|
The Zone had the chance to pick the mind of one of Independent film’s greatest minds, Chris Gore Editor in Chief for FilmThreat.com. Chris is an author, penning 2 books about film fest survival “"The Ultimate Film Fest Survival Guide", and the second edition. He also loaned his mug and opinion to television audiences. He is at his busiest at this time of year with the Holidays and Sundance just around the corner. Film Directors are sending him tapes on a continuous basis, asking him for his advice and maybe even his seal of approval. Mr. Gore is not one to compromise his actions or words leaving himself open for public scrutiny and “HATE Mails” from his fans and peers, this is why the Zone wanted to pry further into his mind.
Chris is informative but yet humorous in ideology of film and all points in between. We asked Chris a few questions and he was generous in his answers. After a quick introduction into his world and mind, EZ got to fire off a few questions of our own.
A brief peek into Filmthreat & and it’s Editor in Chief
“What makes FilmThreat.com unique is our point of view. We will cover all the mainstream Hollywood releases and simultaneously give the same amount of attention to a short film made by an unknown filmmaker from Ohio, or an indie movie playing on the festival circuit, or a short that can be downloaded on the web. We’ve been covering the indie film scene before it was even called “indie” – since 1985 when I started the Film Threat fanzine in college as a teenager.
What inspired me to create Film Threat was David Lynch’s movie “Dune” in 1984. I was really excited by the prospect of this incredible science fiction novel being turned into a big budget movie by one of my favorite directors. I’m a big fan of sci-fi, but the genre often gets caught up in the gadgetry and spaceships instead of focusing on the ideas and how man reacts to new worlds, social structures and technology. When I first saw “Dune” when it premiered during Christmas 1984, I was stunned at how awful it had turned out. It floored me. There were a lot of punk rock and skate punk fanzines at the time and I thought about doing one about movies. As a reaction, to Dune, I put out the first issue of “Film Threat” which was six pages and Xeroxed. I created it with a fellow student and a great friend named Andre Seewood. The punk aesthetic really got a rise out of professors and students at Wayne State University in Detroit where I was going to school at the time. We soon began sending the zine out to other places and stores even asked for them in bulk and we got paid. Andre and I parted ways but he continued his lifelong interest in movies by becoming a film professor in Detroit. To
make a really long story short, (16 years) the fanzine soon evolved into a magazine, I moved to Los Angeles in 1989, sold the mag to Larry Flynt in 1991, continued as editor in chief for five years, left Flynt to pursue a career in the CD-Rom business and simultaneous with the crash of that business, Flynt cancelled the magazine and the rights reverted back to me, so I did a few issues of the mag and when it couldn’t work financially, I launched the web site and e-mail newsletter in 1996 and have continued on the web ever since. During that time I was writing books, pursuing TV and mainly was focused on raising my kids and I’m continuing with all of this.
I also don’t consider myself a “Film Critic.” I cringe when I am described that way. I consider myself a “Film Activist” as I often cross the line and do more than give a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” to a movie. I champion movies, Film Threat currently releases indie films on video and DVD, I write books offering straight advice to filmmakers, and I stand up often for indie filmmakers rights taking unpopular stands that has made me a controversial figure. Hey, it’s an occupational hazard and I take responsibility for every stupid thing I’ve done as well as the things I’m proud of.”
Now that you get an idea of Chris and his views how about a few more prying questions.
Z: What was your very first film fest?
CG: I grew up in Detroit, so I could only go to festivals in my surrounding area as a kid. I went to my first at the age of 12. It was the Michigan Student Film Festival and I had entered a short Super 8 movie. I loved seeing the films there and meeting the filmmakers. I was hooked. I met an older filmmaker there named Douglas Chiang, a 16 year-old who made an incredible animated movie called “A Private Little War.” It’s strange that Doug ended up being the lead designer for Star Wars Episode I.
I then went to the Ann Arbor Film Festival as a teenager. I also began going to the Toronto Film Festival every year, as it was a short train ride from Windsor just across the river from Detroit.
