 3 miles wide by the time you blink your eyes. That is some truly sobering shit Josh. When you factor in some of the dipshits that control the keys to the missiles it is even more terrifying.
I think you have recommended the book before but if not I would throw in "The Elements of Style" by Strunk and White as excellent educational material on writing. Strunk also stresses brevity Josh. Also, though it is somewhat dated, I would say that "The Liar's Club" by Mary Karr is a good read. I had never heard of the book until about 2 weeks ago. Interesting human relations study.
I have not | | |