I began covering festivals in Film Threat magazine, but it wasn’t just about the movies, we covered the parties and the growing scene. For that, Toronto banned us one year, so I created a fake movie magazine called “Film Form: The Art of the Cinema” and actually got press credentials under an alias. It worked and not only did we write about parties the second time, but we wrote about how we crashed the festival. After that, they just accepted us. Now it seems that the way festivals are covered everywhere is in exactly the same style with the same irreverence as our original article. I guess we were
ahead of our time in that way.
Indie films broke big in 1989 when “sex, lies and videotape” exploded on the scene (and proved these films could be profitable) and an entire movement seemed to evolve from that one movie. When I began attending other festivals like Sundance, Slamdance, Florida, Chicago Underground, San Francisco, Cinequest, Olympia and on and on, I noticed that a lot of filmmakers simply did not know what they were doing. Other than showing their movie, they weren’t even quite sure what they were doing there. I saw some amazing independent movies, by filmmakers that weren’t particularly savvy about the business. I think that’s okay. Filmmakers should focus on making great films first, but there was no resource to tell them what they should do AFTER they made their movie. I was tired of
attending festivals and seeing a filmmaker with that “deer in the headlights” look and wanted to do something about it. So I spent two years doing research and writing the first edition. I’m proud of the fact that the reaction has been positive and the book has been adopted as required reading at film programs at universities like NYU, the American Film Institute among others and is recommended reading for USC and UCLA. The second edition is almost twice as thick with 100 new festival listings, new interviews and a section on how to get a distribution deal that focuses on Ed Sanchez and Dan Myrick, creators of “The Blair Witch Project.” I
interview them and then put together a detailed chronology which documents the beginnings of the Blair Witch from writing the treatment to raising the money to casting to shooting to getting into Sundance to a minute-by-minute account of how they sold the film for $1 million to Artisan. The section is called “The Artisan of the Deal” and explains everything a filmmaker must do to position their movie best to sell. I really didn’t get paid much to write the book, but that’s not why I did it. I am really passionate about doing whatever I can to help filmmakers out. I’m proud that the reaction has been so positive across the board.
Z: What was your first published review?
CG: It was a review of David Lynch’s “Dune” and it appeared in the very first issue of Film Threat in February 1985. The opening graphic was a parody of the poster for the movie with the words to the title changed to read “Dumb.” It was not a very well written review, but the film was so horrible, it provided the inspiration for me to start Film Threat. You can read more details in an above or in an essay on the site.
(See points of reference below the interview)
Z: You wrote a couple books but we would like to know what inspired you to write "The Ultimate Film Fest Survival Guide"?
CG: ”(See above.)”, Chris says
Z: Have you ever had a bad experience at a Film Fest?
CG: Plenty. This one has happened more than a few times and I always am left devastated by the experience. Walking up to get a drink at a party and seeing a sign that reads, “CASH BAR.” I cringe when I see that sign. Other than that, festivals that are not well attended are kind of sad. I feel badly for filmmakers when the theater is only partially filled. Those nervous silences after a screening are tragic. I feel very sorry for the filmmakers. The worst are some
of the Q&A sessions where the moderator really has no clue how to attack the topic. I get so frustrated at those I want to stand up and rip the microphone out of their hands just to save the evening from those nervous silences.
(photo provided by Albert L. Ortega)
Z: How do you feel about the state of Hollywood now since the attacks of 9/11?
CG: Like most tragic national events, the effects were felt for about three weeks, and then it was business as usual. I don’t see much change in the way of the content of movies. One thing I will say is that there is paranoia about a bombing occurring at a movie studio. As if the terrorists cared about what happens at Paramount. I wrote about it on the FT site.
Z: How do you feel about the state of independent film?
CG: The dirty secret about Independent Film is that no one is making money. And more than 90% of the filmmakers who make movies never end up making their money back and a good percentage of those end up filing for bankruptcy. Most “Independent Films” these days are simply low budget studio films with stars in them, films made for under $10 million. That’s not such a bad thing because creatively speaking, even studio Indies are much more entertaining than your average big budget blockbuster. The studios seem to have appropriated the name “independent” and it’s used as a piece of marketing,
like a brand name that is supposed to be like a badge of quality. It’s not always true, of course.
Z: Do you feel like some others that the, face of Film Festivals have become too commercial?
CG: Yes, but that’s not such a bad thing either. The real tragedy is the death of the art house. Art houses and rep theaters are closing all over the United States. With competition from cable television, video and DVD and festivals, the art house just has lost favor with moviegoers. The truth is that more people will see a film in its festival run than will see a film on opening night at an art house theater. In a way, for smaller Indies, festivals have become like alternative distribution. Which is why I have
tried to popularize the idea of paying filmmakers for screenings at festivals. Just a small percentage of the ticket sales. $500 may not seem like much, but to a documentary filmmaker who spends $20,000 to make a film who might play 40-50 festivals in a year, that can make the difference when it comes to getting another project off the ground. I also wrote about this on the FilmThreat.com web site.
Z: Have your opinions changed about certain actors after seeing them do Independent Film for pennies rather than the thousands they're used to?
CG: Depends on the film. I think actors have the luxury of doing small Indies to stretch their acting chops which amount to sometimes a one-month time commitment on their part. For a director, it’s a year or more of their time, so filmmakers (writers/directors) don’t have the luxury actors do. I enjoy seeing, an actor take a non-traditional role for themselves. It was amazing to see Sylvester Stallone in “Copland.” You forget that he can really act when he wants to, he just gets stuck doing all these bad action flicks.
Z: What do you think of all of the "First Look Deals" given to actors these days?
CG: I don’t really know enough about that to offer an intelligent comment. Sorry.
Z: Do you believe people really pay attention to movie critics and base their movie decisions on what they read?
CG: Yes and no. When it comes to big movies (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter) critics are irrelevant, but when it comes to smaller, indie films (Business of Strangers, Jump Tomorrow, Waking Life) a critic can help call attention to a film that is worthy of attention. So, in a way, they are important for those in the marketing departments of indie films seeking critics to champion their smaller pictures.
Z: We would guess from your love of movies, you also have a love for music. If so, what are some of your favorites?
CG: Yes, I love music but despise most pop music – I’m not a fan of the girl singers like Britney or the boy bands. I love the old fashioned punk music – Pistols, Clash, and love Nirvana. Basically all the alternative stuff no one has heard of.
Z: We heard through rumors, that you had a couple more books your going too write, and possibly a TV deal. Can you talk about these?
CG: Can’t really talk about TV stuff now, although just recently I am working on (in a research capacity) and will be a talking heads expert on the E! True Hollywood Story of the making of the original 1977 Star Wars. I leapt at the chance to do that. I want to be sure the real story of the making of the original is told and I’m working with producers at E!. As for other TV stuff, I’d rather keep it quiet. When it comes to books, I am working on the 3rd edition of the “Ultimate Film Festival Survival Guide” and I have several other book projects on my plate at the moment that I
plan to write over the next five years. One book I am writing is tentatively titled “Shooting Nude Scenes.” It does cover nudity in films, but more specifically, the book is about the director’s relationship with an actor and how a director creates an environment on the set where an actor can be vulnerable on camera, “emotionally naked, so to speak”. It’s a catchy title for an interesting topic that is worthy of more exploration for today’s directors. I have four other books in various stages, but I learned my lesson when I wrote two books in one year to only focus on one at a time. That’s
hard for me to do, as I love to juggle multiple projects at once.
Z: Any news on "Critic's Court"?
CG: I’m supposed to find out in January or February if it goes. But being on TV was never my goal. In fact, it’s not really my favorite thing because everything is so sound bite-driven. Of all the mediums I have worked, books, magazines, TV, the web, I prefer the web above all others as it is immediate, personal and without limits with regard to length of stories or popular appeal. What I mean is that when I was doing Film Threat the magazine, we were printing 250,000 copies which influenced decisions about who to put on the cover of the magazine – do we put this little unknown filmmaker on the cover with this amazing indie film or this more commercial indie with this recognizable star because we know it will sell magazines. On the web, I don’t have to torture myself with those decisions. I offer the same amount of coverage to the mainstream releases on our front page as the small Indies who simply send us tapes for review. If you look at our review section on the front page in any given week, you’ll see the big releases mixed in with reviews of the
alternative indie and underground films. That makes me proud to give them the same amount of play and attention. I don’t know of any other web site that does that except for us.
Z: Have you ever had anyone get physical with you over a review?
CG: Here’s the long answer: Punched or physically assaulted, no. Verbally assaulted, yes, fairly often actually. I get e-mails from indie filmmakers saying, “You are supposed to support independent films, so how could you give my movie a bad review?” I believe that just because a film is indie, doesn’t mean it’s good. And just because a film is from Hollywood, doesn’t make it crap either. I try to put things into perspective, but we’re not helping an indie filmmaker by encouraging their lousy movie.
I guess the worst attacks have come from Kevin Smith via his web site. Smith was unhappy with some of the coverage he received from Film Threat of his movies “Chasing Amy and Dogma”. So he took it upon himself to attack me personally via the message board on his web site, even though I had not even written the review. It was pretty amazing. I don’t know what possessed him to do this. In all my years of doing Film Threat and writing about movies, I’ve never seen a filmmaker go on the offensive so dramatically and so publicly.
He then he went on to unload on Film Threat in an attempt to discredit everything we have done by assaulting the magazine, the web site, our newsletter, etc… I guess we must have hurt his feelings. It’s bizarre too since Film Threat was the earliest supporter of Smith covering “Clerks” and even putting him on the cover of the magazine when “Mallrats” came out. I went back and reread the reviews of Smith’s movies, which were written by Ron Wells, and they’re very intelligent critiques of the films.
I really don’t have a problem with Smith, I loved “Clerks,” however, and I have mixed feelings about the rest of his work. In Kevin Smith’s defense, let me say that I would rather see the worst Smith movie in the world 100 times, than see the best Joel Schumacher movie. What I like about Smith is that he takes risks constantly. “Dogma” was a huge risk – and it worked on many levels and failed on just as many others. But that’s what happens when you take big risks. It’s amazing to me that his core audience of teenage boys could see “Dogma” and actually is forced to think about
religion. I applaud that; I think it’s admirable. But his films beg controversy and discussion, so I’m miffed he would be offended by what I felt were justified critiques. He does seems stifled by sticking with the same set of characters for every film -- Jay and Silent Bob – characters that were in his first movie “Clerks” and who are also the main focus of his fifth movie “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back” which is currently shooting. It would be as if Spike Lee were still making Mars Blackmon movies and had turned Mars into an action figure, the subject of a regular comic book and kept putting him in every film. It would get
tiresome.
On the other end of the spectrum is Richard Linklater. He is a professional and really interested in growing as a filmmaker. I’ve had many discussions with Linklater about his movies, some I love (Slacker, Dazed & Confused, Waking Life) and some that I believe are not as compelling and even fail in many ways (Newton Boys, Before Sunrise). Linklater told me he prefers to read the negative reviews of his movies because he actually learns something. He says that much of the time, he learns more about the critic than his own work, but he enjoys that kind of interaction.
Linklater is someone who has a lot of respect from many others and myself in the film community for this reason. His latest film “Waking Life” shows a lot of promise. It’s incredibly radical as an animated movie. Linklater pushes himself with every movie and aspires to always surprise and do something different. He once told me he’d probably stop making movies for a while in order to recharge his batteries and get some fresh ideas. Linklater doesn’t make movies as a job, he makes them because he has a lot to say and it’s worth listening every time.
I know of one reviewer (okay, actually it was Rod Lurie, who is a critic turned filmmaker with his movies “The Contender” and “The Last Castle”) who referred to Danny Devito’s as the Penguin in “Batman Returns” as looking like a “pair of shaved testicles.” That’s over the line for me. Ultimately, I feel Film Threat has been brutally honest about movies but focused on the work. We don’t run gossip about celebrities and stars and everything is based on the work that the person does. The “work” is fully open to critique, anything that person, director, actor, writer does publicly.
But you won’t see us writing about fashion, or the latest celebrity break up. I find that stuff, dull and uninteresting. But I seem to be one of the few that feels this way as celebrity lifestyles and gossip is of such great interest to the public at large. I must be out of touch. It’s funny because at times, I don’t even know which celebs are married to whom, I don’t keep up with that kind of news.
I feel badly when I see people act as if they have been personally hurt when I don’t agree with their opinion of a movie. It’s just a movie. People love to get opinions and advice about buying a computer, electronics, cars, etc… When it comes to offering advice about movies, for some reason, people get offended. I don’t understand it. I want to get advice about whether a film is worth wasting an evening and twenty bucks. I do try to get a variety of opinions myself if I
am going to see a movie I don’t know much about.
Z: We've seen your top ten lists via "Film Threat," EZ would like to know your top 5 favorite films?
CG: I personally do not like to list my “top” or “favorite” anything, since it can change on a daily basis, but I’ll do my best. These are all in no particular order:
Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back
Godfather films
Taxi Driver
Slacker
Dancer in the Dark
Your top 5 disliked films?
Battlefield Earth
Yentl
Planet of the Apes (remake)
Anything by Joel Schumacher
Anything starring Madonna
Your top 5 directors?
David Lynch
David Cronenberg
Richard Linklater
David Fincher
Monte Hellman
Your top 5 directors you dislike?
Joel Schumacher
Joel Schumacher
Joel Schumacher
Joel Schumacher
Joel Schumacher
Z: Out of all the film festivals that you attended in 2001, what was your favorite film?
CG: “The Poor and Hungry” directed by Memphis Tennessee native Craig Brewer. This movie was made for $20,000 and shot with a Hi-8mm camera operated by the writer/director Craig. He is an amazing talent and the film has actually gotten him work in Hollywood. He’s smart and passionate and I admire him greatly.
Z: Do you have any advice for up & coming directors, actors?
CG: No, advice for actors other than don’t quit. As for directors, yes, learn management skills and treat people well. I’m constantly taken aback by the arrogance and attitude of some “directors.” Being the creative center of a project is not a license to act like a prick. The PA on your current project may be the studio executive you deal with in five years, you never know, so be nice to everyone. Also, if you’re making an indie film, you have an obligation to your financiers, so take every decision affecting the value of your film very
seriously. Think of your movie like a stock – everything you do can have an impact on the value of the movie. A million dollars can do a lot of things. A million dollars can change someone’s life. If you are using that to make a movie, you have the responsibility to make the best film possible. Put your ego aside at times and do what’s right for the film.
Z: Thank you for your time Chris. Good luck to you and all you’re up coming projects.
CG: Thanks!
As always whether reading something written by Chris or whether exchanging emails and picking his brain, it’s a learning experience one of fun and of the up-most respect. We enjoyed our time doing this interview. We thank Chris for his time, as time is valued for this very intriguing busy man. This guy is definitely one to watch & one to grow from.
For further comments or more information on topics discussed in this interview please refer to our points of interests, and check out FilmThreat. Com.
Points of Interest
FilmThreat.com
First review:
Chris’s DUNE STARTED IT ALL
9/11 attacks opinion:
Chris’s HOLLYWOOD'S POINTLESS PARANOIA
Film Festivals & commercialism:
Chris’s FILM FESTIVALS IT'S TIME TO PAY UP
Chris asked us to make reference to 2 reviews written by Ron Wells:
Ron’s CHASING AMY
Ron’s DOGMA
|
